So what if an agent finds your blog...

happywritermom said:

Like it or not, readers like to know a whole lot more about authors these days. They like to go beyond the book. If someone recommended a novel to me and I googled the author and found that poorly edited blog, I wouldn't buy the book. Even if the book was well-reviewed, I would guess that it had been heavily edited and still would have no interest.

Click to expand...

I think this is more true for highly successful and famous authors like Stephanie Meyers and Laurel K. Hamilton. Most authors don't have enough celebrity status for people to really know or care about who they are (that's certainly the case for me anyway--my blog gets almost no hits). I know virtually nothing about the authors of my favorite books, and I don't really feel a need to know the personal details of their lives. Though maybe I am part of a dying breed.

I not only read the websites and blogs of my favorite authors, I also belong to any fan loops. I take a great interest in writers and I even follow some unpublished authors' blogs and websites. Occasionally, I invite these writers to be speakers for writing events I put on.

I have sat with a friend of mine who used to be an editor for a major NY publisher as she googled prospective authors. I know it happens.

Drat. I'm doomed.

I thought so too. Then I heard the "online voice" of an editor I once read sternly say to me "if you want to be a writer, develop tough skin". Interpreted: Accept that mean spirited people exist everywhere, even as editors.

Corinne Duyvis said:

I actually think that's rather rude. I wouldn't tell an agent to stop Twittering about Jersey Shore, either. We're allowed--even supposed--to have lives outside of publishing.

Click to expand...

Maybe. I google all the authors I read/ come across in genres of interest. Perhaps it's because I try to grasp anything I can at this stage. Also, I like to find more of their work. I don't do extensive research. If the blog is listed I will check out the first few pages, unless it's really good. At that point I'll invest more time into their posts.

Also, I keep in mind that the readers of the future breathe the world wide web (is it still called that?). I look at my younger cousins with confusion. They don't want to do anything that does not require their phones. They read blogs more than anything. If they are into stories e-readers are next in line.

There will always be book nerds like myself (and probably everyone here).
However, the internet is where it's at these days and probably until something better comes along.

Internet:a pass and a fail

The Otter said:

Though maybe I am part of a dying breed.

Click to expand...

To OP, your fanfiction may be better than you think. I know it's probably not top notch grammar-syntax wise, but some of the stuff I've seen out there...lol It's not functional. It's easy to spot the good of the bunch immediately. You have followers because your work is good enough to draw and keep an audience.

Sometimes it's about having an eye for skill. Talent in the rough is talent nonetheless. Eventually it will shine.

With that being said, I'm not sure how editors think therefore I can not say what is best. I would listen to those who have experience in the field.

I write fanfiction - proofread and edited, because I'm perfectionistic that way - but my blog is my professional face, so the fanfic stays off it. I have an account on ff.net under my handle (QoS) and an LJ account where I can chat with other fanfic writers, but there's very little crossover.

NovelTk said:

I thought so too. Then I heard the "online voice" of an editor I once read sternly say to me "if you want to be a writer, develop tough skin". Interpreted: Accept that mean spirited people exist everywhere, even as editors.

Click to expand...

Totally -- I wouldn't sit here crying about it. But that doesn't make it any less rude. *g*

I don't even like knowing about the lives of my favorite authors (or actors - I like the characters, not the people). But I did end up following Patrick Rothfuss (because I want the next book already) and Neil Gaiman (because if I'm following anyone, I have to include him) on Facebook. But for the most part knowing too much about how the trick is accomplished ruins the magic for me.

I don't have a blog. I googled my real name to see what comes up. I've been on the net forever, so you get tons of old posts from the html writers-guild, some Flash group things, an interview with a MUD creator that I did loooong ago, but they still like (twice even) and some interviews from my brief sprint at Examiner. If an editor thinks they're badly written, well I can't take them down, so oh well. I'll have to find another editor or something. I'm not ashamed of any of it - just the detritus of life.

And if they care what Facebook games I do or don't play and how often (if they can even tell that), then they've got too much time on their hands. If I call in sick to an editor, I'll play games on my Ipad. Those don't show *g*

Good point. If an agent or publisher criticises you for playing too many games or watching too much TV, the accusation of "You spend too much time net-stalking people," could be levelled at them.

Oh, sure, there are those who will say they have a right to google you, and that's fair enough. I'd just prefer to work with someone who judged the book on the book, not its author.

In fairness, the agent didn't stalk ChaosTitan. ChaosTitan left the link to her blog in her sig line in her query letter. Were I an agent, I would assume you wanted me to follow that link. More than one agent in the blogosphere has said that they won't follow links when the writer says, "Hey, go here for my query and sample pages," but they will check out someone they're interested in to get a feel for what kind of person they are.

As for readers checking out author sites, I do it when the author's site is listed on the book, and these days that's most of the books I read. If the site is at all associated with your professional name, I expect the publisher will tell you to clean it up and keep it professional. If you want a fun site for family and friends, do it with an URL unrelated to your professional name and use a nickname (or just your first name).

Really, it's just common sense. This is a profession. Publishers are going to be paying you, and they want you to make money for them. Your Web site is an extension of your image whether you want it to be or not.

It really wasn't the editor response to ChaosTitan that I find insulting. It's the link bearilou posted. This one:
http://redlinesanddeadlines.blogspot.com/2010/11/nothing-but-net.html

And particularly this:

Why do editors need to look at an author's website?
Need? Well, some think they don't. But for my money, it's the quickest way to learn about a prospective author, in particular how she presents herself. And not just her site...but her blog, tweets and Facebook posts as well. Is the site a raging grammatical nightmare? That's likely how her submissions will look (don't kid yourself; your mom's/sister's/friend's proofing skills only go so far, in most cases). Is the author slamming fellow writers or (god forbid) publishing companies on her blog? Is her Facebook wall just a loooong rundown of game posts? To me, these things matter. They tell me pretty much everything I need to know. And they continue to tell me things after an author is signed. (Your edits are 5 weeks late because you've contracted a disease that renders your fingers immobile? That's funny. According to FB, you've been playing FarmVille for the last 15 hours straight, and your Twitter feed from the last week could be a novel unto itself.)

Click to expand...

And specifically the Facebook things. I have mine set to private, so I hope that actually means nobody could get in without my permission and I dunno why I'd supply it to an editor, but... I get enough of people telling me how to organize my time in my day job. I don't know why anyone would want to follow my facebook so they can worry about what or how many games I play or when. I don't "twitter" at all (hey, I'm old), but I do have a facebook that has general facebook nonsense on it because what in the heck else do you do with it? And sick in bed is when I might spend the most time there as I don't feel well enough to do anything else (well actually on my Ipad which you can't see but same general drift). What difference does that make? Either I do the work you need and you publish me or I don't and you fire me. Right? Isn't at least part of the idea of working for yourself that you aren't accounting for every minute of your day?

I'm not bashing editors and publishers. Really truly. I hope that doesn't come across as doing so. But... I like the idea of having some privacy. There doesn't seem to be much left in this brave new world of ours.

Sagana said:

I'm not bashing editors and publishers. Really truly. I hope that doesn't come across as doing so. But... I like the idea of having some privacy. There doesn't seem to be much left in this brave new world of ours.

Click to expand...

With due respect, posting ANYTHING ANYWHERE on the 'net isn't private, by definition. Anything on the 'net is fair game, pure and simple. Privacy settings can help, but they can also be hacked very easily.

The best way to keep private the parts of one's life that one doesn't wish to share is NOT to post it on the 'net in the first place.

I don't think it's unfair for an agent or editor to judge a writer by what's in his/her blog. They're wanting to know if the person they're considering is easy to work with, professional, and capable of performing to the expectations of whatever contract they want to enter into.

If your blog is sour and full of rejections that you not only post, but go into detail on (listing people by name, phone number and address... yes, it happens), then they run the risk of becoming blog fodder the first time you disagree with them.

If their blog shows that it took a writer 3 years to write one book, while they spent the lion's share of that time on other things, an agent would have good reason to question whether or not that writer has it in them to pen a novel under time constraints.

If your blog is only to network and communicate with (or entertain) your friends, then you shouldn't link it to whatever name you're using for business purposes.

Terie said:

With due respect, posting ANYTHING ANYWHERE on the 'net isn't private, by definition. Anything on the 'net is fair game, pure and simple. Privacy settings can help, but they can also be hacked very easily.

The best way to keep private the parts of one's life that one doesn't wish to share is NOT to post it on the 'net in the first place.

Click to expand...

A game isn't a post.

Cyia said:

If their blog shows that it took a writer 3 years to write one book, while they spent the lion's share of that time on other things, an agent would have good reason to question whether or not that writer has it in them to pen a novel under time constraints.

Click to expand...

Oh well, being as I've spent the last 30 years of my life doing other things, that lets me out to start with then.

There are fair numbers of late starters in the world. Richard Adams, Anthony Burgess, Raymond Chandler, et. al. Kenneth Grahame wrote the Wind in the Willows after he retired. They all spent the lion's share of their time prior to that on other things, and I wouldn't personally want to throw away their later works because of it.

People are very judgmental. A really good reason why I don't have a blog.

Terie said:

With due respect, posting ANYTHING ANYWHERE on the 'net isn't private, by definition. Anything on the 'net is fair game, pure and simple. Privacy settings can help, but they can also be hacked very easily.

The best way to keep private the parts of one's life that one doesn't wish to share is NOT to post it on the 'net in the first place.

Click to expand...

Sagana said:

A game isn't a post.

Click to expand...

So? You whinged about wanting part of your life that's on the Internet to be private. And the Internet isn't private. Period.

I'm not published, so maybe I don't understand how the business works. When a publisher picks up a writer's manuscript, do they hire the writer? Does the writer now work for that publisher, and does the writer get a W2 tax form from the publisher (or equivalent outside the US)? Does the publisher pay the writer regularly for work done to an agreed upon schedule? Same questions for agents -- when you sign the contract, do you become the agent's employee, or the other way around?

If writers do work for their publishers and agents, then yes, publishers and agents have some limited right to check up on how their writers are working, or goofing off, or farming out their tasks, etc.

But if not, then frankly, it's none of their business what the writer does on his/her own time, so long as the contracted work arrives on time, in publishable condition, and in accordance with the binding terms of the contract.

Granted, I can see checking up on someone before committing to an ongoing money-based relationship with them. One wants to make sure they are who they say they are, at the very least. It's only smart to want to know who one is doing business with, and if after checking them out, one decides not to do business with them, that's perfectly okay, too.

But frankly, I would object pretty strongly if I submitted, for instance, my real-world-setting horror WIP that I wrote all by myself, after fully crafting it to the best of my ability, with the input of betas and proofers, only to have it rejected because the editor or agent in question looked up my fantasy adventure collaboration project and decided they didn't like it because it was too raw and lacked a single consistent voice. My response would be, "Did I submit the fantasy collaboration for you to consider publishing? No? Then why did you read it instead of the book I sent you?" If I ask you to judge one project, do not judge another, entirely different project of your own choosing instead.

I have the same objection to any judgment that is not related to what I would be asking these professionals to do for me, such as judging my productivity and speed if I am not offering them a series, or judging my lifestyle or politics, etc., if they do not affect my career as a writer, and so forth. A publisher might want to make sure the children's book writer they are about to sign up is not a registered sex offender, for instance, but for the most part, unless something about the author would make it impossible to market the book, then it's not relevant, in my opinion, and if it's not relevant, then it's not their business.

That's just my take on all professional relationships. Maybe I'm wrong, but in other areas of life it hasn't hurt me any.

Sagana said:

Oh well, being as I've spent the last 30 years of my life doing other things, that lets me out to start with then.

There are fair numbers of late starters in the world. Richard Adams, Anthony Burgess, Raymond Chandler, et. al. Kenneth Grahame wrote the Wind in the Willows after he retired. They all spent the lion's share of their time prior to that on other things, and I wouldn't personally want to throw away their later works because of it.

People are very judgmental. A really good reason why I don't have a blog.

Click to expand...

Look how long it took Thomas Pynchon to write his second book. Where was his proven track record?

muravyets said:

I'm not published, so maybe I don't understand how the business works. When a publisher picks up a writer's manuscript, do they hire the writer? Does the writer now work for that publisher, and does the writer get a W2 tax form from the publisher (or equivalent outside the US)? Does the publisher pay the writer regularly for work done to an agreed upon schedule? Same questions for agents -- when you sign the contract, do you become the agent's employee, or the other way around?

If writers do work for their publishers and agents, then yes, publishers and agents have some limited right to check up on how their writers are working, or goofing off, or farming out their tasks, etc.

But if not, then frankly, it's none of their business what the writer does on his/her own time, so long as the contracted work arrives on time, in publishable condition, and in accordance with the binding terms of the contract.

Click to expand...

You work with an agent. The agent takes care of a sale to a publisher. That publisher enters into a contract with specific guidelines you are supposed to be able to fulfill.

IF you are a writer who has a blog that's full of horrible grammatical errors and typos, but your submitted MS isn't, then it's not a stretch to think someone else got your MS into saleable shape -- this could mean complications when suggested changes to the MS are brought up. If the writer can't take care of their own editing, that puts the publisher at the mercy of a 3rd party's timetable.

IF you are a writer who has no qualms about railing against publishers, agents, and editors on your blog, then you become a potential PR nightmare for your future publisher. They don't need the headache.

Every so often, you'll see a blog that goes viral because the person on it has thrown a temper tantrum (or they do it on Amazon, which is a bigger audience). Inevitably, their agent/editor (if they're published) has to rein them in to stop the train wreck.

Just to clarify:

I do think that publishers and agents have a right to check out anyone who asks to do business with them and to judge whether to accept or reject that person on whatever criteria they like.

I do agree that many people put way too much personal stuff about themselves on the internet and the result is never flattering to them. That's why I don't do personal stuff online, and on Facebook, I even hide or delete wall posts from friends and relatives who I love and respect but who put too much personal crap on my wall. It's also why I don't put my FB link in my sig.

But I reject the proposition that we have to live every minute of our lives, even the public minutes, as if we're on a job interview.

I also reject many of the issues writers will be judged on by editors and agents as simply unreasonable and unprofessional on the part of the editors and agents. I'm sorry, but that's how I see it. To give it context, I'm in the midst of searching for a new job in the worst market of my life. I just got an email reply to a resume submission saying they want to interview me but requiring me to submit to a credit check before they'll talk to me. I think that's outrageous. They want me to give them access to my financial information before they'll even talk to me, tell me what the job is, or let me see the office? That's not a good faith offer, in my opinion, and I'm not going to do it. I'm not that desperate for money. I feel the same way about editors/agents who judge a writer by things that have no connection to what the writer is offering them. It's not a fair judgment, in my opinion.

/considerably more than 2 cents.

That's just my take on all professional relationships. Maybe I'm wrong, but in other areas of life it hasn't hurt me any.

Click to expand...

Publishing is unlike most other industries. I have worked as a writer for software developers, a big aeronautics company, an aftermarket auto parts retailer, and a telecommunications company. When I produce training or a software manual for those companies, at no time does my final audience know who I am or google me to find out more. I am merely an employee of the company.

Publishing isn't like that. When you publish a book and it is for sale to the public, you become a public figure. People WILL google you. If they don't like what they read on your Web site, they may well stop buying your book. If they REALLY don't like it, they can start a campaign to dissuade others from buying it. Statements can be taken out of context and can go viral.

Publishers have vested interest in their writers and in the public image they convey. Stupid behavior can damage their business. I don't think it's unreasonable AT ALL for them to expect the people they are paying as professionals to behave as professionals.

muravyets said:

I also reject many of the issues writers will be judged on by editors and agents as simply unreasonable and unprofessional on the part of the editors and agents.

Click to expand...

You can reject it, but it's not really a matter of opinion. It's the way the business works. You don't get to decide how others see you, all you can do is make the face you present to the public as professional as possible.

Some agents have said they Google and check out the writer's sites and blogs only if they're interested in the manuscript. So yes they do check us out.

I make sure I don't present anything that may embarrass me professionally online, including social networking. Facebook is iffy - but at least that's not public. On AW I use a handle but my real name is in my sig. But I hardly think I have anything to be embarrassed about on here, except a few typos here and there.