• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Why does "Publishing" have to equal "Revenue"?

Dreamhand

Troubadour
I've noticed an assumption among writers that Publication=Revenue. Now, while I get that we all want to be paid for our brilliance, I think the idea that "the only way I want my work released is if I can make money on it" is limiting... and a little mercenary.

I'm NOT bashing the idea of getting paid. I'm TOTALLY down with it and believe it to be a reasonable expectation (I cannot emphasize that enough). But if the only people that see a writer's work are publisher's slush-pile readers and literary agents, then why write in the first place? If making money is your primary goal as a writer, then why not become an investment broker?

I'm literally stunned by the number of writers who vehemently dismiss the notion of podcasting their work for free or offering it as a free e-book. The response is either "But if it's free, no one will think it has value!" or "I worked too hard on this to just give it away".

Personally, I feel both arguments are short-sighted and don't encompass the full scope of anyone's writing career. I mean, knowing that people are reading and enjoying one's work... that you've made a connection and inspired new ideas and emotions in one's audience... that your work has value to people beyond a price tag... isn't that a big part of why we write in the first place? And if so, then why NOT podcast it? Why NOT offer it as a free e-book? Why NOT get it out there and circulating and generating discussion and critical review among the very people we hope will someday buy our books?

Look at it this way... let's say you ARE the next Stephen King or Patrick Rothfuss. So let's say you release your heart-breaking work of staggering genius for free and it sweeps the interwebs and the literary communities like wild-fire. It's on every Kindle and Nook and reviewers are singing its praises far and wide. Are you telling me you've LOST? That you've been cheated?

If the book you've written is the ONLY book you'll ever write, then yeah, fine... mine it for gold. But I think most of us have countless stories in us, waiting to be told. If you're not currently on the best seller's list, if you're not earning your living as writer yet, then why not get your work out there? It's easy, it's cheap, and it can be the spark that evolves into a vital and dynamic relationship between you, your work, and the community.

I'm not saying traditional publishing is wrong. I'm saying that there are alternatives... and to dismiss them because they don't generate revenue is a self-imposed limitation that may prevent you from discovering a wealth of opportunities.
 
Last edited:
It's funny, because a lot of musicians when starting out totally have the perspective that they're happy to give away their music, they just want to get heard and build an audience (musicians' revenue primarily comes from performances/touring, not music sales; or at least, it did before the Internet, when the big record labels were the only way to get wide exposure).

I don't really see any reason why authors can't be the same way. I've been toying with the idea of offering my novel for free on Amazon/PubIt/iTunes for a period of time before giving it a price (which would probably be $3.99 or so), and I'm already planning on sending free ebook copies to any MS member who asks ;-)

I'm also down with exploring other methods of building an audience, the main issue right now being that I have very limited time to actually put into this whole writing endeavor, and I try to spend most of it actually writing (and the rest of it here with you fine folks). If I ever do have the time to actually do all those things, like keeping up my blog and writing short stories as teasers and serializing through podcasting, I totally want to try them out.
 

Shadoe

Sage
There are a couple of perspectives on that.

When a book is published by a publishing house, it means the book has been selected out of a hundred just like it and chosen to be the best. Then it gets the editing treatment, which means the crap gets taken out and at least a few eyes have looked at it and deemed it readable. Granted, this doesn't always make the book perfect, but it's got a better chance than self-published works do. It also means that the book is going to have a much wider audience than it would if it was self-published, since most people who self-publish don't have the bucks or contacts to advertise and distribute.

Going the publisher route also means that your book will simply cater to the lowest common denominator. It means that the publisher thinks it will appeal to a wide audience - not necessarily the audience you were aiming at when you read the book. It also means that you'll probably have to make changes to your work that you may not necessarily want to make.

Of course, avoiding the publisher route allows a self-published author to take the short and simple route to call themselves "published authors." That actually cheapens the title, I think. But, it also means that a work that would never have seen the light of day because the publisher didn't think it was marketable gets out there where people can enjoy it. On the other hand, it's going to be swimming in a sea of self-published drivel, so it'll be pretty hard to find. AND, a self-published author has to spend a lot of their own time publishing, marketing, and doing a lot of the other things that a publisher would normally be doing, taking away from the time that should be spent writing. And, self-publishing still carries quite a stigma.

There are positive and negative points to both sides. Personally, I have no plans to ever seek publication for my fiction. I get enough crap to deal with over my writing on my day job. And having been an involved onlooker in the SF/F publishing biz, I know I don't want to get involved in that.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
I think there's one good reason why writers should want to get paid for our writing: So that we can write more. We want to break that border between hobby and (partial) employment.

I don't mean to imply that there's anything wrong with writing as a hobby. But in general, if you are getting paid to write, you can justify the hours of research, character mapping, world building, editing and peer review that it might take to create a higher quality project. You can also spend more time doing what you love.
 
Some people write as a "hobby" and so their goal is not to make money at it. I don't see anything wrong with that. For me, I make a living from writing, and after years of my wife supporting me while I worked on my craft I now return the favor and she has been able to quit her day job.

I think that free copies and podcasts are great ways to help building an audience, and again, if you want to be read (and don't care about money) then they are really worth doing.

I'm giving away free short stories...my current one is The Viscount and the Witch. I've both self-published and traditionally published and both have provided me six-figure incomes. So it is possible to make good money without a publisher.

The thing about writing, and other artistic pursuits is they are done both for enjoyment and (for some) income. Few plumbers will put in a bathroom for a strange "just cuz it's fun" so writing is a bit different than other "proffessions". I feel very fortunate that I can make a living doing what I love...and I won't apologize for wanting compensation for the many hours of work I put into my "craft."
 
I don't really see any reason why authors can't be the same way. I've been toying with the idea of offering my novel for free on Amazon/PubIt/iTunes for a period of time before giving it a price (which would probably be $3.99 or so), and I'm already planning on sending free ebook copies to any MS member who asks ;-)

The problem with your "plan" is you can't offer your book for free on Amazon or Pubit (You can though on iTunes). The lowest you can put it on those platforms is $0.99. Maybe in the future they will allow authors to do so but they don't currently. Yes...there are free books out there by indie authors but they are made that way on a "case-by-case" basis. Usually you have to generate a decent amount of sales volume and THEN when you make it free elsewhere (like ibookstore) they MIGHT match it to $0.0.
 
maybe series of free short stories might help build audience while i love to write i would love to be paid for it too
 
The problem with your "plan" is you can't offer your book for free on Amazon or Pubit (You can though on iTunes). The lowest you can put it on those platforms is $0.99. Maybe in the future they will allow authors to do so but they don't currently. Yes...there are free books out there by indie authors but they are made that way on a "case-by-case" basis. Usually you have to generate a decent amount of sales volume and THEN when you make it free elsewhere (like ibookstore) they MIGHT match it to $0.0.

Curses. Well, offering it for $0.99 to start would probably increase sales volume a bit, or at least get people more likely to try it out.
 

Dreamhand

Troubadour
It's my understanding that, if you let Amazon know that it's available for free somewhere else, they'll mark it as free as well (this is based on the recounting of an author's experience I heard on Dead Robots Society, so consider it second-hand information). Also, you apparently CAN list it for free if you release the book through a publisher (check out this very interesting blog post).

[EDIT: Michael Sullivan points out that Amazon MIGHT mark it for free. Didn't want to be misleading]

But dude... while Amazon is certainly the biggest "source" for e-books, they aren't the only way to distribute your work. In fact, the sheer size and scope of their offerings makes it hard for people to actually discover your work unless its supported by some other marketing efforts. There's also openlibrary.org, gutenburg.org, manybooks.net... AND (my personal favorite) your own blog/website. And what about the Nook? There's lots of free books on the B&N website but I'm not sure about their process.

We're blazing new trails of distribution and access here. It may take some digging and some work (and almost certainly will), but getting your book out there for free is totally do-able.
 
Last edited:

Dreamhand

Troubadour
You know... I understand that, for expediency, the terms "professional" and "hobbyist" are used to describe "someone who earns a living wage from publishing their work" and "someone who doesn't". I get that, I understand it and I appreciate the value it has in expediting communication on the topic.

But those two terms are actually the root of the motivation behind making this post in the first place. I didn't realize it at the time, but I had a very charged emotional response after reading the responses to my initial post. Then today, I was listening to the Full Cast Podcast today where they were interviewing J. Daniel Sawyer (episode 2 and 3) and it finally hit me.

The term "hobbyist" is so dismissive, especially when presented as the opposite of "professional." And I think a lot of us get wrapped up in wanting to be professional, to be the guy or girl in the room who has nothing to prove. And being presented (again and again) with the idea that the only credible proof of being a professional is to make money on our writing sends a very limiting - and potentially demoralizing - message.

I say again... I'm not against making money of our writing. I WANT to make money off my writing, and I congratulate and admire those craftsmen and craftswomen who have achieved that goal.

What I'm hoping to convey to those of us who HAVEN'T yet made that leap is that "professional" does not mean "paid". A profession implies some endeavor that entails a high degree of skill and craft to carry out. Garbage Collector is not a profession (under this definition)... Brain Surgeon is. And Writer/Author is very definitely a profession, requiring a high degree of skill and awareness to execute effectively. I want to make sure that those of us who are still in the formative stages of our careers don't let preconceptions of what a professional is and what publishing entails become a demoralizing goad.

The idea of someone writing an excellent story and then waiting years (if ever) to share it with the world because the "only way to be professional is to get a publisher to sell it", breaks my heart. I say get it out there, receive the accolades and criticism that will feed and nurture that creative muse. If you're that good, you'll be paid soon enough. And if you're NOT that good, then getting it out there will help get you there.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Dreamhand, I think your definition of professional is correct as far as it goes, but falls short. In looking up a quick definition it mentions skill or formal training, but also in the same definition indicates that it represents a paid occupation. I agree with that. The word should have meaning and should distinguish itself from a word like amateur. An amateur or hobbysist may also employ a great deal of skill, but if one is not making at least a portion of one's living through writing, one is not a professional writer.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
An amateur or hobbysist may also employ a great deal of skill, but if one is not making at least a portion of one's living through writing, one is not a professional writer.

What he said. A "professional" is typically someone who is getting paid for their skill and does so as a profession.

I deliberately used the word employment instead of professional in my post above because I know that word alone can strike a sore point for some people. It shouldn't, but it does, even with me. I think it's probably because "unprofessional" has such a broad and insulting meaning, and we sometimes hear that word as being somehow implied in these conversations.

I haven't run into the word "hobby" being viewed dismissively before. I'm kind of surprised by that. But I guess most other hobbies don't really lead into moneymaking.

I don't think anyone here means to imply that someone's work is somehow inferior just because they aren't writing professionally and being paid. I do think that time can increase your quality, and getting paid can buy you more time, but I don't think anyone here would go farther than that.

I particularly wouldn't use an audience as proof of quality; I've seen too much garbage in print. And I've certainly read many quality stories for which the author was never paid.

I suppose there's one more thing to add, as I might hazard a guess as to what might have inspired your thread, Dreamhand. I wouldn't consider someone to have been "published" unless they've been paid for their work, at least a little. Strictly speaking I'm probably wrong. I wouldn't mean it as anything more than a convention of the sort you mentioned with professional and hobby.
 
Last edited:

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Those are good points, Devor. People do perhaps view professional as the opposite of unprofessional in this context. I agree that it is a mistake to do so, but it could explain why people are put off by the use of the word to distinguish someone who makes a living from something (or at least a good portion of their living from it), as opposed to those who do not.

I typically use the words "amateur" and "professional," and primarily to make the distinction I set forth above. I'm come across some very good amateur writers, and also some poor professional ones, so I do not think the terms are automatic indicators of quality.

If you put work up on the web or distribute it in eBooks for free, I'd say you are an amateur writer. But that doesn't mean you are a bad writer by any means.
 

Dreamhand

Troubadour
...I might hazard a guess as to what might have inspired your thread, Dreamhand.

Points to Devor. Very astute, my friend. ;)

I need to clarify some things:

1) I was wrong to try and introduce semantics into this discussion
My apologies. I'd rather not debate the definition and usage of "professional" and "hobby" and "amateur". The terms were what crystallized my motivation for the post and so I followed that impulse. I'm more than happy to discuss this in a separate topic, but it's really not what I hoped this thread would be about.

2) I wasn't pointing fingers or accusing MS Members
In reviewing my post, I realized it could be interpreted as me taking issue with specific member's use of the term "hobby". While that concept is (clearly) a hot topic for me, it was not my intention to get snarly with my MS brothers and sisters. I love you guys and I value the dialog and insights you share.

Moving on...

In my original post, I was suggesting that there are alternatives to the conventional approach to getting published. I suggested that getting your work out there for free - as an e-book or podcast or whatever - builds an audience and can get you to your goal of being a PAID author as effectively as tossing your manuscript on the slush pile of a big publisher. I proposed that getting your work into the hands (or ears) of an audience should be considered "being published."

The general tone (until I derailed it with semantics... again mea culpa) seemed to be that my assumption is incorrect. That it's all well and good to "write for fun" and give away your work, but you're not a "real author" until you've been paid, no matter how many downloads you have.

Really?

I'd like to clarify that I'm not suggesting that a writer ALWAYS give EVERYTHING away for free FOREVER. I'm suggesting that, by circulating your work and promoting it effectively, you will acquire a following and gain vital insight in writing and publication (certainly more than you will waiting for an agent to read your query letter). To put it another way, I'm saying that investing some "sweat-equity" into your career up front - by writing awesome books and getting them out there in some form or another for free - is a viable and proven means to attaining a writing career.

Furthermore, I'm NOT saying ignore conventional methods of publication. Find an agent! Submit to publishers! Follow all those tried-and-true methods. But while you're waiting (for weeks or months) for someone to decide if you're worth giving a second look to, why not explore some alternatives? Engage with your work and the community on a whole different level!

Respectfully, I direct your attentions to the websites of the following authors who make their living off their writing:

Scott Sigler: ScottSigler.com
Tee Morris: TeeMorris.com
Phillipa Ballantine: Philippa Ballantine
J.C. Hutchins J.C. Hutchins: New Fiction And Author Updates |

Again... authors who are making a living getting paid as authors. Every one of them began podcasting their work as serialized audiobooks offered for free, built an audience, and carved their niche in the speculative fiction market.

[EDIT: Michael Sullivan points out in a later post that I'm mistaken regarding Tee and J.C.. My apologies for not checking my facts]

Now if that's not your scene, I get that. It's not for everyone. But if you're reading this and feeling intimidated by the conventional publishing path, I'm here to tell you... there ARE alternatives. ;)
 
Last edited:

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Now if that's not your scene, I get that. It's not for everyone. But if you're reading this and feeling intimidated by the conventional publishing path, I'm here to tell you... there ARE alternatives. ;)

I don't think anyone who really dispute that in so far as it goes. The other options are there. The likelihood of success using these alternative paths is small, but that is true of going the traditional route as well.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
Again... authors who are making a living getting paid as authors. Every one of them began podcasting their work as serialized audiobooks offered for free, built an audience, and carved their niche in the speculative fiction market.

Now if that's not your scene, I get that. It's not for everyone. But if you're reading this and feeling intimidated by the conventional publishing path, I'm here to tell you... there ARE alternatives. ;)

Let me put it differently. I feel a little like we're still arguing semantics. If you're podcasting for free with the goal of eventually getting your work published by a publisher, I would consider that marketing. Podcasting by itself is a different medium and a successful podcaster, I think, has to be judged under different standards.

If you post a youtube video in the hopes of directing people to your blog where you post your work on line, that's marketing. I have a friend who's part of a group that posts skits and movie reviews on youtube which can earn as much a thousand dollars a month. She is successfully publishing on youtube.

You might think I have a negative view of such efforts simply because I use the word "marketing." I majored in Marketing and Economics at NYU's Stern School of Business. I assure you, I mean to imply absolutely no negative connotations to the word. It is absolutely a valid way to promote your work and help to achieve your goals. I only mean that it is a means to an end rather than the end unto itself.
 

Dreamhand

Troubadour
I gotcha... yeah I think we may have crossed our wires there.

To my way of thinking (which, I'm learning, is becoming increasingly more divergent from the mainstream), there IS no "end". The continuum of a writing career is on-going and whatever you've written today is not the last thing you're going to write. Mike Sullivan's contract with Orbit Books is not the last contract he'll ever have. When I podcast my stories, that's not the last podcast I'll ever do. Every choice, every action is step on the path... even a book that took you years to write.

No need to apologize for invoking marketing. Heck, everything we do as writers that reaches even the smallest fraction of the public eye is marketing. And yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about... in the context of a writing career, if you put your stuff out there for free so it's accessible, that helps you (in the words of Sigler) "prove to the fans that [you are] worth their money before they even spend a penny."

If your book is reasonably good and you get a decent voice guy to produce it and then podcast that production for free, you have the opportunity to get read/listened-to by thousands of fans. If you cross-promote with other podcasts and market the podcast even marginally on your blog and Facebook and twitter, you'll access those fans.

Now people know your work. NOW when you write the next book (you WERE planning on writing more than one book, right?) you have people who recognize you, who will look for you and google you.

And it's not just "books"... short stories and novellas are just fine for that medium! And authors sell short stories in the Kindle Store all the time! And the more you put up there, the more credibility you get and the more trust the buyers are willing to invest in you. You DO have to hold up on your end and give them a great read, but that's a whole different thread.

So yeah, Devor... it's absolutely marketing. "Publishing" DOESN'T have to equal "revenue" if you look at it from the broad perspective of an entire career, yes? Publishing is just one step of a much broader career continuum... and to get hung up on it slows down the whole train. ;)
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I don't think any general approach can be characterized as 'right' or 'wrong.' I know some successful authors who have gone the traditional route and advised me (and others) never to give away work for free. In their view, you always go with a paying market, or with some other traditional approach that compensates the writer. I think that may very well have been good advice when these people started as professional writers, but I don't think it holds true today. One might take the traditional route, or instead one might take advantage of the potential of new publishing models in the digital age.

The only real issue between the two is managing expectations. I know people who have self-published eBooks who, at least early on, were pretty sure that making the work available and maybe putting in a little bit of marketing effort was going to translate into a success story (financially). The truth is, the likelihood of that happening is relatively small. The same goes for podcasts of works and the like, which some authors do. It is not a bad idea by any means, and as part of an overall marketing strategy it may be helpful, but self-published writers have to remain cognizant of the fact that in all likelihood an ultimate success will be a lengthy process and may be modest at best. I've seen over-inflated expectations have a really negative impact on writers and other artists when they don't play out.

None of the alternative approaches to marketing oneself and one's work are bad, and I think many of them can be effectively combined as part of an overall strategy. For most of us, there won't be a quick path to success, however, whether as self-published authors or ones who are traditionally-published.
 
Top