The Shatzkin Files


Just because the author does a lot of marketing doesn’t mean the publisher can’t help

Posted by Mike Shatzkin on August 1, 2012 at 11:27 pm · Under Uncategorized


The growing (but still tiny) group of very successful self-published authors and those who believe that they are a harbinger of the future have a big stake in the notion that “social network marketing” will replace the “legacy” techniques established over many decades and still employed by many houses. In fact, the houses themselves are increasingly committed to the various avenues that, unlike the megaphones they have historically relied upon, are available to the authors directly without their help.

But for the self-published authors, they’re the whole ball of wax. And when it is argued that self-publishing is the better course for authors, two assumptions seem to become tacit: 1) that the print-in-store sale doesn’t matter and 2) that if the marketing to be done is mainly in social networks, the publisher can’t or doesn’t add much value.

Since both the self-published community and the established author community lack any really useful data on the rates of success of any one marketing technique versus another or what an author’s chances of success are publishing on their own or with a publisher, we have a battle of anecdata.

It grew hotter this past week with the publication in the Guardian of an articulate and snarky attack on the idea that an author can Twitter and Facebook her way to success and an equally articulate (and snarky) response from a defender of the new way.

The debate around whether author efforts with social media provide an adequate substitute for the marketing done over the years by publishers (a big component of which, of course, is exposure of the printed book in brick bookstores and we all know that’s declining even though it is still more than half the sale for most books) is really a proxy for a larger question: does the publisher add value commensurate with their share of revenues? Some bloggers frame the question artfully but one is too-often left with the feeling that they feel think the author and reader really don’t need much help from anybody else.

I’m pretty sure that’s rarely true.

How effectively social network marketing can replace display in stores and reviews in newspapers is an open question that won’t really be answered for a long time. The social networks are growing and there are already more possible outlets to work (Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, YouTube, Pinterest, GoodReads, and the comments section of every relevant blog are just the starting point) than most authors would have time to handle effectively (even assuming they have the skills and interest).

It’s going to take technology and scale to do this effectively. For example. , Hachette announced last week a new tool called “Chapter Share” to enable easy posting of a chunk of a book on Facebook. They’ve chosen to make the capability available to other publishers as a SaaS (software as a service) offering. Some publishers will have it; some won’t. Authors will be hard-pressed to do something like this on their own (unless Hachette decides to enable them).

And with the number of influential blogs and sites and apps where relevant posts or author appearances could find a useful audience rising every day, it is hard to imagine one author alone possibly staying on top of all the possibilities that are important for them and their book.

So, long story short, we don’t know how effective social network marketing can be yet. And we can be pretty sure that nobody has all the answers about how to use it best. (Even if they did, the answers would be different six months from now.) But however things change, I’ll bet there will be a role for a publisher — an aggregator looking across the work of many authors — to be helpful with all the marketing, including the social network marketing. Managing metadata properly and search engine optimization, critical to online sales, are much more likely to be done well by a publisher than by an author.

All the big publishers are regularly really working on figuring out how to be helpful with systems and tools and collecting names to email and have been for a while.

And the print-in-store piece does still matter.

Without denigrating self-publishing as a serious alternative for many people, I think the odds are that most authors will be better off with publishers than without them for a long time to come.

  Back to blog

  • http://www.facebook.com/harry.bingham1 Harry Bingham

    I’m a traditionally published author (Orion in the UK, Bantam Dell in the US). Yours is a good piece – it correctly represents the state of knowledge as of this moment – yet interestingly enough it doesn’t answer your own question: “does the publisher add value commensurate with their share of revenues?”

    Historically, that question was easily answered with a Yes. Books sold through bookstores; the only access to stores came via publishers; QED.

    What’s more, publishers used to know how to promote stuff. With my first book (published Jan 2000), HarperCollins spent a significant amount on consumer advertising. With my more recent books, there’s not been a whisper of such advertising, but my publishers have spent a significant chunk of change on buying places in retailers’ in-store promotions.

    These days, for regular (that is, not big name authors), even the instore promotional opportunities have withered away. Few authors that I know are impressed by publishers’ online efforts. (I’m talking about the UK market here; I don’t know the US market well enough to comment.) The old ways of establishing authors seem to have dwindled without any approach of corresponding power taking their place.

    Now it may well be that publishers are learning fast or doing great things behind the scenes. But they’re not communicating those things to their authors, so it’s not altogether surprising that authors are beginning to ask your “larger question” and asking it with some real doubt about the answer. (And if you want to look at a survey which examines authors’ views, you can do so here: http://www.writersworkshop.co.uk/blog/do-you-love-your-publisher-the-results-of-our-survey/

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Thanks for the survey link. It’s interesting. Just glancing at the results seems to suggest that most authors are reasonably happy with their publishers and not considering self-publishing.

      I think self-publishing is a *great* alternative if you can’t get a real deal or if you don’t want to wait for one or if you think it can *lead* to one. But I don’t think it makes sense for most authors if they can get a deal. The survey results do not undermine that opinion in any way.

      Mike

  • Clive Eaton

    As a self-published author (The Pyramid Legacy) I cannot disagree with the point about print in store sales still mattering – of course they do, and will remain so for years to come. What has changed, however, is the marketplace for purchasing books, whether they be tangible or e-book format. Many good authors are thwarted by the rejection barrier placed by both agents and publishers, but that barrier can now, to some degree, be bypassed with the likes of Kindle and CreateSpace. Sadly some self-published books are poorly written, poorly edited (if at all in some cases) and poorly presented – but not all of them fall into this category. Many self-published authors are worthy of a traditional publishing route, but for a variety of reasons are not picked up by the industry. (Equally, many books which are published should never have seen the light of day, such is the subjectivity of the industry.) As a result of agent/publisher rejection self-published authors have to use the arsenal of marketing routes available to them to get their voice heard. It becomes a personal focus. A level of focus which possibly a publisher cannot afford to each and every author they represent. Publishers may have the edge, and of course budgets, to provide more success for an author via the traditional marketing routes, but the hunger and desire of the self-published author, to maximise the plethora of opportunities afford by the Internet, could very well exceed the service the publisher provides to its authors. Only time will tell what the outcome will be as the industry faces unprecedented change.

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Clive, I don’t buy it. Whatever a self-published author is doing for herself to promote, she could do the same things if her book were delivered by a publisher. And she should. So the publisher should never *diminish* promotion.
      It should always be value-added.

      Mike

      • Clive Eaton

        Yes Mike, at a level . . . but! After reading Harry Bingham’s survey – and looking at each question answered – it is clear that communication and marketing between author and publisher is not as good as it could be. As soon as lack of clarity regarding roles creeps in there is a danger things get missed, because one party thinks the other is doing it. This type of scenario reminds me of a story I have used many times when discussing communication as part of a training seminar – There were four people called Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody, and there was an important job to be done. Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it but Nobody did. Somebody got angry about this because it was Everybody’s job. Everybody thought Anybody could do it. But Nobody realised that Everybody wouldn’t do it. It ended up with Everybody blaming Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done. – It happens all the time in industry, and Harry Bingham’s survey clearly suggests that it happens in the publishing industry too. So until publishers grasp the nettle, and communicate and support their authors without ambiguity, I believe there is a real danger of the publisher diminishing value, rather than adding to it.

      • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

        We’re speaking in generalities here about what are really tens of thousands of specific cases. Yes, communication about books is highly challenging. That’s not just between author and publisher! It’s within the house and all the time. The Big Six publishers do three thousand to five thousand books a year. That’s 10 or 15 a *day*. We all know how complicated putting together each book is and how many details there are to communicate. So, I’d say, no matter *what* any publisher or author does, there will be communications failures.

        That really isn’t responsive to the point. Because there is so much to do to market every book and because at least some of what needs to be done is either better done by automation or done on behalf of more than one book at a time, the publisher is likely to be able to add marketing value to whatever are the author’s efforts. And how well communication is managed is only a component of that.

        I’d say that “as long as *Somebody* does it, who cares what *Anybody Else* thinks,
        or even if *Anybody Else* knows?”

        Mike

  • Pingback: WRITING ON THE ETHER: Olive Branch | Jane Friedman

  • Francis Hamit

    Mike my last traditionally published book in 1993 was a “best-seller” but the publisher had little to do with that. I was told that promotion was my responsibility and I was the one who arranged media appearances and book signings. I was refused some of the latter because the publisher was known to be too cheap to support them in any way. My current books are in the traditional distribution system, but only one book store in the nation has them on the shelf. Some are willing to carry them but only on direct consignment. They don’t want to order them through Ingram or Baker & Taylor. I am not sure why. But direct consignment hasn’t worked for us and we no longer do that. Amazon has them of course. My last two novels were never submitted to a literary agent nor a traditional publisher. The latest one came out as an e-book first and may well stay that way, except:. The entire review situation is nothing short of chaotic. Even a review of an e-book necessitates the creation of a print edition because many reviewers will not accept electronic text. So we will create a POD edition that will sell for about five times what the e-book does. We don’t expect to sell many and we won;t make any more money per unit on them either. Small publishers have limited time and will seek the path of least resistance. Social media works better than the traditional publishing alternative because it does not really contribute anything unless the book is expected to be a “best seller”.

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Francis, thanks for sharing your experience. It would seem to me you’d be better off with a publisher if you could get one, but I realize the path is often hard. I think if your ebooks sell well, though, somebody’d be interested (including Amazon).

      Mike

  • Bruce Batchelor

    Hi Mike -
    Thanks for your post — as always, your words are thought-provoking. Do you know of ANY examples where a publishing house has used “social media” to SUCCESSFULLY promote a book by a previously unknown author? I’m curious, because I’m not aware that any of the publishing houses have been able to do what a few dozen indie authors have accomplished, i.e. jump to bestseller status without publicity campaigns, advertising and print books in bookstores on consignment. Perhaps you or your readers have some examples for me?
    thanks, cheers, Bruce

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      My readers might. I don’t.

      But I think social media blends into lots of other efforts with the big houses. It would stand in somewhat more bold relief in a self-published situation where it is the *only* thing going on.

      And keep in mind that nothing a publisher does should *stop* an author from his/her own efforts. Presumably all those authors that did it successfully for themselves would have only reaped *more* success if they had done the same thing with the distribution and marketing power of a house complementing their efforts. Which is really the point…

      Mike

  • http://twitter.com/mlouisalocke Mary Lou Locke

    Dear Mike,

    The problem with your analysis
    is the basic assumption that 1) “The growing (but still tiny) group of very
    successful self-published authors and those who believe that they are a
    harbinger of the future have a big stake in the notion that “social network
    marketing” will replace the “legacy” techniques established over many decades
    and still employed by many houses.” and 2) But for the self-published
    authors, they’re the whole ball of wax.

    If you read Konrath, Kathryn Rusch, Wesley Dean Smith,
    some of the most successful of the self-published authors (who like many take
    the hybrid approach), they have said over and over that beyond blogging (and their
    blogs are seldom direct pitches for their books)–they don’t depend on social
    media to sell.

    While social media, like twitter, etc can work
    for some if they gain 10,000s of followers, for most of us, moderately
    successful equivalents of mid-list authors, they are most useful when used in
    combination with other marketing techniques like free promotions. I have now in
    less than 2 years sold over 40,000 books, and within the next six months should
    hit the $100,000 mark in terms of sales., with only two books out. I have less than 1000 twitter followers, less
    than 400 fans of my facebook page, and only 124 regular subscribers to my blog.
    Needless to say I was not dependent on social media to sell these books.

    Which brings us to 2) “that social media
    for self-published authors are the whole ball of wax.” This is simply not
    true.

    There are two ways a person buys a book (from a
    brick and mortar store or estore), 1) they either come to the store looking for
    that book–or books by a certain author or 2) they find the books while
    browsing.

    Social
    media plays a role in number one. Just as book reviews, postcards, newsletters,
    play a role, as they always have. Social media has the benefit of not costing
    money and providing options to people who don’t have the clout to get their
    books in print reviews (ie most self-publsihed authors and the vast majority of
    traditionally published authors.)

    Which brings us to the other way people find
    books–browsing. Whether it was in the libraries of my youth, the bookstores of
    my middle years, or Amazon in my senior years, I discovered new authors
    primarily by looking on the “shelves,” being intrigued by the cover
    picture and the title, looking at the short description of the book and blurbs,
    maybe scanning the first pages, and then deciding to take a chance.

    While self-published authors don’t have access
    to the brick and mortar store, and have limited access to libraries, they have
    open access to the eretailers. And,
    unlike the traditionally published authors, they don’t have to worry about
    whether their publisher did an effective enough job to get their books in those
    books stores, or are willing to pay to get those books the promotional slots in
    the stores.

    What the self-published author has, instead, is
    more control over what helps a book sell when it is dependent on browsing. We
    have control over the cover, over the title, over the product description, and
    we can change if they aren’t working–something that traditional authors can’t
    do as readily. In addition, with KDP Select, Nook First, and Kobo’s new free
    option, self-published authors have access to what has been a major boon to
    unknown authors, the option of putting their books up free for a limited time.
    These free books help drive the books up in the bestseller lists (the
    equivalent of being on one of the front tables in a store), help gain reviews,
    and win fans who will now start to look for their books.

    In addition, there are a growing number of
    authors who have enough books-particularly series books–that they can make the
    first book in the series free or 99 cents as permanent loss leaders. While
    these are strategies that traditional publishers can and do use, it is more
    difficult (they have more overhead, slower reaction times, etc).

    My own success, and the success of the majority
    of authors I know personally has come, not from social media, but from getting
    my books on the historical mystery list on Amazon, and then having a cover,
    title, description that makes readers want to buy it. Free promotions help
    explain why my income doubled in 2012 (when KDP Select was introduced.), but I
    was doing ok even before that.

    In summary, self-published authors are not
    dependent on social media, there are many other factors that go into
    successfully selling in today’s market, and while it can be useful for all
    authors (to alert fans of new books and promotions, to get reviews, to develop
    fan loyalty, to increase name recognition, etc), if “legacy
    publishers” and the people who advise them think that social media is the
    only important strategy for success in the ebook market, they will be sorely
    disappointed.

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Mary Lou, I would certainly agree that an author who can blog effectively, has the judgment and skill to design and pick a cover better than a publisher, is comfortable learning the ins and outs of several retailers, and does the analysis and timely response to it that allows them to benefit from price changes (and, among things you didn’t mention, can handle getting professional editing and can manage metadata) has far less need for a publisher than one who doesn’t have those attributes.

      But publishers are also beginning to use the free-pricing launch tactic and are certainly changing prices a lot. Changing covers and blurb copy after launch is less common, but it will become more so too.

      I take the point that social marketing isn’t important for most authors. I agree with that. But what you’re talking about now is primarily working through established retailers using price as a principal weapon. When the impact of the DoJ suit settles in and the big book prices come down, that isn’t going to work as well anymore. Do the self-published authors thriving at $2.99 and $3.99 realize how much they’re depending on publishers keeping the price of the famous names at $12.99 and $14.99?

      I don’t think so.

      Mike

    • http://twitter.com/AiAuthors Independent Authors

      Absolutely correct, Mary-Lou. Self-published authors don’t believe social networking sells books; at least members of the Association of Independent Authors don’t believe this. Success and sales come from pursuing a number of different initiatives over a longer period of time at various stages of the book’s life cycle (it’s not solely about price). And we would venture to say that independent authors are more creative when it comes to finding avenues to promote their book in their target market. They know the buck stops with them and success is dependent on just one person; they’re not sitting back waiting for a marketing ‘team’ to disappoint.

      • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

        Well, good for the Association of Independent Authors for not only achieving unanimity in their POV but also for being correct! Must be a fabulous organization.

        But while it not be “solely” about price, I’d love to hear about the self-published author that made it all work at $9.99; I don’t think there’s been one. And as far as authors putting forth the effort because they know it all depends on them, I think you could meet authors from every major publisher who feel and act exactly the same way.

        It sure feels to me like you’re making the argument that the self-published author is a biologically superior breed. (Maybe that’s why the AIA is capable of such amazing organizational behavior.)

        Mike

  • Kathleen Rowland

    I agree, those with huge success as self publishers are a tiny percentage. Authors published with big houses are assured success with marketing and reviewing underpinnings. Many authors are doing both, but they have readership.

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Gee, I wouldn’t say that authors at big houses are “assured success”. The only thing they’re really “assured” is that they can keep their advance (which in most cases is far more than most self-published authors will ever earn). But, frankly, authors at big houses aren’t really “assured” anything else. They just have better odds…

      Mike

    • http://twitter.com/AiAuthors Independent Authors

      80% of authors published with a publishing house do not earn out their advance so there is certainly no assurance of success. In fact, only 20% can expect to be even moderately successful. There is no difference in either game: traditional or self – on both sides there is a small percentage of very successful; the larger percentage of moderately successful; and a small percentage who have little or no success, quite often as a result of doing very little for themselves.

      • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

        Kathleen, you’re ignoring or eliding the fact that the 80% who don’t earn out their advance *keep their advance*. So their book didn’t succeed commercially, but they got paid what would calculate to an outrageous royalty per copy. So self-publishing would have been a *very * bad option for them!

        In round numbers there are probably 50,000 authors a year signing up with major houses and 1 or 2 *million* self-publishing (guessing by ISBN assignment.) Objectively, the odds of success are *much *better for a published author than a self-published one. But, then, the published ones have been selected. Money has been spent on them. Of course they’d have better odds of success. But I think it is really a tendentious argument to say they don’t.

        Mike

  • Alice Armitage

    Hi Mike-

    Have you seen Guy Kawasaki’s latest post on Self-Publishing? http://www.kirkusreviews.com/blog/author/guy-kawasaki/
    In it, he lists the reason why traditional publishing should be an author’s first choice, but then goes on to explain how self-publishing can be used to get publishers to take notice if they reject an author at first. In it, he uses the example of an author who did just that.

    But her success hinges on her marketing ability, which got her 100 5-star reviews on Amazon and the sale of 1000 copies of her book. Kawasaki does not detail what she did- and that I think is the crux of the publishing debate. How many authors have the marketing/ social media skills to promote themselves effectively? And why should they want to spend their time doing that instead of writing? Yet It seems that authors have to do this even if traditional publisher picks up their book. So the real problem may be that the traditional ways that publishers promoted books is not working now. Why give publishers such a large part of an author’s sales revenue when they make the author self-promote anyway? Give them their fair share for editing, art directing, and other services. But their current revenue split may be too high.

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      I think the mining of self-publishing by the majors is going to be a frequently recurring theme in the months to come.

      Mike

  • Pingback: BookMachine Weekly BookWrap: publishing stories from around the web | BookMachine - the book publishing portal - events, views and publishing tips

  • http://twitter.com/AiAuthors Independent Authors

    Penelope Trunk had an interesting post on what publishers do these days to market books.
    http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2012/07/09/how-i-got-a-big-advance-from-a-big-publisher-and-self-published-anyway/

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      There’s been a lot of debate around the very interesting and provocative post by Penelope Trunk, including whether the entire story can be believed. There are elements of it that just don’t ring true to people who know publishers and their practices. (But it is very entertaining in any case.)
      Mike

  • Laura E. Kelly

    There’s one undeniable value add that a legacy publisher still brings these days: book review coverage in major media. Even while many bestseller lists now make note of self-pub sales, name reviewers maintain the wall dividing traditionally published books from the deluge of self-published books. It may be unfair, but it’s the current state of things (and doesn’t look to change anytime soon unless, say, Philip Roth starts self-publishing his books).

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Actually, Laura, there was a crack in that particular wall over the past couple of days. The San Francisco Chronicle (of course) just announced that they will devote attention specifically to ebooks not available in print. What I read referred to efforts that are professional — like The Atavist and Byliner. These are businesses where advances are paid and the editing is serious. I don’t know how much this will end up helping self-published authors.

      By the way, I really don’t want to denigrate self-published authors. I just read two more John Locke books in the past week and downloaded three more earlier today. And Locke is really an example of the one strategy no publisher would allow that really can work: he’s published what seems like a book every 6 or 8 *weeks* since he started 18 months or so ago. Of course, there are not very many writers who are capable of executing on that strategy.

      Mike

  • Pingback: Industry News-August 5 » RWA-WF

  • gotcha marketing

    great article and insight. We have been posting content, articles and links to chapter downloads for publishers and authors on their Facebook fan pages. The results have been amazing! Free content drives views, most all readers are especially interested in viewing a chapter download of a future release! Facebooks new timeline wall allows up to 12 tabs/ applications now. Chapter downloads, signed book contests, graphic images from the cover or interior for free (facebook is a very visual medium!), links to your Youtube channel, links to pre-buy at your favorite retailer are ALL now possible.
    Publishers and authors have a very exciting platform in social media marketing now with the recent changes on Facebook that can drive views and constant interaction by their constituency!

    • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

      Thanks for this. Always glad for my readers to get practical information I didn’t know in my comment strings!

      Mike



«
»