Self Publishing

I Should Be Appointed Secretary of State Because My Mom Had Her Picture Taken With Gerald Ford

by

You know how much I like to trash publishing scams. Well, now my brother Tod is jumping into the fray with an expose of BK Nelson Literary Agency and their, um, "qualifications":

I can't think of a better reason to sign with BK Nelson other than she was associated with a law firm that, uh, had a partner whose daughter married Paul McCartney. If anyone can think of a stranger biographical note in an agent's bio, please, forward it to me. It's pretty much the equivalent of me saying you should buy my books because I once worked at a staffing service that sent temps to Disney (which was founded by Walt Disney).

Vanity Press Trickery

by

The wonderful Writers Beware blog led me to this excellent list of tricks vanity presses use to con desperate, and gullible aspiring writers into believing that they are "real" publishers…which also double as rationalizations the suckers use to convince themselves that they haven't been swindled. Among them, the myth that if a publisher doesn't accept all submissions (eg. Tate), and pays a token advance (eg. PublishAmerica), they aren't a scam.

2. Misconception: Vanity presses don’t pay advances.

While
vanity presses are supported primarily by the money that writers pay
them, the less-than-honest vanities try to pass themselves off as real
publishers. One way to do so is to pay advances (or claim to do so).

Now,
how to be an advance-paying publisher and still make a profit from
writers? Well, the advances could be very low. For instance, $1 per
author, non-negotiable. The publisher could also pay – or claim to pay
– advances to some authors but not others. Maybe you’ll get it, maybe you won’t.

They can afford to pay you the $1 or the $100 because they know they will make it all back in the money they make off of you and your family buying copies of your own book…which, in fact, is their actual business. They make are in the "selling books to authors" business.

Snead’s Screed — Dishonest or Stupid?

by

I don't know whether Louise Snead, publisher of Affaire De Coeur, is dishonest or stupid or self-deluded..or a little of all three. As you may recall, I took her magazine to task for her unethical editorial practices (accepting advertisements in exchange for reviews) and for an outrageously unethical conflict of interest  (her advertising director co-owns a sham publishing company that received cover stories, features, and extraordinarily positive reviews in the magazine).

In subsequent public comments on this blog and others, Snead and Bonny Kirby, her advertising director, unapologetically confirmed both the reviews-tied-to-advertising policy and the conflict-of-interest and defended them as appropriate conduct.

But now, in an Affaire De Coeur editorial, Sneed is trying to reframe the discussion by grossly mischaracterizing my objections, lying about her advertising policy, avoiding any mention of the magazine's conflict-of-interest, and chiding publishers for not rushing to her defense. Snead writes:

These are very serious, slanderous allegations, not even borne out by his own review. He didn't take out an ad and his publisher has never taken out ads either, so how did he manage to get a five star review if what he allegesis true?

As she knows, I never said my five-star review was bought. What I said was that AdC offered publishers the opportunity to buy reviews (and other editorial coverage) in exchange for an ad…and that, in some cases, purchasing a review was required before the book would be reviewed. Don't take my word for it, take Snead's, as stated in AdC's own advertising package:

To compliment your ad and review we also offer interviews or articles.
If you would like an interview let us know 3 months in advance so it
will go in the same issue as your review and ad.[…]Book cover
ad.–This is the cover of the book that goes right beside (or above or
below) the AdC review of your book.[…]We do not review books after
publication unless it is done in association with an ad.

It's sleazy and unethical. And, therefore, I wanted nothing to do with them or their positive review of my book. She pretends not to have this policy in her editorial and then has the gall to say:

I was under the impression people could not simply tell lies on the Internet as if they were gospel. I was wrong.

But apparently she's under the impression that it's okay to tell lies in a magazine, since that is what she's doing. She's denying an advertising-for-reviews practice that both she and Kirby have previously defended in comments they posted here and on other blogs. Did she think no one would notice?

But of equal surprise was how disinterested in the truth some readers are. Some of the AdC staff and I responded to Goldberg's allegations with the correct facts, borne out by statistics which anyone can gather from our magazines, only to be completely ignored.

She's being disingenuous. It's not possible for readers to make an informed judgment about the magazine's biases and conflicts of interest when those relationships aren't disclosed.  You won't find any disclaimers alerting readers to reviews and articles that were written as a result of an advertisement being purchased by a publisher or author…nor any disclaimers alerting readers to articles, reviews, and cover stories about publishers and books in which executives at the magazine have a financial interest. Therefore, it is impossible for readers to gather anything from flipping through the magazines about the objectivity of Snead's reviews and articles. She writes:

[…]for 27 years we have strived to produce
a product and reviews that are as good and unbiased as we can make then.

If that were true, she would have informed readers that all the Light Sword books that were reviewed — all but one of which received four stars or better — were published by a company co-owned by AdC's advertising director.

If that were true, she would have informed readers in the cover stories about Light Sword that the company they were raving about was co-owned by an AdC executive.

But those facts, representing an outrageous conflict-of-interest and bias, were not disclosed. And yet, Sneed expected publishers to line up to defend AdC's dubious editorial integrity.

A greater revelation is how cowardly some people are. AdC reviews over 100 books per issue, the vast majority of which do not have ads in the magazine. Hundreds of authors and publishers could have stepped forward and declared that Goldberg's opinions were false but sadly, only a few authors did — some with qualified statements — and only one publisher stepped up to the plate, saying that we review dozens of their books and they've never taken out an ad. And even then, she did it anonymously.

I'm
guessing that publishers didn't defend
of Snead because they have very little respect for the magazine and are
disgusted by the repugnant conflicts-of-interest. I'm making that assumption
based on the tons of emails I've received from authors and editors
thanking me for taking a stand and exposing Snead's highly unethical
editorial practices.

I am not surprised that Snead is using her magazine as a soapbox to present her side of the story nor that I am
depicted as the anti-Christ nor that she doesn't acknowledge the unethical relationship between
AdC and Light Sword Publishing.  It makes sense. She doesn't think that
there is anything wrong with her ads-in-exchange-for-reviews policy
or that her advertising director co-owns a sham publishing company that
has been heavily promoted in her magazine and has been found guilty in court of defrauding authors. In her view, the
only wrong here was that I dared to call her on it.

(Thanks to EREC for alerting me to the editorial)

Why Reviewers Ignore Self-Published Books

by

Chicago Sun-Times book critic David Montgomery explains why he doesn't review self-published books.

In my experience the overall quality level of self-published fiction
is not sufficiently high for the books to be given serious
consideration. This is not to say that all self-published fiction is
bad. The law of probability alone would indicate that at least some of
it must be readable. But the vast majority of it is not.

There are many reasons for this (e.g., self-published fiction has no
third-party vetting, most of it is not professionally edited, much of
it was already rejected by agents/editors for a variety of reason), but
the bottom line is that most self-published fiction just isn't very
good.

He's right, and although he's only speaking for himself, he might as well be talking for the majority mainstream magazine and newspaper book reviewers out there.

Inexplicably, I keep getting emails from publicists and vanity presses to review their self-published authors….even though a) I am not a book reviewer and b) I am a harsh critic of self-publishing in general and vanity presses in particular.

Beware the “Term of License” Contract

by

In this month's Authors Guild Bulletin, Mark L. Levine warns writers to be very wary of publishers offering a so-called "term of license" contract (signing you for seven to ten years with an option to renew) unless you are already a best-selling author or are negotiating paperback or reprint rights to an existing work.

If they're offering it to you as a novice writer, then it's a big warning sign that "the publisher in not a bona fide trade or academic publisher or even a bona fide print-on-demand one but a vanity publisher masquerading as a bona fide POD publisher."  He offers some more good advice:

Recently, a handful of POD publishers have been soliciting and "accepting" manuscripts at an astonishing rate and not requiring money up front to publish a book. They even offer what on its face apperas to be a relatively standard publishing agreement and sometimes agree to pay a nominal advance (eg one dollar). This has led writers — particularly novices– to think they are being published by bona fide trade publishers.

[…]They typically will not publish any copies other than those ordered at the authors discount. Apparently, the total number of books purchases for friends and relativesat the "special" author's price by the presumably large number of people taken in by this scheme makes it a profitable venture for the ethically challenge.

[…]If you are still interested in proceeding in the hope that your publisher is bona fide, be sure to insert, in addition to the requirement that the book be published within a specified time period at the publisher's sole expense, language stating tha the number of print-on-demand copies of the book initially published at the publisher's expense "will not be less than ______ copies" (eg 500 or 1000). Language like this, as well as a good out-of-print clause, should flush out the intentions of the publisher and save you from a bad surprise.

The Fine Print of Self-Publishing

by

Fineprint
Mark Levine has just published the third edition of  THE FINE PRINT OF SELF-PUBLISHING. I was a fan of the first edition and this one is even better. Particularly useful are the updated and expanded  examinations of the various self-publishing companies, their services and their contracts.

Anybody who is thinking about self-publishing must read this book first.  Even authors who aren't interested in self-publishing will come away, as I did, with a deeper understanding of publishing contracts and what the various clauses actually mean for you.

I strongly recommend this book.

Airleaf Reborn?

by

6a00d8341c669c53ef00e54fb34c9d8833-640wi
Bonnie Kaye, who was a key player in the demise of the Airleaf vanity press scam, is now leading the charge against Jones Harvest Publishing, a sleazy vanity press run by Brien Jones, a former Airleaf exec (who is also doing business as Author Celebrity, Starred Review, Great Concept Books, Book Wheat  and Author Profile, to name just a few).

She has launched JonesHarvestFraudVictims, a blog for people who claim that they've been swindled by Jones. She writes:

In the aftermath of Airleaf Publishing's demise, the former Executive
Vice President, Brien Jones, has "re-invented" this system all over
again in his own publishing business.  Although Mr. Jones swore he was
not the man to be blamed behind Airleaf's fraudulence, the
investigation conducted by a number of members of the Airleaf Victims
support group has proven that this is not the case. Mr. Jones was no
innocent victim of Airleaf fraud as he proclaims like the authors who
bought their worthless promises—in fact, he perpetuated much of it.
According to a dozen ex-employees, Mr. Jones was the mastermind behind
the worthless promotions of Airleaf that he was pitching.

Brien Jones has cast himself as an innocent victim who is being trashed by "baseless and vicious attacks from competing publishers," even though his critics aren't publishers at all.

I was an employee of another publishing company and despite being
called the “mastermind” of this operation I was not in charge of
anything at all. I never had access that company’s check book, company
credit cards, accounts payable, or accounts receivable. I never saw a
bank statement, not one time. Most amazing of all, I was not allowed to look at the mail!

I also had no information, none, about book sales. Despite nearly constant pleas I never had any clue how many copies of client’s books were sold.  I had no clue how many of MY books were sold, even though I had to pay out of my pocket (just like the other authors) to print them! I DO know that I never got paid a percentage of any book sales, including my own.

[…]When
I left that publishing company it was up to me to decide how much of
the responsibility was mine. I decided I deserved my fair share of the
blame. So I sent out apologies. I published 30 books for free
(including the crusader’s), and 30 more at our hard cost. I also used
and use the same vendors that got stiffed by my former boss. In other
words I have done all I can to atone for my role in that other company.
Since many of our client’s now were clients there, I guess we must be
doing something right.

That's one way of looking at it. Another would be that he's suckered the same suckers again using the same schemes that worked so effectively at Airleaf (which seem primarily targeted at senior citizens). He's not the only one who has seemingly gone back to the Airleaf playbook for inspiration. As Writer Beware notes:

Airleaf has spawned several publishing enterprises run by ex-staff–including Fideli Publishing, a fee-based publisher whose marketing packages bear an eerie similarity to Airleaf's, and Brien Jones's Jones Harvest Publishing,
which also charges fees for publishing and offers many Airleaf-style
services (Writer Beware has gotten some advisories about Jones
Harvest's email solicitations,
and Mr. Jones has recently chosen to reimburse several Jones Harvest
authors who alleged performance problems). If you trace the family tree
backward instead of forward, you arrive at the Big Daddy of POD vanity
publishing, AuthorHouse, where Brien Jones was employed before he
co-founded Airleaf's predecessor, Bookman Marketing. It's a tangled web
indeed–which, sadly, is not unusual in the murky world of vanity POD.

Sadly, many of the desperate, and insanely gullible, aspiring authors who were swindled by Airleaf learned nothing from the experience…and have gone running from one vanity press scam right into others.

Kaye organized over 450 scammed authors against Airleaf and succeeded in getting the Indiana Attorney General to shut the company down. I wonder how many victims she will rally together this time…

Another Opportunity for Vanity Press Suckers To Throw Away Their Money

by

The Telegraph is amused by Blurbings.com, another inept "service" aimed at hopelessly stupid people who've already been suckered by a vanity press and are eager to throw away even more money:

It had to happen sooner or later: an American company
is offering writers gobbets of praise with which to decorate the covers
of their self-published books. A plug from an unknown author is
unlikely to encourage anyone to buy a book by another unknown author,
but this has not stopped www.blurbings.com offering various packages that start at $19.95 for 10 micro-bouquets.

Victoria Strauss at Writers Beware also points out the stupidity of this new attempt to shake a few more bucks from the pockets of the dumb and unwary:

According to Blurbings' About Us
page: "Normally, a blurb will cost an author and/or publisher $14 –
$23, which includes printing of the galleys, packaging and mailing
fees. The standard 30 – 50 blurbs expected per book can range from $420
to $1,150. It is also very time consuming researching and contacting
prospective authors as well as conducting follow-ups during the
duration of the process."

Uh…okay.

[…]The whole point of a blurb is that the blurber be recognizable to the
general public, or else be someone whose credentials suggest that his
or her opinion is worth taking seriously. But how likely is it that
someone like that will find his or her way to Blurbings and happen upon
your digital galley? (And if you contact them yourself, what do you
need Blurbings for?) It's far more likely that the blurbs you'll get
will come from other site users–i.e., other self- or
small-press-published authors–or, possibly, from random web surfers.
No offense to Joe Micropress Author or Jane Random Web Surfer…but
blurbwise, who cares what they think?

Emily Maroutian, one of the owners of Blurbings.com, defended her "service" in a comment on Writer Beware:

Blurbings.com was not created for big industry authors or authors, like
yourself, who don't like blurbs. Blurbings was created to help
self-published authors and small presses receive blurbs for their work.
It was created to shorten the process and make it cheaper. […]If anyone here feels as if our service is pointless then don’t use it. It’s as simple as that.

I don't know why the Telegraph and Victoria are criticizing Blurbings.com. Everyone knows that a ringing endorsement from a complete nobody for a total unknown is better than no blurb at all. But I think I'm going to save $20 and just ask my gardener, the cashier at Ralph's, and the first person I see on the street to blurb my next book.

BookWhirl Can’t Even Sell Itself

by

I got the following spam email from Bookwhirl, a online marketing & promotion huckster for authors:

Greetings!

I am Jen, and I am Marketing Service Representative from BookWhirl.com. I understand that you have published books. If I may ask, do you have any marketing plans for your books?  I am asking this because we at BookWhirl.com want to help you market your books and we want your books to succeed!

I clicked the link to their site, where they say that:

Waging a successful online book marketing campaign does not require a lot of money — it’s all about having the right combination of knowledge, creativity, and business sense.  Let our team of experienced online book marketers do the selling for you.

If the flatly-written, uninspired, and impersonal mass email that I received is an example of their combination of knowledge, creativity, business sense and online experience, then God help the fool who hires them (packages start at $800).

BookWhirl.com employs an experienced team of online marketing strategists, ad copywriters, graphic artists, and web designers whose combined expertise ensure an effective online marketing campaign

Except their email campaign for themselves is a bust, a demonstration of their total lack of  persuasive skills and marketing savvy. Their email begs the question… if their "marketing strategists" can't even effectively sell themselves, how are they going to sell you?

Naturally, the people who are most likely to waste money on something like this are those who are already experienced at flushing cash down toilets. So it's no surprise that Bookwhirl's list of clients is full of suckers from PublishAmerica, Xlibris and subsidy presses like High-Pitched Hum Publishing.