# Author Social Media Faux Pas?



## Philip Overby (Sep 8, 2014)

I don't know much about this author, but there has been some apparent backlash over the way she has handled some reader questions. In turn, it seems the "1 Star" parade has begun as it did when an author lashed out against J.K. Rowling for "dominating the market" not long ago. 

I guess this raises the question: should some authors avoid social media altogether? Or should authors realize that anything they say can be held against them in the court of public opinion? I guess it's that whole "author vs. their work" argument. I'm seeing some 1 Star reviews from people who haven't even read her work. I don't know how I feel about that.

This article looks at it from both sides. 1. That authors are still human and say or do things that everyone may not agree with. 2. One should view social media as a mixed bag: it can definitely help, but it can sometimes blow up in your face.

Warning: a couple of instances of foul language in the link.

Author Chelsea Cain and the Fickle Finger of Social Media | After the Sucker Punch


----------



## skip.knox (Sep 9, 2014)

If you're going to speak in public, use your public speaking voice. We all do that here, right? We moderate our language a bit, we're careful not to slap people around, etc.

What I see in FB is people sometimes begin to speak there as if they were just accosted at a restaurant, or were speaking in the privacy of their home, or among friends. They forget where they are, and they pay a price. There are plenty of authors who, when asked a stupid question, simply ignore it and go on. Or politely answer it, or even tersely answer it. They remember where they are.

The lesson from this particular snit is the same one I learned many years ago on academic listservs. The time it takes to be polite is far less than the time it takes to recover from being rude. And time is my primary currency.


----------



## Chilari (Sep 9, 2014)

I don't think these kinds of stories paint anyone in a very good light. Okay, she shouldn't have snapped and been rude - there's certainly a softer way she could have conveyed the original message - and the follow-up should have said explicitly "sorry for being rude earlier" instead of just being defensive, but if someone being a bit rude on the internet is really enough to fire someone up so much they then harrass, insult and attempt to harm the career of the rude person, then they are going far too far. If someone says something you don't like, it's fine to call them out on it for what they did wrong, (ie, "that was rude and unfriendly") but after that, however they respond it's generally best to forget about it and move on.There are more important things in life. But anyone who then goes and tries to exact some sort of vigilante justice via harrassment or 1* reviews, it seems to me, soon commits worse crimes than being rude - all in the name of teaching someone a lesson.

People really have made a mountain out of a mole-hill here.


----------



## CupofJoe (Sep 9, 2014)

I've just come back from some "social media" training for my work.
The final summation was "Don't say, post, tweet, write anything you aren't prepared to have repeated in court."


----------



## Steerpike (Sep 9, 2014)

The only thing apart from the merit of the writing that has made me stop buying an author's work is Twitter and how the author handles themselves there. I don't think social media has ever enticed me to buy a work, on the other hand.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Sep 9, 2014)

I think there are a couple things to consider here.  One, that I have friends who have boycotted certain things, Hobby Lobby, for example, and I think a consumer has any right to boycott anything they wish if it's there prerogative to do, since they may spend their money how they wish.  However, I think the crux of this issue isn't that readers have somehow misaligned with an author and refuse to buy her work, but they're in essence slandering her for her character, and not the one in her book.

I'm not sure how I feel about my friends boycotting Hobby Lobby, but I don't presume to tell people how or where to shop.  Similarly, I think if they chose not to support any given artist for personal reasons, they have that right.  But to wantonly sabotage someone's credit?  I'm not sure how I feel about that.  I think the law protects people on both sides of the issue.  I mean that the author, if she's so inclined, should be able to pursue writers of false reviews, but it's honestly her leg work to do.  Is she so bothered she'll put forth that kind of effort?  I'm not sure I would. 

That being said, I think we can all acknowledge a certain amount of "putting one's best foot forward" in the public arena is warranted.  However, where does one draw that line?  I'm a member of a pagan community and have been for many years.  I refrain from posting pagan-themed jokes/ articles/ whatevers on facebook because I have a bunch of Christian friends and I like to stay neutral.  I don't post political/ religious/ controversial material not because I have no opinion, but because I don't appreciate being evaluated as any one single thing.  I mean, would my Christian writer friends be put off by my openness or acceptance of different people?  Does it matter to them whether I'm friends with practicing pagans or whether I practice?  Would my political views alienate future readers or stop someone from trying out my book?

While I'm secure in my beliefs and my personal creed, I think there's something to be said for remaining neutral.  I think any time a person stands strongly for something, they risk alienating those people who don't share those beliefs, and while I don't necessarily allow those differences to affect how I buy a writer's work, other people aren't so...flexible?  I'm not sure what word to choose.  

Basically, if I post a ton of pro-life articles and stuff on my facebook page, but then portray a character who has an abortion, I'm no longer an artist showing a side of the human condition, I'm a person with a political/ moral standpoint who has an agenda (when no agenda actually exists).  It's perception that we're battling as writers/ artists.  Does Tiger Woods' affair affect his golf game?  No, but sponsors care a whole lot about it.  Our moral responsibility increases as we strive toward public recognition and every step of the way, we're really more under scrutiny.

Whether we join the NRA, send charitable donations to Planned Parenthood, boycott Hobby Lobby openly, post daily prayers on facebook, proclaim we will never immunize our children, or speak out about another artist, our words and actions have power and sometimes, they have repercussions.

We must expect a certain number of people will not agree with us or our beliefs.  And that's okay.  For some people, wholly embracing their rights to be themself will outweigh any loss of future readers/ associates, because being a strong individual, capable of standing up for their beliefs is the most important thing.  For others, it makes more sense to remain neutral on charged issues, forgoing self expression to instead try not to offend anyone.  

Both have their merits and people respond differently to them.  I guess every writer must consider for themselves how to comport their self on public forums/ facebook/ in public/ sometimes in the privacy of their home.  Just as your job can sometimes fire you for representing their company in a negative way (by breaking their code of conduct while representing them or in your own personal time), an author has to realize they are always an agent for their own career and what they do can have negative effects.  Unfortunately.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Sep 9, 2014)

Well said.

I think achieving fame comes with a price, and you need to be aware of that. I don't ever expect to get recognition... and the sentence could just stop right there, honestly.

But if I ever do get a fan base I can make a career of, it won't be as a result of my political beliefs or whatever. It'll be my creative works. Knowing that, the only info I'd want our there publicly is what's important to me about my art form and perhaps a human side to me such as my family. I won't say "no comment" to a question on a best-avoided topic like abortion, but only because I think feigning neutrality on an issue like that won't save me when it's likely that the person asking knows damn well I'm not neutral, then I'm alienating those who agree for being a wimp and those who disagree feel vindicated by my apparent shame. However, I won't volunteer opinions when they're not wanted, and if I do, it'll always be from the most apolitical angle I can manage... and never nasty, spiteful, hateful, etc.



Spoiler: my current response to questions on best-avoided issues



I'll tell you when I'm famous.



I was telling my students today about my number one goal when I'm at a restaurant with my kids and one or more of them misbehaves. My goal is to not embarrass myself by my own actions. My daughter can spill her milk on my pants. That's fine. My calm reaction might even make me look like an awesome dad. If I react like a jerk, however, then I'm embarrassed and I have myself to blame.

I think that should apply to famous authors and pretty much anyone in the public eye. Others can try to embarrass you, or embarrassing things can happen to you, but it's your own action or reaction that kills your credibility.


----------



## Penpilot (Sep 9, 2014)

Well, that was unfortunate. IMHO, the author should have ignored the messages that bothered her and should have focused on the ones she wanted to answer and engage with.

Every person that has fans will always have zealous fans among them wanting a minute of time. It may be annoying, but these fans care. That's why they're posting and trying to engage. If you can't spare the time, then you can't. But don't EVER lose your cool, at least not in public. It's a no win situation if you do.

Brandon Sanderson keeps a file of answers that he's given to various questions over the course of his career. When ever a question comes up that he's answered before, he or his assistant simply cuts and pasts the answer in. Problem solved. No more having to answer the same questions over and over.


----------



## Steerpike (Sep 9, 2014)

Read the comments here for an epic example of how not to respond to a bad review in social media and/or comments:

TidBITS: FunBITS: Bears in Boats Fighting Crime


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Sep 9, 2014)

Haha... I read that on Wendig's twitter feed. It's ludicrous & delusional to the point I almost (I repeat almost) felt bad.


----------



## Chilari (Sep 10, 2014)

Steerpike said:


> Read the comments here for an epic example of how not to respond to a bad review in social media and/or comments:
> 
> TidBITS: FunBITS: Bears in Boats Fighting Crime



Didn't that get posted the other day? I've seen it linked a lot anyway. I love reading about things like this, it's entertaining to watch the delusion.


----------



## Ryan_Crown (Sep 10, 2014)

Wow, that has to be the craziest comment thread I've ever read. As I was scanning through the first series of comments, I thought it was a joke at first, because surely no one would really comment on their comment on their comment over and over like that.

And I have to say, for me this is a case where I don't care how good the writer's work might be (and from the samples of text I read, he's not that good), if you as an author show that level of arrogance and elitist mindset, you've killed any interest I might have in reading your work. Defending your work is fine, but that just takes it to a ridiculous level.

As far as social media in general goes, I'll admit this has always been an area of slight discomfort for me. Having seen the level of nastiness that people can sink to in a comment thread (especially if it's one where you can post anonymously), I've always wondered if it's really worth it to try and engage with your fans on social media, versus just putting your books out and letting your writing speak for itself (not that I see myself becoming well-known enough for it to matter, but crazier things have happened).


----------



## Steerpike (Sep 10, 2014)

There was an article about that particular post in The Guardian. Someone purporting to be the author, Harper, has also made long, rambling posts in comments to the Guardian article.


----------

