Ebooks: Independent publishers, self-publishers, and more fun things

[justjess]

The ebook is picking up steam, as is self-publishing. Have you heard about Amanda Hocking? She's a self-published YA author who became a millionaire selling her own books on Amazon, Smashwords, the iBookstore, etc., and she just signed a $2 million book deal with St. Martin's for her next four-book series. She wants to spend more time writing and

Comments

[justjess]

There are a few major differences between self-publishing and going through a major publisher. If a person has a real entrepreneurial spirit and wants to tackle everything a publisher does on his or her own, then self-pub is a viable alternative. Publishers edit, design, market, distribute, etc., and it's often difficult for self-published books to obtain the same amount of publicity (and therefore sales) as books that go through a major house, unless the author has been published before and already has a following or platform. Most book reviewers won't even touch self-pubbed books unless the author is someone like Amanda Hocking, whose books just took off. So, if your friend feels capable of marketing his book on his own, all the power to him! And yeah, you can't tell him that traditional publishing keeps the crap out. ;)

The validation factor is another major reason people stick with traditional publishing. They want traditional publishing to recognize their writerly genius, because they think their books deserve it. The downside is that authors give up a lot of creative control over their own work. Self-pub lets authors keep that control, even if the author's editing/design/etc. might not be as good as what a traditional publisher can provide.

This is why I love independent publishing houses--they act as gatekeepers and do all of that awesome traditional publishing stuff, but they also usually allow the author to have more input. Not always, but often.

I agree that book publishing is handling the digital shift better than the music industry. We're fortunate that it's happening now, when more people are more well-versed in the Internet, as opposed to when I had Napster in middle school and a lot of people just didn't "get it," especially those in the older generation.

And I agree, too, that we in the industry need to keep the definitions clear in our own minds and try to politely correct people when needed. The biggest problem I see here is the self-pubbed authors who insist on calling themselves "independent publishers" because it sounds better. Some of them have even started their own companies (LLCs or sole proprietorships or whatever), so I understand why they want to use the term. But I think there needs to be a clear line between people who publish only their own work and people who actually publish other peoples' work. And therein lies the problem with independent houses that publish their own editors' books. I still don't know how to reconcile that.