Handy promises

At one point, the Jenny Craig weight loss company was running ads with the tagline “lose all the weight you can.”

All the weight you can?

How handy: a promise impossible to break!

Now here’s another: according to Damian Whitworth in the London Telegraph, lulu.com will turn unpublished writers into “potential J.K. Rowlings.”

But — unpublished writers are already potential J.K. Rowlings.

Lulu.com’s found, Bob Young, had his own brush with J.K. Rowlings potentiality.

The idea for Young’s digital publishing business came when he wrote his own book about Red Hat [the open source software developer he co-founded] to counter adverse media commentary on his company. The book sold well, about 20,000 copies, but he was disenchanted by the way it was edited, the tiny amount he was paid after the publishing house had stripped out costs and the enormous number of copies that languished unsold.

I think lulu.com is a wonderful company. If you have a niche book with a clearly identifiable market, easily and cheaply reachable through a manageable marketing campaign, lulu.com is definitely the way to go.

But does anyone really think that the only thing standing between a given writer’s obscurity and his Rowlingsesque success is the physical production of his book?

You get what you’re paid for ;-)

Lee Gomes, technology columnist for the Wall Street Journal, does a bit of investigative journalism on one of the more charming opportunities brought to us via the world wide web.

That’s a sarcastic “charming” btw.

The opportunity: writers wanted. “To generate original content for websites. ”

Why? So the sites will rank high on search engines, earning ad dollars for their owners.

Gomes’ article focuses on the clutter aspect. “Legitimate information . . . risks being crowded out by junky, spammy imitations.”

What bothers me a lot more is that these people are scamming writers. The guy Gomes talked to, for instance, offers $100 for fifty 500-word articles. Cheap s.o.b.

25,000 words later — I bet you’d never even see your money.

Write, or buy a lottery ticket?

In a Guardian article on POD (publish on demand) books, we find this charming side dish:

. . . 50% of all published books with an ISBN (International Standard Book Number) tag sell fewer than 250 copies and barely more than 1% of manuscripts submitted ever get published.

Interesting numbers; I don’t doubt they are true. Yeah, the odds are stacked against us.

What I don’t understand is how POD is supposed to help. Sure, by publishing yourself, you are, technically, um, “published.” But does anyone think that by self-publishing, you can improve your chances of selling more than 250 copies? Even if Amazon does list your book?

Sure, you bypass the multiple gateways of agents, editors, publishers, distributors, and booksellers. But not the readers. Ah, the readers . . .

If it feels good, read it?

I found this via Booksquarea Guardian story that claims people prefer books with happy endings.

Okay, I’m willing to believe that. Who wants to pay money to be made to feel miserable? (Yeah yeah that just invites a whippersnapper response, doesn’t it! Go ahead, it’s the weekend!)

But halfway through the first draft of this post, I realized that the info on the study’s methodology was a bit on the thin side, and what there is raises a flag in my Bordeaux-livened brain:

The survey of 1,740 respondents was carried out on the World Book Day website.

So this is, what, like an AOL poll? :-o

The details from the outfit that conducted the poll, Worldbookday.com, aren’t much thicker:

An online survey was carried out on the World Book Day website between January 1 and 9 February 2006. There were 1740 respondents.

The survey was commissioned by the organisers of World Book Day and analysed on their behalf by Education Direct.

Well, maybe Education Direct was able to extrapolate Reality from 1740 Internet users? Hmmmmm.

I next googled to see how other papers are presenting the survey results. Here’s how it’s framed by The Telegraph:

Book readers overwhelmingly prefer novels with happy endings . . .

and

Almost half the nation’s readers . . .

I.e., no qualification that maybe, just maybe, the poll might not be representative of the larger population.

The Mirror, otoh, spins it into a story on the Top 10 Happy Endings. How funny is that: falling back on pure fluff somehow feels the most honest of the batch :-)

I swear I don’t know this person

Stopped by Amazon this morning, and someone has posted a new review for Outwitting Dogs.

A week or so ago, the subject of Amazon reviews came up on a Yahoo list I’m on, and someone said that they generally ignore 5-star reviews. The reasoning is that no book is perfect, and if someone says so, they have to be a friend of the writer. A shill.

Well, I do not know this person. Maybe she knows Terry (the book is a collaboration; Terry Ryan, my co-writer, is a professional dog trainer) but the book’s been out for a year and as far as I know Terry hasn’t asked anybody to post an Amazon review for her. (I haven’t either. Call me a wimp but I’m descended from a long line of Methodist ministers. Somehow I just can’t get the words “would you fake a nice Amazon review for me?” out of my mouth. And my day job is PR. I should be cynical and conniving. Thanks a lot, Grandpa, wherever you are.)

So anyway, I’m reading the review, and maybe I’m a little short of sleep, but it made me teary. This person loved the book. Really really loved it. The writing, the organization, the content, the attitude . . .

It was a nice, warm, pat on the back and I am deeply grateful for it. So citywulf, wherever you are, thank you. Thank you so much.

I’m going to go write some more, now.

Somewhat less “romantic,” per se

I’ll let blogger Pharyngula explain this himself:

All across the world, people are wondering what the etiquette is if they should find themselves in a romantic situation with an amorous cephalopod, and it is my duty to provide the answers.

The protagonist of my new novel in progress has a degree in biology. And to think I was wondering if my setup would lend itself to comedy . . .

Romance novels, a friendly-like look

The Telegraph has published an article on romance novels.

But the real mystery is, why aren’t we preoccupied with writing and reading novels about work, or the environment or children? Why is it always about pair bonding? “Lord, what fools these mortals be,” Puck remarked, observing human lovers in a certain wood outside Athens – but then, even Shakespeare’s fairies were subject to and humbled by the velleities of passion.

Yeah, it’s a kind and respectful article. And that’s a good thing ;-)

Bah to book overhype

I recently picked up a paperback because its cover sported a glowing blurb by an author whose work I enjoy.

The book was a resounding disappointment, and, no dummy, I, I made a mental note to never trust a blurb in quite the same way again.

I’m comforted to learn that I am not alone. Heck no, I’m part of a trend, according to Damian Horner on Bookseller.com, who says that readers have become cynical about the rave reviews and gushing quotes that accompany so many book launches today.

I suspect we will soon see publishers working much more closely with bloggers and reading groups. They will run ongoing focus group panels and maybe some will even follow the Miramax model and ruthlessly target awards and prizes.

They already are. In an interview with conservative blogger/radio pundit Hugh Hewitt, for instance, Robert Ferrigno talks about how the publisher of his new political thriller, Prayers for the Assassin, spent “six figures” on website and blog marketing. (The website lets fans enter, virtually, the futuristic world of the novel.) Ferrigno predicts that in five years, “publishers will not be advertising in print media, except in very rare cases.”

These tactics work by generating word-of-mouth, which has credibility because the Mouth generating the Word tends to be a peer–a reader, just like you are, who has no vested interest in praising something that’s no good.

The weakness of this tactic, however, is that an amateur’s recommendations can be worthless, as well. Fifteen minutes scanning the reviews on Amazon is all you need to convince yourself of that ;-)