No such thing as bad publicity?

[BWFoster78]

People are calling this article a great example of all the things an unknown author shouldn't say:

If JK Rowling Cares About Writing, She Should Stop Doing It | Lynn Shepherd

But you do have to admit that it got her name out there...

Career killer or genius move?

 

[Graylorne]

I saw negative reader comments are spilling over to her Amazon & Goodreads reviews, so I'd say it doesn't help her reputation.
If I were her publisher, I'd not be pleased; it's an extremely silly article.

 

[Steerpike]

I agree. The article doesn't make the author seem very intelligent and would certainly put me off buying anything she wrote.

 

[Devor]

More career killer than genius, and it depends, but really neither. Rowling is successful, it's expected she will get these kinds of attacks and that she can take it. It would be a career killer to go off on an unknown author for silly reasons, but attacking pop for being pop is kind of m'eh, whatever. It might turn off some of her fans, but mostly there's a little distance now, people are more level headed. And some people might agree with her. There's a chance she's appealing to her niche, at the expense of people who won't like her work anyways, although I doubt it.

The thing is, there's nothing in this article which made me want to read more by the author of this article. If anything I felt an urge to read Rowling's new works to see if her points were valid or not. Maybe if I were running a blog, and she approached as a guest author, it might make me take a look. But then again, I wouldn't want to share in her turn off of Harry Potter fans.

It depends, of course. It might fit perfectly with her overall brand strategy, but I think it mostly washes out.

((edit))

I do feel that I should say, it's ridiculous for her to criticize adults for reading Harry Potter when she hasn't read even a word. But I know people who think this way, who also read. I'm familiar with where she's coming from.

 

[The Blue Lotus]

I read that article months ago.
The author speaking is, imho, an idiot. JKR fans will do everything in their power to kill her books before they ever have a chance now.
Bad PR is bad for business. I'm sure she was trying to start a rivalry thus improving sales, it has worked in the past. However, she went about it poorly and just comes off as bitter, resentful, and a jealous waste of space.
I'm not a huge JKR, after the Potter books, fan by any means, but give the woman some credit. She came up with a book idea that set the world on fire, re-energizing children everywhere and many adults too, to read once again, not to mention write!
We should all be kissing her feet and thanking her. Not trying to tear her down.
Part of the problem with her newest work is that it is not for children; or even young adults. She's been type cast per say. So, when she does something that does not fit within peoples set expectations, it is not received as well as if it were yet another child themed/marketed book. JKR, should not be expected to write just for kids, or just about magic, she is trying to branch out, stretch her literary legs, and people should allow her to do so. Without the name calling and demands for her to hang up her quill.

 

[BWFoster78]

I'm really of two minds on this. On one hand, she comes across as an entitled dolt and does nothing to recommend her work at all. On the other hand, were it not for this article and the hullabaloo about it, I'd never of even heard of her. Is it better to have people know your name even if it's with a negative connotation or to have them never to have heard of you at all?

 

[The Blue Lotus]

IDK we all know who Hitler is/was, but if his memoires were published I doubt there'd be a line to buy the book...

 

[Steerpike]

I'm really of two minds on this. On one hand, she comes across as an entitled dolt and does nothing to recommend her work at all. On the other hand, were it not for this article and the hullabaloo about it, I'd never of even heard of her. Is it better to have people know your name even if it's with a negative connotation or to have them never to have heard of you at all?

No. There's not likely to be a benefit in the latter in terms of selling books. How many people are going to say "Hey, this person sounds like an idiot. I think I'll buy this book." I buy books from unknown authors when I stumble across them for one reason or another. So at least there was a small chance I'd buy her book at some point, if I happened across it and it looked interesting. Now that I know her for this article, there is zero chance I'll buy anything she puts out.

 

[deilaitha]

My dad sent me that Huffpo article a few weeks ago. He also sent me a blog post by the writer of the Monster Hunter International series, Larry Correia. Correia said that Ms. Shepherd is a classic example of "defeatism" in writers--the idea that "I can't get published because that person is taking the spotlight" instead of just putting one's nose to the grindstone and working to achieve the best no matter what.

His blog post is rather harsh and scathing, but it offers some good thoughts on the subject of working really hard as a writer. http://monsterhunternation.com/2014/02/24/fisking-the-huffpo-because-jk-rowling-is-nice-and-im-not/

Anyways, I digress a little from the topic of this thread, which is whether or not this will hurt Shepherd's reputation. But, considering that at least one published, successful author tore her article to shreds and I have seen far more negative comments than positive, I think that this is a case of "bad publicity."

She starts her article with saying

When I told a friend the title of this piece she looked at me in horror and said, "You can't say that, everyone will just put it down to sour grapes!" And she does, of course, have a point. No struggling but relatively ambitious writer can possibly be anything other than envious. You'd be scarcely human otherwise. But this particular piece isn't about that.

Unfortunately, I do put it down to sour grapes. I don't say this to bash her by any means, but if this isn't sour grapes, she has seriously misrepresented herself. I don't really like how she then appears to justify her envy by saying everyone else is.

She may be a delightful person and I don't mean this personally against her. But again, she has seriously misrepresented herself and painted herself in a poor light. More people might know her name now, but everyone is going to associate her with the phrase "sour grapes." One thing that you learn in expository writing is that people remember the first paragraph and the last paragraph of an essay more than they do the content, and by putting "sour grapes" and "envy" (definite buzzwords) she has forever tied herself to those concepts.

I don't really see how a writer can recover from that kind of publicity. I definitely think this one was a career killer.

 

[Steerpike]

Yeah, it's not so much the jealousy, though that's bad enough, but the sheer stupidity exhibited by the writer. She appears to believe that J.K. Rowling publishing books has magically reduced her own ability, or the ability of other writers, to do so. It's a combination of sour grapes and cognitive defect, as far as I can tell.

 

[Devor]

I'm really of two minds on this. On one hand, she comes across as an entitled dolt and does nothing to recommend her work at all. On the other hand, were it not for this article and the hullabaloo about it, I'd never of even heard of her. Is it better to have people know your name even if it's with a negative connotation or to have them never to have heard of you at all?

Right now I think her name is.... Lynn What'sit? I didn't notice the name of the site at all. Tomorrow I won't even remember that it's Lynn.

The question of "bad publicity" is a big one that's discussed in Marketing. And it's not easy to explain when and why bad publicity can be helpful. In this case, I think the potential for being black listed by book reviewers looking at her website outweighs the name recognition.

But it's one of those areas where you just never know. Is it perceived as bad publicity within the niche that her work appeals to? And then there's other questions. For instance, I'm put off by the article, but I'm also a little put off by the backlash to it. At some point, for some people, that kind of reaction can turn into support.

 

[deilaitha]

The author speaking is, imho, an idiot.

We can't really know whether or not Shepherd is an idiot, but I think we owe it to her (and ourselves) to be the "better man" and not stoop to her level of slinging insults around. That being said, what she wrote was rather idiotic in nature. She has done herself a huge disservice; and as you said, bad PR is bad for business.

...she went about it poorly and just comes off as bitter, resentful, and a jealous waste of space.

That is so true. Whether or not she is a jealous waste of space, she presented herself that way. And, unfortunately, first impressions are always the ones that last.

I think we can all learn a lot from Ms. Shepherd; the things we write and say now can reflect on us for the rest of our writing careers.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I don't understand the logic used to come to these conclusions. If anything, books that are wildly successful can popularize a niche genre.

Look at all the paranormal romances which have had success after the runaway Twilight train finally slowed down. The same could be said for the entire YA genre in fact. It's had an enormous bump in readership, much of which is attributed to books like the Potter series. Percy Jackson anyone?

Truth be told, some people are always going to look for excuses to explain away their own failures. Others see opportunity.

 

[The Blue Lotus]

No, I stand by my assessment, anyone who shoots themselves in the leg by mistake is not the sharpest crayon in the box.

 

[BWFoster78]

To Devor and Steerpike,

Not that I advocate doing something that appears monumentally stupid for the sake of getting your name out there, but there does seem to be some benefits. I'm not sure that the notoriety from this article can help her sales directly, but, if she's a lot more savvy than the article makes her appear, can the notoriety be leveraged?

I remember when I used to watch The Apprentice. There was this lady, Amorosa, who came across as a total whiny witch. She managed to profit quite a bit from that exposure and participated in a number of other reality shows because she stood out.

It seems like, in this day of social media, fame, even for doing something stupid, comes with some kind of reward if you take steps to harness it.

 

[deilaitha]

Yeah, it's not so much the jealousy, though that's bad enough, but the sheer stupidity exhibited by the writer. She appears to believe that J.K. Rowling publishing books has magically reduced her own ability, or the ability of other writers, to do so. It's a combination of sour grapes and cognitive defect, as far as I can tell.

That is one of the things that Correia noted in his "fisking" of her article. Her reasoning is, to say the least, poor logic. And if she can't think through something like this issue, how can she think through the composition of a novel? This is the face she has presented to the world. Definitely a bad move on her part.

 

[deilaitha]

No, I stand by my assessment, anyone who shoots themselves in the leg by mistake is not the sharpest crayon in the box.

LOL! Fair enough, my friend. Fair enough.

 

[The Blue Lotus]

Yeah, it's not so much the jealousy, though that's bad enough, but the sheer stupidity exhibited by the writer. She appears to believe that J.K. Rowling publishing books has magically reduced her own ability, or the ability of other writers, to do so. It's a combination of sour grapes and cognitive defect, as far as I can tell.

Agreed. If her work were as good, and she landed the right agent willing to do what Little did for JKR she too could be massive. But one of the two is off, so... I mean whose fault is that?

 

[The Blue Lotus]

It seems like, in this day of social media, fame, even for doing something stupid, comes with some kind of reward if you take steps to harness it.

Well That is true, but the question is would then be, is she smart enough to do that? From the whining, she's done at this point I'd have to say no. But hey, I could be wrong. In which case, good for her, but I'd not hold my breath.

 

[deilaitha]

Not that I advocate doing something that appears monumentally stupid for the sake of getting your name out there, but there does seem to be some benefits.
It seems like, in this day of social media, fame, even for doing something stupid, comes with some kind of reward if you take steps to harness it.

I realize you weren't talking directly to me, but fwiw, I really do get what you're saying. I mean, think about what happened with Miley Cyrus and the VMAs. That was extremely negative publicity, but she profited from it. However, she did not say something like, "the only reason I am not that popular is because Katy Perry is." (Maybe that's why she tried making out with Katy Perry!)

Is it possible that some monumentally stupid things can be harvested and leveraged, but others can't?