Erica Friedman, Former Publisher of Comic Books
Répondu il y a 84w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 9.7k et de vues de réponses 21.1m
The “bordering on hatred” is a weird relic of human thought. Because we have in-groups (us) and out-groups (them) when we make a decision to out-group something we often become obsessive or zealous in our out-grouping. You saw this clearly in the last election in which one group demonized members of the other.
So, a person who has not found a publisher through traditional means is predisposed to out-grouping not only the publishers, but everyone associated with that path. (Admittedly, agents kind of do suck and publishers have few to no resources left to risk on new authors, so trying to get published seems like standing outside a castle wall, shouting to be let in.)
It is also human nature to embellish the positive side of any decision we make. “Self-publishing is AMAZING! I don’t have to worry about an editor ruining my story, or a company taking my profits!” Well, both are true, sort of. You still need an editor, duh~~ and you’re paying Amazon or whatever system you publish through instead. There is no self-publishing route that is completely free of cost.
There are positives and negatives in every kind of publishing. I write about this specific issue here: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Self-Publishing Your Manga (The title says “manga” but it applies to all forms of self-publishing.)
Emil Fortune, Editor in children's publishing
Répondu il y a 84w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 2.6k et de vues de réponses 1.8m
Big publishing companies have a certain kind of inertia. They are complicated beasts which are composed almost entirely of contracts; the contracts may or may not be particularly forward-looking, and if they need changing to fit the times, that takes time.
As an example of this, there was a period after the introduction of truly successful mass-market ebooks - the launch of Kindle, what, ten years ago? - when publishers had to go back and look at all the publishing contracts for all of their books and work out what they could and couldn’t publish electronically. Older contracts didn’t even consider ebooks a possibility, and the ones which did make some provision for them couldn’t agree about the value of the rights.
Bear in mind that the backlist is critically important to a big publisher. I’ve seen a contract for a key backlist children’s book where the author had a 50% ebook royalty and the illustrator had a 5% royalty, purely because the contracts were negotiated by two different agents, and neither the publisher nor the agents had a clear idea of what the royalties would be worth ten years down the line.
As a result, it took several years for publishers to clear rights to even sell their backlist on Kindle; it meant identifying the rights they needed to clear or amend, negotiating the new deals, and sending lots of letters back and forth for each title. While we were in the middle of sorting these rights out, new things kept popping up. What about an interactive app based on a children’s book? Is that an ebook? Is it some kind of animated version of the cartoon? In the end we had to wedge in definitions and royalty rates for things like ‘e-versions’ or ‘enhanced ebooks’ as well as loosely-defined ‘app rights’. Which wouldn’t always be definitions agreed on universally between literary agencies, publishers, or retailers.
It was a huge bureaucratic and strategic task for big publishers, and it only managed to solve the basic problem of being able to sell the book in a couple of new ways. If you’ve ever wondered why so few big publisher books show up on platforms with different payment models, like Kindle Unlimited, it’s because each book would need re-negotiating to work out how the revenue is split up and paid out.
Publishing contracts aren’t the only type of legal entanglement. The relationships between publishers and retailers such as Amazon are also governed by legal agreements; if you want to change the way you do business in some way, that potentially creates big issues too.
To sum this point up: traditional publishers can sometimes lag behind the pace of technological change because keeping up requires a vast amount of paperwork. Committing to that paperwork means you need to be fairly sure that it will be worth it, in a commercial sense; and the bigger you are as a publisher, the more risk that represents.
Pranav Shree, works at Word Pinnacle
Répondu il y a 21w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 54 et de vues de réponses 25.5k
Authors are starting to hate Traditional Publishing because it is slow and puts a lot of creative restrictions but the benefits it brings in are the reasons why no one is ready to ditch it:
- Avances de fonds
- Updated with the latest tech/Evolving with time
- More recognition and speaking opportunities
- Enough time to concentrate on upcoming books
- No worries about book editing and formatting.
We have put a detailed study of why traditional publishing is still so popular, check it out and tell us what do you prefer.
Marion Gropen, Je suis sur le côté financier de l'édition de livres depuis 25 +
Répondu il y a 84w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 1.4k et de vues de réponses 1.1m
I think that the haters of traditional publishing tend to fall into one or more of a few categories:
- Those who have submitted their work to the traditional system, and been rejected. Rejection hurts, and it’s entirely natural that they’d resent and denigrate those doing the rejecting.
- Those whose books have been published by mainstream traditional publishers, and not had the success that they expected. The same sort of defense mechanisms come into play. It’s the awful publishers, not my bad luck, much less that readers didn’t like my book.
- Those who know very little about the internal workings of publishers, much less why they do what they do in the way that they do it, and assume that all you need to do is feed the ms to the printers and out pops a successful book.
- Those who understand how to succeed (modestly) as a self-published authors, and who over-generalize those rules. The economics of a book that will sell 500 or 1,000, or even 2500 copies (in total) are radically different from those of a book that sells 50,000 or more. What makes sense for one version of publishing makes no sense at all for the other.
- Those who deeply desire the death of mainstream publishers for one reason or another. Wishful thinking can color all sorts of perceptions.
Mainstream publishing is adapting to the changes. After all, these are hardly the first, or the most extreme, changes that the industry has been through in the last 100 years or so. It’s had lots of practice.
Michael Roberts, lives in Crown Heights (2017-present)
Répondu il y a 84w
Traditional publishing has come under pressure (I don’t want to use the word “attack”) from the rise, easy and relatively low cost of digital publishing. That includes newspapers, newsletters, booklets and books. But I would not characterize traditional publishing as outdated. I believe that books, newspapers etc. are VITALLY important for the following reasons:
- While you can simply “google up” something that you want information on and get it instantly, if you want to RETAIN AND REMEMBER that information and internalize it reading is the way to go. I get that people learn differently by different tools (videos, audio etc.). But no matter the tool READING plays an important role.
- Many local/community newspapers still exist and are thriving. That’s because in a place like New York City, for example (where I live) there are over 53 unique racial and ethnic neighborhoods. In Brooklyn, a city of over 2.5 million people, OVER 78 different languages are spoken. In these communities local newspapers are crucial to informing, educating and entertaining these “non-mainstream” community residents especially those whose “first language” is not English.
- These small community newspapers are the ones that help large mainstream newspapers and cable news outlets get story ideas.
So traditional publishing still has a place in modern society. Just because its easier, more modern, applicable to a changing technologically driven society does not mean that its lost its value and relevance. What it means is that traditional publishing has to adapt and adjust to the changing times, demographics and technology. Many have done so or started to do so (online publishing/online sites for citizen journalists etc.)
Marva Dasef, Régulier et auto-publié depuis 2007. J'ai été autour du bloc une fois ou deux.
Répondu il y a 84w · L'auteur dispose de réponses 2.3k et de vues de réponses 916.9k
15% royalty on ebook net price (retail less processing fees) vs. 70% royalty on retail price. Plus the ability to set your own retail price when self-publishing.
The royalty with traditional publishers varies, of course. But do you think you’d sell more books for $9.99 vs. $3.99?
The royalty structures are changing, but the major publishers have been resisting it. Also consider the majors won’t even talk to an author. Everything has to go through an agent. The agent takes their share off the top of the author’s share.
Self-pub is full of crappy books, but so are trads.
Downside of self-publishing are people who willingly pay more for a book just to have the “designer label” on it.