Why don't more people read Self-published authors? Showing 2,001-2,050 of 2,452

[Simi]

Oh nvm. I think we're on the right page. Sorry

[J.]

First I have to say that I try to find a new-to-me Indie Author 6 or 8 times a year. I've found some really good Indie books that haven't gotten many reviews or been found by many readers either. I try to help promote them. I've also found some pretty poor books, too. It is hard to sort them out ahead of time unless you can discover a reviewer (or two) that you trust to like the same things you do. Which gets to my second point, just because I don't like something doesn't mean others won't. There are readers for all kinds of books, that's why there is room for us all. That doesn't really answer the question here, but is at least a contributing factor.

[Wendy]

I agree - there is so much good stuff out there, but also so much garbage. Word-of-mouth is always best, and that's what both readers and authors hope to get out of Goodreads.

I'm a reviewer over at Abyss & Apex Magazine, and we only review small presses, or Indie writers if they' written for the magazine and we trust them enough to invest the time in reading their manuscript. Scifi and Fantasy only! http://www.abyssapexzine.com/

[Tom]

J. wrote: "First I have to say that I try to find a new-to-me Indie Author 6 or 8 times a year. I've found some really good Indie books that haven't gotten many reviews or been found by many readers either. I..." As an Indie science fiction author, I appreciate your efforts to find other Indie authors. I do so as well. I found it quite amusing to see your post so shortly after I've started reading your book Shepherds. I plan on reviewing it once finished. Keep up the good work.

[D.M.]

Honestly, even before becoming a self-published author, I didn't really look for whether they were self-published or went through traditional publishing, I mainly just read the description and let the cover do the picking for me most of the time.

Now, I do know some of the issues indie authors face is that most of the time they don't get enough promotion to make a difference (to be seen widely). But if we take the time to build a relationship with bookstores, online, build our audience, etc. then it would likely be easier to be seen, hence making it easier to have your books bought. But it takes time and effort. You can go through different marketers who will do it for you, but it does not always guarantee sales. It can guarantee page views, but that's about it. It's up to the reader if they want to get your book or not. That's why the free and 99 cent promotions are so important to authors like us, because it gives us more exposure.

Personally, I love goodreads and connecting with other authors because it helps me broaden my scope of who I read, and what kind of books I read. Being a writer, it is also important to read a wider range of books rather than just what we normally would read, or what we write, because it can help build your style and presence.

I'm looking forward to getting to know my fellow self-publishers, and look forward to reading some of your books in the (hopefully) near future.

[J.]

Tom wrote: "J. wrote: "First I have to say that I try to find a new-to-me Indie Author 6 or 8 times a year. I've found some really good Indie books that haven't gotten many reviews or been found by many reader..."
Hi Tom,
Looking forward to your review. Any tips on finding new SF authors? I'll have to look at your list to see what you've given a thumbs up.

[Jim]

Quality assurance procedures, fully embraced and implemented by the producer, is the key to any product's long-term success.
Unfortunately, far too many self-published authors fail to understand this basic business philosophy or simply choose to ignore it.
Quality Assurance Procedures for Aspiring Writers
Prior to Publishing:
1. Expend the time and effort to learn the basics: Spelling, punctuation, grammar, syntax, dialog and narration.
2. Write, proofread and have others proofread every page, then rewrite and polish the entire manuscript.
3. Expend the resources to obtain the services of a copy editor, conceptual editor, layout design artist and graphic design artist.
4. Evaluate the final submissions of those assets named in step-3, then rewrite and polish the final manuscript prior to contacting and agent, publisher or self-publishing.

Even if the writer does all the above, the invention of the personal computer and internet, combined with the proliferation of self-publishing opportunities, have flooded the field with literally millions of aspiring writers. The odds of achieving commercial success are slim. However, some have become successful. There is no reason why you could not become one of them.

[Wendy]

Jim wrote: "Quality assurance procedures, fully embraced and implemented by the producer, is the key to any product's long-term success.
Unfortunately, far too many self-published authors fail to understand th..."
I've heard it argued that when an author hires out experts like an editor, an interior book designer, or a cover designer they are not technically called "Self-published" any longer. Because they are no longer doing it all themselves, you see. Getting expert help makes them technically "Indie" authors, who are independently published but don't do everything themselves.

[Jim]

Wendy wrote: "Jim wrote: "Quality assurance procedures, fully embraced and implemented by the producer, is the key to any product's long-term success.
Unfortunately, far too many self-published authors fail to u..."

The descriptive adjective "self" pertains to whatever one does for oneself. The term "self-published" is self-explanatory, it refers to an author who has published their own work. Self-publishing requires no particular training, skill or talent. Effectively copy editing, conceptual editing, layout design and graphic design does.

[Lynda]

Wendy wrote: "I've heard it argued that when an author hires out experts like an editor, an interior book designer, or a cover designer they are not technically called "Self-published" any longer."

Jim wrote: "The descriptive adjective "self" pertains to whatever one does for oneself. The term "self-published" is self-explanatory, it refers to an author who has published their own work. Self-publishing requires no particular training, skill or talent. Effectively copy editing, conceptual editing, layout design and graphic design does."

I think we're nitpicking at phrases here. Self-published authors simply arrange for all the details themselves, rather than publish through a press that would provide editing, formatting, covers, etc.

Indie authors and self-publishers are, in essence, the same thing, though "indie" is slightly more legit-sounding to most people. Anyone who takes the steps to publish on their own through CreateSpace or other DIY sites is technically self-published. This doesn't mean they've skipped any steps in the editing process, or that they've designed their own covers, or any of those things. Believe me, the authors I work with pay decent money to make their books the highest quality possible in an effort to erase the stereotyping of "self-pub = garbage book" that's so prevalent.

People can self-publish and still put out a quality product. It's just that they are paying for each step on their own, rather than signing with a press (large or small) that provides those services as part of the package.

Yes, in the strictest sense of the word, "self" refers to those things only executed by oneself. However, I don't think the dictionary definition overrides the practical application here. Vanity presses seem to fit that definition of "self" more than any other. It's unfortunate that "self-publishing" has a negative vibe to it, whereas "indie author" does not.

[Alicia]

Lynda wrote: "People can self-publish and still put out a quality product...."

I may take heat for this, but every single job necessary for publishing, and that includes editing, covers, and formatting, is learnable. The people who do those jobs commercially weren't born knowing how.

Some of us prefer to make sure those steps are done correctly, and make a huge effort to educate ourselves before publishing.

We have an advantage: we need to learn what applies to us and to our book, not necessarily enough to get a job in the field.

Many indies and self-published authors won't learn to do these things properly, even for themselves. A very few really can't. Many others are too new to the process (and don't take the time to educate themselves). Others outsource (learning to do THAT is another big project) some of the necessary jobs.

But there is almost nothing an intelligent and patient writer can't learn to do.

The fact that some impatient writers have been successful at selling, shall we say, unfinished work, tempts others to attempt the same with less than stellar results.

If just hiring experts were the way to go, there would be no huge flops in the traditional AND self-publishing worlds. Remember, we don't see most of the failures.

[Richard]

Some self-pub authors may find solace in the fact that nobody reads plenty of trad-pub authors, too. E.g.: http://writersnoonereads.tumblr.com/
and http://neglectedbooks.com/ And there are also non-traditional ways to measure success: perhaps as an indie you're doing well if your cover doesn't show up here: http://lousybookcovers.com/
;-) Happy New Year.

[Lynda]

Alicia, I'm not sure if you're agreeing with my post or not.

I agree with you on one hand: writers should learn all they can about each aspect of the craft, not just the writing itself. There's no way a person can make an informed business decision if they haven't researched what they're looking for. No different than an author shopping for an editor or cover designer.

However, I must disagree with you on a writer being able to learn just about anything. I've seen some pretty awful covers that were made by writers who didn't know enough to realize how bad and unprofessional they looked. If someone is creative, they may be able to learn enough to know what kind of "look" they want, but if they're not an artist or a graphic design specialist, they'll never grasp the nuances that take a cover from okay to WOW. Placement of lettering, font style, coloring choices, ratios—I may know what I like but that doesn't mean I know exactly how to create one myself, even with learning to use specific tools.

The same goes for editing. I'm an editor who does line editing and copyediting. I can do a final proof on someone's book, but I wouldn't call myself a proofreader because that is a completely different, very specific set of skills. (Learning as much as possible about your craft and self-editing is wonderful, because it will keep your costs down when you do hire someone if your MS is fairly clean.) And no matter how skilled I am at line edits and copy edits, I would be a fool to edit my own work as the pre-publishing step. My own drafts, yes, but the final edits should be left to a fresh pair of eyes. I'm not an author, but I write for two blogs (my professional editing blog and a personal one), and I have an author friend preview every post I write. We simply miss too many things when self-editing because we see what we intended.

The authors I've worked with have all educated themselves about formatting—most have said it's doable, but for the hassle of it compared to the cost of hiring someone who can do it easily for multiple publishing formats, with a variety of professional fonts available . . . they'd rather hire it out.

They've also looked into cover design. Many of them are fairly artistic but recognize their limits. They can put together promo material fairly well, but they trust their covers to someone who does covers for a living, i.e. someone who can do it better and faster. The lone exception with those I've worked with was one gentleman who is also a graphic artist.

It really is a shame that there are so many who skip a large chunk of the necessary steps because they're either too cheap to pay a pro, too broke to pay a pro yet, or too impatient to wait until they can either learn more or save up money to hire a pro.

It's a rare person who can do all of it well, but there are far too many who think they can, and that's where the self-pub/indie pub reputation suffers.

[Lynda]

Richard wrote: "Some self-pub authors may find solace in the fact that nobody reads plenty of trad-pub authors, too. E.g.: http://writersnoonereads.tumblr.com/
and http://neglectedbooks.com/ And there are also non-traditional ways to measure success: perhaps as an indie you're doing well if your cover doesn't show up here: http://lousybookcovers.com/"

I LOVE lousybookcovers.com! It's my favorite place to send people for stress relief.

I find that I don't read a lot of trad-published books, either. I've been trying to stack my TBR list with books written by those I interact with through my blogs or theirs, and have found so many treasures that are thought-provoking and creative, and far from the cookie-cutter offerings of the Big Five.

My choices are also based on cover, blurb, and recommendations from people I know. If there's a bad cover, I won't usually bother to read the blurb.

[Alicia]

Lynda wrote: "Alicia, I'm not sure if you're agreeing with my post or not.

I agree with you on one hand: writers should learn all they can about each aspect of the craft, not just the writing itself. There's no..."

I was expressing my own opinion. The biggest problem with NOT learning to self-edit is that your voice is then filtered through an editor's. Editors are human; it can't be helped.

Most people don't write the way I do. Most people want speed, to get those books out there into the marketplace. And an editor may be a faster way of getting something clean enough to sell. Good enough.

After several experiences with editors, I will having nothing to do with another. The process, the back-and-forth, the missed connections, the wrongness - it's all exhausting to someone like me.

I wouldn't recommend people skip editing. I would look carefully at what it costs, and not just financially. In the traditional world, many an author has been stuck with what the publisher's editor did to her work. In indie, the buck stops with the author. I like it that way. And I'm quite aware of the responsibility that entails.

I suppose it isn't necessary to tell newbies that - they have so much else to learn. But they should know it's possible to do your own work, to your own standards, and they don't need to relinquish control of their own voice and style.

[Tracey]

I think readers read books by authors they know. Fortunately they are also nosy, so looking down the list they may click on a link to see who the author is. What have they published, their social media? If you Google your name would anything come up on the first page? They say it takes 4 books to establish brand recognition.

Quality – regarded as the great unwashed, this has always been a stick to beat us with. Traditional publishers regard themselves as the filters and purveyors of quality and seek to exclude indie authors from any prestigious opportunities. Like some dystopian novel, if they could bury us, they would. The paradox is, we are also readers and any trad author who criticises an indie, effectively signs their own death warrant. We are a huge community.

Grammar, punctuation, spelling, to a man with a hammer, all he will see is nails. If you can afford £500+ for an editor, who understands your work, great. If not, you will have to suffer the hammering, none of us spot every mistake.

Please don’t just read indie. Read the best, both inside and outside your genre. Not NY Times bestsellers, that’s just someone throwing money at it, but someone who has made an impression – Kazou Ishiguro, Salman Rushdie, Anne Tyler, Ian McEwan or Stephen King.

To paraphrase, I never judge a book by its cover, but by the quality of its content.

[ka.ya]

A lot of self-published books are underrated so it's sad that this is the case. People automatically assume that it isn't professional because of the fact that they published the book themselves.

[Lynda]

Alicia wrote: "After several experiences with editors, I will having nothing to do with another. The process, the back-and-forth, the missed connections, the wrongness - it's all exhausting to someone like me."

Alicia, allow me to apologize on behalf of editors everywhere. It sounds like you got a batch of awful ones! I can't imagine having bad communication with a client. And though I've heard of some "editors" trying to change an author's voice, I haven't yet run into one, because those "editors" are not actually qualified to edit someone's work.

I've gotten a handful of my clients as a result of writers hiring someone who claimed to be an editor but who was not. Perhaps a writer looking to make some extra money, or a reader who figured it couldn't be that difficult to add a comma or fix a typo or two. I've even seen a solid number of them who have advertised here on GR about their editing services, and yet their ads were full of misspellings, incomplete sentences, grammar issues, and more—one person had three ad posts that even had DIFFERENT errors in each one, including misspelling the name of her business.

One of the things my clients mention often is that I don't try to change their voice. I'm not sure why some people do that, but it has never occurred to me to make someone else's work sound like me. This may be because I'm a blog writer and not an author per se, and it may also be because I work with a variety of genres which, by their nature, are different styles of writing even if they were to be written by the same person.

Of course, I will still always advocate for a professional edit prior to publishing, but your advice of learning to self-edit is some of the best advice out there. Every author should either own a current Chicago Manual of Style or have a subscription online, as well as a variety of books on grammar and punctuation. There are so many good ones out there that give the information in an entertaining way while not compromising the lesson itself.

Ultimately (with my own business as well as many others I know), the more you know about how you're writing what you write, the cleaner your MS will be, and the lower your cost will be overall. I give an extra discount to those whose MS has a revision rate that's lower than a certain percent because I know they've put a lot of effort into getting it right.

[Alicia]

Lynda wrote: "Alicia wrote: "After several experiences with editors, I will having nothing to do with another. The process, the back-and-forth, the missed connections, the wrongness - it's all exhausting to some..."

Thank you for an interesting thread, but I'm finding that most people's minds are hard to change, so I will bow out.

I do believe a lot of writers need far more editing than they receive, self or otherwise. But I only have to worry about what I put out, as I'm my own harshest critic (well, except for people who ignore all the warnings - cover, description, sample - that I don't write Romance, and then complain my work is too long, has words that are too big, and shouldn't have that pesky extra main character in it).

I wish you well with your clients - you sound like someone who has their best interests at heart.

[Jim]

"It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble. It's what we know that ain't so".
Will Rogers (Humorist): 1879 - 1935

[Richard]

Lynda wrote: "I LOVE lousybookcovers.com! It's my favorite place to send people for stress relief."

LOL. It can be eye-opening and amusing... I've also found at least one actual gem there.

Since coming to GR, my TBR list has been filled with lots of good indies, and I've enjoyed plenty of beta reading of writers I've become acquainted with here. Almost don't need to go hunting for new stuff any more!

[C.E.]

If it's not good enough to be accepted by an editor or publisher, why foist it on the public?

Out of over 30 stories published I've self published only my annual "SOLSTICE STORIES and one work that was never published but was too good to discard.

https://kinzuakid.blogspot.com

[D.M.]

C.E. wrote: "If it's not good enough to be accepted by an editor or publisher, why foist it on the public?

Out of over 30 stories published I've self published only my annual "SOLSTICE STORIES and one work th..."

It's not about whether or not it was accepted by an editor or publisher. It's about being able to take control of your own projects and do things on your own time. And, quite frankly, I believe it is important to do what you set your heart to. If being a writer or author is what your heart or intuition brings you to, then it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks of it - not an editor (who many times do not ensure that they keep the story authentic to what the author meant), nor a traditional publisher (who only represent based upon sales, so it doesn't matter what you have to say about anything - if they don't see it as sales-worthy, they won't pick it up, period)!

They are your words, and if you believe they are worthy of being read, then why deny ourselves that?


V/R

A self-published author who believes it doesn't matter what traditional publishing thinks is best - because self-published can be just as good, if not better.

[Lynda]

I agree, DM. I know many indie authors who chose that route to maintain control of the entire product, including profit. Some even turned down publisher offers because the promo involved would have been just as much work as if they'd done it all themselves. So many skilled indie writers are able to publish non-mainstream books that are much better for not being cookie-cutter identical.

[J.N.]

Art has no boundaries. So why should anybody settle for the expected? Branch out. Try a new dish. What's the worst that can happen?

[D.M.]

Lynda wrote: "I agree, DM. I know many indie authors who chose that route to maintain control of the entire product, including profit. Some even turned down publisher offers because the promo involved would have..."


Absolutely correct. While writing I made it a point to find out the dos and don'ts, I also looked at what the difference between traditional and self-publishing, even had some publishers lined up to send my story to. But when I came to the understanding that at the end of traditional, it may not even be my book anymore (let alone that I wouldn't have rights to it for a while), it upset me. I decided self-publishing was the way I wanted to go because it's like a baby - why would I want to give mine away when I could have the joy of keeping it to myself, and raising it the way I wanted - mainly because I have a series and I want it to play out the way I want it to, not how they think would best sell. So, to me it was important to maintain the integrity of the project as best I could.
I'm glad to see so many others feel the same way.

[D.M.]

J.N. wrote: "Art has no boundaries. So why should anybody settle for the expected? Branch out. Try a new dish. What's the worst that can happen?"

Absolutely true! I think the best ideas come from people who can come up with stories that don't play out the way we imagine they will. That's what makes them so great! Not just that, but being able to pick apart the product in a way that reflects to many - that's important. But if people already know what to expect, they'll get tired of it.

Art has many meanings, as do the meanings of our books. Not just to the author, but to the readers as well. And that is why self-publishing is such an appeal to me. It makes me believe that this way we will always have the control to lead our readers how we feel, not as to what they can always expect. Unique art is the most appreciated of all.

[Alexandra]

Altruistic wrote: "A lot of self-published books are underrated so it's sad that this is the case. People automatically assume that it isn't professional because of the fact that they published the book themselves."

I actually used to not assume that at all, but learned over time it is true the vast majority of the time.

The number of professional quality self-pubbed books is a small fraction of the self-published books put up for sale. There are a surprising number of self-pubbed authors that don't even think they should be expected to put out a professional quality book. I know I used to be surprised the first few times I'd see one say that, until it became so common I stopped being surprised.

But it is fun and rewarding to find a few gems, and I have.

[Jim]

In order to become a professional, one must expend the time, energy and financial resources to learn and then master the basic skills required to adequately perform within their chosen profession, including obtaining knowledge of the various types of supporting skills possessed by others required to assist one in eventually achieving success.

[Jennifer]

However, there are times when it's actually better to self-publish. For example, if you do a lot of speaking, seminars, teaching, etc., it's better to be able to order as many of your books as you need for each event and have them easily available for giveaways, etc.

[Shannon]

Simi wrote: "Let's try not to lose hope when it comes to self-publishing. You just need to keep working hard on selling your books. Hey, find opportunities that will put your name out there. That's what I'm try..."

You are absolutely right. I'm not published yet and still undecided. I like to support my author friends from both communities, but when books are constantly being pushed, and that's all I see from singular people....it just becomes noise and I skip through it. I do however, understand that they need to market. And I support with RT's, and love to discover new authors.

Much luck to all.

[Lance]

C.E. wrote: "If it's not good enough to be accepted by an editor or publisher, why foist it on the public?"

Before you go down this road, please remember that Fifty Shades of Gray and every ghostwritten celebrity insta-book on the market were accepted by an editor and publisher. "Good" doesn't always have anything to do with it.

[Sarah]

I am in the process of publishing my first ya verse novel, and I am doing a ton of reading and networking to learn how to do this in the most professional way. I am enjoying the process and feel like it is making me a better "writer" in the sense that I am learning about the business of publishing and all the people and expertise it takes to produce a beautiful book, ebook, audiobook. I love collaborating with people on the cover, the narration, the styling. Yes, I want my book out there, but I do recognize that there is a lot of work involved in the process that requires a level of expertise.

[Alexandra]

Lance wrote: "Before you go down this road, please remember that Fifty Shades of Gray and every ghostwritten celebrity insta-book on the market were accepted by an editor and publisher. "Good" doesn't always have anything to do with it."

Right, because an extremely rare outlier, and one that owes it's success to various specific factors:

Origins as a very popular fan-fiction with an established fan base. (Meaning large number of built in customers upon publication, as well as tons of buzz and word-of-mouth advertising).

Lots of sex, sex, sex.

A genre with a huge and voracious readership - Romance (i.e. very large potential customer base).

Is representative of anything a typical self-pubbed author can count on for their book.

/end sarcasm.

Yes, typically "good" has quite a bit to do with it. And quite often even really good isn't enough for a book to catch notice, find a significant audience, and actually sell well. There are various other factors as well, including how "niche" a book is vs. how broad a potential audience.

Sorry, but a self-pubbed author writing a military sci-fi story that's poorly written and poorly edited is not going to be able to count on the Fifty Shades excuse.

I have a writer acquaintance who has written a mashup detective noir/sci-fi story who justifies his refusal to have his novel professionally edited by pointing to Fifty Shades too. (Apples vs. Oranges people).

So far his book remains unpublished, but when/if it finally is, and if he sticks with that attitude, he's not gonna have the next Fifty Shades on his hands. He'll probably do well to sell 100 copies.

Don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but having a big success is rare, not easy, and highly unlikely to occur if an author thinks "good" doesn't matter.

[Sarah]

Is there a site that promotes self publish young adult? I would like to support those authors more in my #bookaday reading. I read 200 books last year, 270 the year before, and I don t think any were my self published authors because my book lists come from ...gosh, I have to think more about that.

[Alexandra]

Sarah wrote: "Is there a site that promotes self publish young adult? I would like to support those authors more in my #bookaday reading. I read 200 books last year, 270 the year before, and I don t think any we..."

There are groups on GR that do Sarah. Might look around for some. I've read a few self-pubbed Middle Grade and YA books I really enjoyed. I can rec you some, if you're interested. I read mostly Sci-Fi and Fantasy though, not sure that's your cup of tea?

[J.]

Interesting discussion here but I wonder if it is getting at the topic question. We all have our own reasons for either indie publishing or not. But what keeps readers from being indie published books?

[Alexandra]

J. wrote: "But what keeps readers from being indie published books? "

There are a variety of reasons for that, and they vary both by reader, and by book.

Some reasons are:

1. Amaturish cover
2. Readers who have tried indie books and found out that wading through the tons of muck for a few gems is a hard slog.
2.a. Unprofessional quality writing/story/editing.
3. The unfortunate tendency of a few self-pubbed authors to become nasty, ugly and unprofessional when a reader has the audacity to express dislike for their book and/or post a review that doesn't please them.
4. Lack of visibility - self-pubbed authors tend to not advertise/market their books well or enough, or aren't able to. Or, they do so in ways that are ineffective, and sometimes even counter-productive.
5. Bad blurb.
6. A book simply may be in a genre or niche that doesn't have a large number of potential readers - small pool of potential interest.

Those are a few reasons I can think of.

The truth is the overwhelmingly large number of self-pubbed books out there, coupled with the fact that a majority is from mediocre to outright objectively terrible, added with the small percentage, but highly visible occurrences of self-pubbed authors harassing readers, has caused a lot of harm to the good, decent, sincerely trying self-pubbed authors out there.

In general, self-pubbed has a bad rep, and it's sadly more deserved than not.

From a reader perspective a self-pubbed book really needs to be nearly indistinguishable from a trade-pubbed book in presentation (cover, blurb), and content - writing, editing, lack of typos, grammatical errors, etc. In short, it needs to be a professional quality product.

And the author should behave in all interactions with readers (and when talking about readers) in a professional manner.

I've found some really good self-pubbed books that I truly enjoyed, and that I tell people about. But, I am extremely picky about what self-pubbed books I'm willing to take a chance on, and why. And I think that's why I tend to be fairly "lucky" when I do.

[Lynda]

Number one on your list is number one with me. I won't bother to pick up any book with a cover that looks homemade. I don't care how skilled someone is in MS Paint, a home-created cover looks unprofessional and gives the impression that the writer either doesn't care enough to invest in the product, or that the writer doesn't think the readers need to be visually impressed into looking deeper. If a writer is amateurish in presentation, I will assume the writing will be of equal quality. Perhaps that's unfair, but that's how I see it.

As an editor who works almost exclusively with indie authors, I'm pleased to say that those I've worked with are diligent about quality, from cover to writing to editing and formatting. They will not put out an inferior product, and seek out professionals to help them go about it correctly. It's kind of spoiled me, actually, because I have developed an intolerance when people claim they don't need to put forth the effort because "the story will speak for itself." Yes, your story may speak for itself but you might not like what it's saying.

Author behavior here on GR is another issue that turns people off from trying an indie author's book. There may be only one bad apple in one hundred great authors, but that one person's tantrum over a three-star rating or lower will sour people on the entire group. Unfair, but it happens.

[Alexandra]

Lynda wrote: "Number one on your list is number one with me. I won't bother to pick up any book with a cover that looks homemade. I don't care how skilled someone is in MS Paint, a home-created cover looks unpro..."

Excellent points.

And I've actually seen some self-pubbed authors state they didn't feel they should be expected to meet the same standards as a trade-pubbed book. That people who buy their book should just accept it's not going to be up to par.

That's not how selling retail products works in the real world.

[Lynda]

Alexandra wrote: "And I've actually seen some self-pubbed authors state they didn't feel they should be expected to meet the same standards as a trade-pubbed book. That people who buy their book should just accept it's not going to be up to par."

I want to scream and shake those people and ask WHY? Why would you expect that I want to pay good money for a book that's not as polished, perhaps not as well written, not as appealing? Would that person pay the same $6.99-12.99 for a paperback of a shoddy book as he would for something of higher quality?

The reader doesn't care that an author is trying to make a living, or that he has four children and two dogs and a large mortgage, or a mother-in-law who needs financial support. The reader wants a good product for the money spent. Period. We won't pay Stradivarius prices for a beginner's student-grade violin.

If the author doesn't care to meet a standard of quality, why would I care more about his book than he does?

I've also run into authors who figure they'll publish, then save money for edits from their profits, and THEN get edits. So, so backward.

[Alexandra]

Lynda wrote: "I've also run into authors who figure they'll publish, then save money for edits from their profits, and THEN get edits. So, so backward."

Yup. Read this, it's from a self-pubbed author's now deleted blog:

"Before criticizing my grammar and typos, please make sure your review is impeccable, otherwise you might not be taken seriously. Keep in mind that a self-published 1st edition still might have a few flaws. I don’t say that’s how it should be – but it happens. Every Author who is permanently working on getting better is going through it again to correct these mistakes in a second edition. So am I, together with my editor."

Catch that? This author publishes a book and then expects to correct mistakes in a "second edition".

And just for a bit of context, I read the Kindle Sample of this person's book (it's no longer available), and I can assure you it was without question objectively, laughably, very bad. So, we're not talking a few typos here.

We're talking expecting customers to pay for the privilege of helping this author edit her book.

Sorry, a published book that's up for retail sale should be a finished product.

[J.]

I think we agree that indie authors have to meet the very top level in every aspect of their book, some work very hard to do that and come out with some very good reads. I guess beyond the cover (has to be good) and doing some promo work, all you can hope for is to find people who like your book enough to tell their friends. And nothing else the author can do will make people rush out to read indie published work.

[Lance]

Alexandra wrote: "Right, because an extremely rare outlier, and one that owes it's success to various specific factors..."

Thank you for completely missing the point.

Fifty Shades is a bad book that, as you pointed out, was well-positioned for its publisher to get it to blow up without a lot of effort. That makes it not nearly the outlier you may want to think it is. Consider:

-- Those celebrity insta-books. Usually egregious and slapdash, but there's a famous name on the cover, so they're easy to sell.

-- The long-running genre series, the author of which has been phoning it in for years. But the author's name still sells even if the fans have had to become good at making excuses for him/her. (Publisher's nirvana: new installments in the series come out years after the name author dies, but they still sell.)

-- The political screeds, at best duplicates of the ones that came before, at worst overcooked, errant nonsense. But the base needs its monthly top-up of outrage and the readers don't care about editing, so the books are easy to sell.

-- The cookie-cutter romances: change the names, recycle the plot. Don't even consider skirting Avon's or Harlequin's story rules. The fans consume them like Tic-Tacs anyway.

You may notice that "good" has nothing to do with any of these.

Are there bad indie books? Yes, there are. Are there bad legacy-published books? Yes, there are. Lots of both. I'm perfectly willing to condemn the indie books and authors that give the rest a bad reputation. Are you willing to do the same for legacy publishing?

[Sarah]

I'm trying to launch my book with a team to entice more teachers and librarians in my education world to read more self published authors like myself. you can join us for April I'd you want to meet some of them and launch my book https://goo.gl/forms/QYJV56WlITWErhpk2

[V.W.]

Since legacy publications tend to just appear and are placed before the audience in a constant stream and presented in a generally homogeneous manner, I think we underestimate how many legacy books we also ignore or reject.

In addition, since indie books are not filtered so heavily by market research, house style, etc. the "signal to noise" ration for any particular reader is necessarily greater.

[Alicia]

Denise wrote: "Story trumps good writing."

Story trumps everything. But if story is dominant, it doesn't hurt to have good writing, too. As you've pointed out, it's hard to get both for some reason.

I don't understand why some writers stop at story. Craft is not that hard - it just takes time to learn.

Maybe I'm a purist (and an extremely slow purist at that), but letting things go out under your name that are not as good as they could be means you're content with 'good enough.' 'Because it sells' is no excuse.

And if you insist on quality, the next book will be better - before it is even written.

I like how you think.

[Marília]

Lynda wrote: "Number one on your list is number one with me. I won't bother to pick up any book with a cover that looks homemade. I don't care how skilled someone is in MS Paint, a home-created cover looks unpro..."

Now I feel out of place in replying because I might be part of the problem (I confess to making my own covers and enjoying how they look). :)

But to answer the main question as a reader: I usually am more weary of indie books simply because there is no initial filter. Several times, I've grabbed an indie book to read that didn't have any reviews. Does that mean it's bad? Not necessarily. But it also doesn't give you any idea of what to expect.

V.W. made a good point about "signal to noise" ratio. I do believe that is the main cause.

Sometimes reading the description does help. If it's poorly written, you can probably expect the same from the book.
On the other hand, I've seen books that had a good cover, good description, and inside, it was a mess (and I can think of a few traditionally published books that fit into this category as well).

Unfortunately, some of it might also be the mindset that indie books are not *real* books.

[Peter]

Interesting thread...re book covers, to me, who made them is less important than what they look like. If a cover looks professional (e.g no obvious stock artwork, not too lurid or plastic, balanced composition, etc), then I'm inclined to at least consider a book. I used a pro for my own book because I felt that my time was better spent on other parts of book writing/marketing rather than learning the craft and artistry needed for competent design.

Re the bigger issue of indi vs trad publishing, as an indi author myself, I don't think that there is a single solution to all the issues noted above except to play the long game and build a robust reputation by aspiring to craft creatively-written, thoroughly-edited, and well-packaged books. Yep, easier said than done, but a focus on quality sets you apart from many (most?) self-published and some traditionally published books and a professional approach has implications for your marketing tactics: try to leverage your work’s value to pull in potential readers (and reputable reviewers). For sure, high quality, especially for one book, won’t necessarily be recognized or rewarded, but building a credible reputation spanning several works at least improves the odds of durable success.

[Jenna]

I agree with what others have said about covers - we live in a day where packaging is critical. Especially in wealthy countries, this is key. It's gotten to the point that you almost CAN judge a book by it's cover. For example, if I see a book cover that I love, I'm much more likely to click on it and read the blurb.
I don't typically care about ratings, and I don't care who published it, but admittedly, as soon as I hear 'self-published' I wonder how edited it is.
Because of these biases, I make sure I have professionals do my covers. I also have someone copy-edit my works. This isn't foolproof, but I figure if that's what I want, then that's what I should do for mine.
That said - I do get that when you start out you may want a $0 budget, and that can be a hard call to make.