Basically, the blogger writes that most proponents of self-publishing fall into one of three groups. He writes:

1)     Clueless.  These people are generally victims of a vanity press scam.  They believe that people like Stephen King pay to publish their books.  They are to be pitied more than censured, and the best thing you can do for them is to send them a book contract for them to study. It might take days, but I suspect they will eventually realize that the money flows toward the author.  Sadly, much of this is their own fault – the information necessary to avoid scams is readily available, all you have to do is make a minimum of effort.

2)     Conspiracy theorists.  These are actually a subset of number 1, people who think that editors and agents are there to keep new writers and new ideas from ever hitting the shelves.  This particular group is just as irrelevant as the first, because it shows that they haven’t done their homework.  Or maybe it’s just easier to believe that there’s a conspiracy than to accept the sad truth: the writing you are subbing just isn’t good enough for public consumption.  Not liking the options (get better or get out), these people went the self-publishing route.

3)     Economists.  It’s better to keep all the profits yourself, right?  Why pay these editors, copy-editors, formatting people and especially artists, when I already have a great book – my first draft! – and I can format it myself, and use a cover design made by my niece, which is just as good.  And who needs publishers when I can upload it to my kindle.  And if I go the print route, I’ll sell them myself, after all, authors have to be great salesmen, don’t they?  I’ll make a fortune.  All I can say here is: probably not, and your cover art is making my eyes bleed. 

To which I respond that he is forgetting a fourth category of self-publishers—the savvy ones who realize they need to have their manuscript professionally edited and their interior and cover designed by an artist who knows book design. These are primarily professionals who have an important message to get out there. Often they are in a niche market and regardless of the quality of their writing, most publishers have to pass because these books will probably not become bestsellers. Even some novelists are taking their own destiny in their hands by self-publishing. These “indie” publishers want to maintain complete control over their work from a creative standpoint (you don’t always have that option with a traditional publisher)—and some of them just enjoy the business aspect of publishing.

Does getting hundreds of rejection letters from publishers somehow make a writer more noble? Does it make him or her a better writer? Authors who self-publish the right way—by making sure they are putting out a top-notch book, both from an editorial and design standpoint—have accomplished something of which they can be proud. I think anyone who believes there is some sort of high standard to which traditional publishers are held today is kidding him- or herself. Sadly, it is no longer about the writing.  It’s all about whether or not a publisher believes a book will make money or not.

Going through a vanity or subsidy press is not self-publishing. It is paying another company to publish your work. It is very different from true self-publishing wherein the author/publisher has his or her own company imprint on the book and owns the ISBN. I agree that the only appropriate use for a vanity press is to publish a few books for posterity or for family archives.

The blogger also writes:  “Then, after the thing is written, someoene [sic] who knows how to select the best work will choose what gets seen, and someone who knows how to edit will edit, and someone who knows how to market will market!”

I also want to point out that traditional publishers do very little to market the books of their midlist authors. Writers who think that their work is done once they sign the contract and send in a completed manuscript are naive. You’ll earn a spot in the publisher’s catalog and on their website, but beyond that, the onus of marketing is firmly resting on the author. I can attest to this first-hand as I worked for a trade publisher and I’ve recently been published by a trade publisher. My co-author and I are the ones who came up with a marketing plan–and we are the ones who are implementing it.

I realize that self-publishing can be looked down upon because far too many books have been done poorly — badly designed, dubiously edited ego pieces. But the fact of the matter is, self-publishing is going to continue to be a viable option for authors who are tired of slush piles and gate keepers.  And I really don’t get how this hurts “real” writers? They should be grateful for the increased lack of competition, right?

I’ll start by saying that I am not the average person who has no idea what lurks in slush. I spent many years in the trade, going through those very awful slush piles that blogger writes about. And it’s true; there is some real crap out there. And everyone does not have a book in them.

That said, this does not mean that every acquisitions editor working for a major publishing house would know slush if it came in a cup. There is plenty of junk out there that is sitting on the bookstore shelves right this second. Some of it is written by bestselling authors or celebrities, ie, the publishing companies know it will sell. To imply there is some rigorous high standard that always goes along with book publishing is untrue. It’s about money, pure and simple. For most houses, there is no loftier goal than publishing what will make money—regardless of whether it is crap or not.

I fully agree with this, from the article: “I do have to say one thing in defense of self-publishing: it is a very useful tool for people who have a niche audience or their own book sales channels. Ideally, both. Most traditional publishers may not do ‘niche’ projects (not a large enough target market to justify general trade publication).” But may I also add that traditional publishers today are also looking for authors who have a built-in platform—before they sign the contract. Because the reality is that most trads do little to promote their mid-list authors. It is primarily up to the authors themselves.

I also don’t believe that every self-published author believes The Man (as Kidlit refers to the trads) is holding them back so they must “settle” for self-publishing. There are plenty of savvy authors out there—check out indie author and publisher Zoe Winters, for instance—who realize the odds are not in their favor. It isn’t because their work isn’t “ready”; it’s simply because there are a finite number of books being published by traditional publishers. As publishing houses have gobbled one another up in recent years, there are even few opportunities to be published. It isn’t about feeding the ego by getting a “stamp of approval” from The Man for these authors; it is about sharing their message. And if you truly have something to say, wouldn’t you rather have a few people hear it rather than none?

I think it’s misleading to tell writers that when your manuscript is just as perfect as perfect can be, you have a very good chance of being picked up by a traditional publisher. I think that’s overly optimistic. My husband’s heavy metal band is very good—all members of the group are accomplished musicians—but the reality is that they have virtually no chance of being picked up by a major record label. They know that. But it doesn’t stop them from wanting to be heard anyway.

“I’m only interested in people who grow, learn, polish, adapt, and set their sights on the difficult goal of traditional publication. It’s hard for a reason. Not everybody gets to do it.” What about the indie music scene? Should my husband’s band not put out their own CDs because they are pining for some major label to sign them? What about indie movies? Are they any less of an achievement because they are not produced by some major film company?

“But most people who self-publish don’t have a niche book or a good marketing strategy: they want to target the mass market. They have a project that would appeal, in their opinion, to everyone and anyone. And self-publishing a book intended for a trade audience is where these would-be authors get in trouble. Because reaching a mass audience — casual readers — with a self-published fiction project is nearly impossible.” I say there are plenty of self-published authors who go into it with their eyes wide open and their expectations realistic.

It’s unfortunate that with the advent of the so-called “self-publishing companies,” such as Author Solutions and Lulu, way too many people dive right into “self-publishing.” (Incidentally, this is usually “vanity” or “subsidy” publishing, which has somehow become lumped in with true self-publishing wherein authors set up their own imprint and have their own ISBN under which to publish books.) I have a real issue with these cookie-cutter, assembly-line service providers who enable authors to publish their slush on the cheap. Would I consider publishing these books an “achievement”? Not usually. Do I consider truly self-published authors who work hard writing a good, salable manuscript; have it critiqued and edited by professionals; and have the book well-designed as having achieved something? Absolutely.

Yes, there are those who “who don’t believe what editors and agents keep telling them: their work isn’t ready”—or that their work is just bad. I say, let those people go publish with Lulu. Their book will be available on Lulu.com, where approximately zero people actually go to buy books. What I’d like to see is the true self-published authors not denigrated for what they’ve done—because it is a real accomplishment.

Traditional publishing is not exactly known for embracing change (anyone want to talk about the fact that returns are still allowed?!), but I think maybe The Man is going to have to adjust his way of thinking whether he wants to or not.

That, of course, is nonsense. For many authors, self-publishing—independent publishing—makes the most sense creatively and financially. These are the authors who have done their homework. These are the authors who are original and creative—and who know what it takes to run a successful publishing business. The quality of their books—both the way the work is written and edited, and the way it looks physically—matches that of those put out by large traditional houses.

Potential readers pick up their books not knowing—and not caring—who the publisher is. (Do you know who Stephen King’s publisher is? Do you care?) I’ve been criticized for saying that a well-done self-published book should not be identifiable as such; apparently it’s somehow “immoral” or “misleading” to put out a quality, top-notch piece of work. Eh. Whatever.

Indie publishing is here to stay, and I hope as more authors do it “right,” any remnant stigmas ultimately fall to the wayside.

Meanwhile, though, how do you make sure your book does not scream SELF-PUBLISHED and is judged by its cover and its content? Assuming you have a unique, compelling manuscript in the first place, here are some tips:

Have your own publishing company imprint and your own ISBN prefix. Head over to Bowker and buy a set of ten numbers—or a hundred if you have more than a few titles planned. If you are truly self-publishing (ie, not going the subsidy route), your publishing company must be listed as the publisher of record. If you’ve got Outskirts or Author Solutions or others of their ilk listed, they are the publisher—and you haven’t actually self-published. (Reference the subsidy link, above.)

Get your manuscript edited by a professional. Regardless of how good a writer you are, you probably cannot effectively edit your own work. I know I can’t—and I’ve been an editor of other people’s work for more decades than I care to remember. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve gone back to read something I’ve written only to be shocked by some glaring error I overlooked. Self-published books have a reputation of being badly written and poorly edited; make sure yours is neither.

Hire a professional to design your book cover. There are a lot of very inexpensive self-publishing options available today, most of which offer templated cover designs. They are all pretty awful and amateurish.

I recommend most authors hire a typesetter to design and layout their book’s interiors as well. If you are pretty tech savvy and can work a program such as InDesign, however, you can probably get away with formatting the interior yourself.

Don’t expect indie publishing to be easy. But do expect it to be rewarding—especially if you do it right.

So you self-publish your book but then what? Just because you’ve built it, they won’t come. High street bookstores are unlikely to pick it up, and Amazon will take it for a few bucks but won’t highlight it unless it miraculously becomes a best seller. Most good journalists won’t review it (trust me, journalists don’t take self-published books seriously) and unless you’re a marketing or PR guru, it’ll be very difficult to promote it well.

Actually, if you publish traditionally, you are still going to be expected to promote your book. And in fact, you will likely not get signed on with a traditional publisher if you don’t already have a strong author platform with lots of potential buyers. When I was managing editor for a trade publisher, almost every single author we signed on was shocked to learn they were expected to promote their books. But the truth is, the bulk of our marketing was to plop the book into a catalog and send out a few news releases in hopes of getting a review or two. Anything beyond that—well, there just wasn’t a budget for it. Granted, that was a smaller press but even if you do manage to snag one of the major players, they are not likely going to spend their marketing bucks on a new author (like advances, marketing budgets continue to shrink). They’ll spend their money promoting whoever their current James Patterson is—and you will likely be lumped in with the rest of the midlist authors who enjoy little or no marketing budget.  

In addition, if you self-publish properly—start up your own imprint, purchase your own block of ISBNs, and have the book well edited and well designed—as opposed to going the subsidy route (often incorrectly called “self-publishing”), reviewers should have no idea you are self-published. Your book is simply a title from a new independent publisher. And there is no stigma there.

The next hurdle is trust. Sadly, self-published books have a bit of a grim rep. Whether it’s because people associate them with their Aunt Bettie’s History of Littlehampton book with its funny photoshopped front cover, or because they’ve read a self-pubbed book chock-a-block full of mistakes (which, sadly, most self-pubbed books have due to the lack of a decent editor and proof-reader), there’s not a great deal of respect for self-published books despite there being some decent ones out there.

See my point above about putting out a top-quality book. It should look just as sharp as any other book put out by one of the big houses. And again, done right—there is no way readers can tell if a book is self-published or not.

This is why self-published books on average sell dozens (if you’re lucky hundreds) whereas traditional publishers tend to sell in the thousands.

This is true of subsidy published books; these are often called self-published but in reality they are pay-to-publish vanity pieces. They sell few copies because they are often poorly done—and they are usually not priced competitively because authors are forced to purchase the books from the subsidy at an inflated price. In order to make any kind of profit, the books are priced too high—and they don’t sell.

Authors who self-publish in the true sense of the meaning are able to price their books competitively, and if they have a solid promotions plan, they tend to sell books in the thousands—sometimes tens of thousands.

Now if you’re one of those writers who doesn’t care about book sales and it’s all about the love of writing, then self-publishing is worth a shot.

To this I say—if book sales and profits don’t mean anything, by all means, go with the subsidy presses such as Outskirts, iUniverse, and Author House. If you want to make money—self-publish the true way.

But consider this: you’ve spent a year or so writing your book, maybe more, maybe less. So why not try to get paid for your hard work, rather then pay, as you would with self-publishing. Just give it a try, you know? For a start, most reputable traditional publishers will pay an advance (usually in the thousands if through a larger publisher). Then you’ll get royalties for every book you sell (once you make back your advance).

It’s pretty common knowledge that advances from traditional publishers have gotten smaller in recent years.  You’ll still fare much better by self-publishing and keeping all of the profits rather than just 10 percent or so since you have to promote the book anyway. Yes, there will be editing and production costs, but with print-on-demand, you won’t have to lay out a bunch of cash for printing. (And remember, you’ll want to hire a professional editor before sending your manuscript to any agent or publisher, even if you are publishing the traditional route—so that expense, along with promoting, is also a given.)

Don’t forget too that once you sign that contract with a traditional publisher, you lose a certain amount of control. They may change the title. They may edit drastically. They may come up with a cover you hate. They may delay your publication date. But you’re probably stuck with their decision.

Even Kevin Weiss, CEO of a huge self-publishing company in the US (Author Solutions), admits 80 per cent of their authors fail to break even whereas traditionally published authors always do as they never had to fork out in the first place.

Author Solutions is a subsidy publisher—you can’t have someone else “self” publish for you—but I agree that those are some pretty grim sales statistics. Sadly, they are all too true.

And then there’s being able to tell people you’re a published author. Most savvy people will not accept you are one if you’ve paid to have your book published because, as I’ve said before, anyone anyone anyone can self-publish.

Yes, anyone can self-publish, but what you are talking about here is subsidy publishing, or vanity publishing. True self-publishing is a complicated process, and if it’s done well, it generally garners nothing but respect for those who have been through it.

As for the idea that your amazingly successful self-pubbed book will garner the attention of traditional publishers, this does happen but not often. Your chances of getting an agent and then publisher are higher.

I would have to disagree with this point as well—unless you’ve already got a well established platform and a large following, your chances of getting an agent and then a publisher are very small. Very small. You are much better off self-publishing (doing it well) and establishing a track record of sales with which to approach a traditional publisher. That, of course, is if you want to at that point. You’ll likely make more money if you keep it as a self-published title.

So what I’m saying is, give traditional publishing a chance first. Don’t let people tell you traditional publishing is a pipe dream; that getting an agent is impossible; that self-publishing is the first and best option. It isn’t. The fact is, if you write a damn good book, someone will take notice and maybe you’ll get published and maybe you’ll make money.

I agree with this—only when it comes to fiction. As far as nonfiction titles, however, self-publishing is often the best and fastest route to publication. By the time authors wait around for umpteen rejection letters from traditional publishers, self-publishers could have been reaping the rewards of their published books for months…even years. This doesn’t mean self-publishing is right for everyone; but it is most certainly a viable option for those who want to maintain control and keep all of the profits.

Editing and Proofing

Developmental Editing. Understand that a developmental editor is not the same as a peer reviewer. I can tell you from my observations that they are not catching overall writing problems, and this is not the job of a copyeditor either. Whether you use me or someone else for developmental editing, it will be expensive but it will improve the overall read and feel of your writing. Even while your writing improves over time, you cannot expect it to be perfect–ever; that is just the nature of writing. I never depend on myself for my final edits but rather I send my work through one and often several professional editors at whatever cost to me.

Proofing. Always proof your work after completing it. It will save your editors and layout people time and will save you money.

Ellipses. Rules for ellipses are well defined. The Chicago Manual of Style defines the grammatical use as follows:

• To indicate text missing from within a sentence, put a space before the first ellipsis, after the last ellipsis, and in between all ellipses. “The author…wanted all writing to be clear and concise.”
• To indicate text missing from the end of a sentence, do not put a space before the first ellipsis, put a space in between all ellipses, and add an extra one at the end to indicate the final period. “The author demandingly wanted all writing to be clear….”

Gender-Specific Language. Avoid gender-specific language if possible. I prefer the “compromise” of alternating the use of “he” and “she” throughout a document rather than “he/she,” “he or she,” “(s)he,” or “s/he.”

Glossaries. Consider using them; glossaries are a great help for obscure terminology. They are as helpful, if not more so, than an acronym list.

In-text References. Always ensure that in-text references to book or article titles as well as Web site URLs are accurate. Incorrect references should never appear in a publication. Developmental editors and reference checkers catch these in the book and periodical publishing field, but when you are publishing your own materials you will either have to be extremely thorough and double check all material or pay someone else to do it.

Keep Verb Forms Together. Watch out for splitting verb forms. Opt for “also will be responsible for” over “will also be responsible for,” unless it is extremely awkward when the former is used. 

Knowledge Base. Be careful when writing about any topic in which your level of experience may be limited. Your knowledge base appears to have increased by about 300 percent since I have known you (not to mention the increased development in your writing style), but none of us are perfect. If I, as your editor, question some of your statements because my research shows different outcomes, others will question your authority as well. (In all fairness, though, understand that it simply could be a matter of sources that are referenced.) And this could not be good for your reputation or book sales. If you are unsure about a certain technology or industry, research as much as you can. It is labor-intensive and time-consuming, but you cannot expect to get complete and accurate information by asking a couple of people. Plus, other specialists and experts do not necessarily have the time nor the inclination to do your research for you anyway.
   Lists. If the listed items are in a hierarchy, use numbers or letters; otherwise, use some sort of bullet.

Microsoft Word Tools. Do not depend on spell check or grammar check. Know how to research spelling and grammar issues since Word tools often recommend incorrect changes.

Noun (Subject)/Pronoun Agreement. The old school was to always have these agree such as “Every writer must have his or her way.” Today, it is becoming more acceptable to write, “Every writer must have their way.” 

Numbers, Writing. For numbers, follow the under 10 rule, i.e., spell out numbers if they are under 10, except for time, measurement, and money. Also, if three numbers are used in the same sentence, use whichever style outnumbers the others. For instance, you would spell out for “the contestant won 6, 11, and 15 times in a row.” Note how “6” is under 10 and normally would be spelled out, but the number is used since the other two numbers are over 10. If you decide to follow the ninety-nine and below rule where numbers are spelled out, be consistent. (Keep in mind, though, that numerals are nearly always used with percentages and measures.)