E-Publishing and Self Publishing: compare and contrast.

As an example, I know of one woman (not a member here) who has decided to self-publish her novel in e-format, after a) swearing she'd never self-publish and b) blogging about how much she hates ebooks and ereaders.

This change of heart came about after the book was knocked back by a very small number of agents. Very small. Low single figures.

Rather than editing her book, rewriting, reworking, whatever, she let it sit for months, then decided to pull it out of a drawer and self-publish.

In her case, she's stubbornly refused to take editing advice because she knows best. And that's why she hasn't got an agent or publisher. She's too proud to edit and is putting her work out there regardless.

This would never happen in traditional publishing because she'd have to either edit her work, or write something else which is good enough to get past the gatekeeper.

As things stand, there will soon be one more book out there which has been rejected for very good reasons, written by an author who's too proud to learn how to edit her work. She simply doesn't want to. She's taken a huff with the industry.

This is her first book, so she doesn't have a platform either. It's not like she's an established writer with a built-in following. No-one knows who she is.

Platforms are vital in self-publishing, because you have to do all the bookwhoring yourself.

I have two questions. When I first wrote the thread about wanting to e-publish my book, I never dreamed it would have this discussing of what e-publishing is. First question: Have you guys been arguing over this for a quite? I hope so. I hate to think I started this! I know I could search the threads but it's simple to just ask. Second: Why not just have two subject forums--one that is for e-publishing since there are people who e-publish books and have another thread that is for publishers of e-books where the discussing is about publishers or whatever? Or make sure that the one that is already here for e-publishing or about e-publishers not just a general e-publishing. That way the e-publishers will not be confused with those who are just self-e-publishing.

Yes, this is a popular subject for argument at AW.

No, there's no need for splitting the epublishing forum because there's already a self-publishing forum too and they are two different things.

...Except for when a self-publisher is e-publishing... like me!

aruna said:

...Except for when a self-publisher is e-publishing... like me!

Click to expand...

No; they're still two different things. One is method of publication, the other is format.

Yes, they are two different things.
But a self-publisher may use the format of e-publishing; and questions pertaining to this format may be asked on this forum.
At least, that's th emessage I got from Old Hack's last post!

Is there a distinction between 'ebooks', which can be self, traditionally, or ePublished, and 'ePublishing', which is a category of submission-based models and should line up with the words: traditional, indie, epublishers, etc...
?

Paperbacks can be self-, indie- or traditionally-published too.

"Ebook" is nothing more than format. If I say I'm reading an ebook, you don't know whether it's self-published or not. Because it's me, chances are it won't be, but you see my point.

This thread came about simply because too many people on AW have been saying lately, "I epublished my book," when their query or discussion is less about format, more about self-publishing.

If you want to ask about getting an ITIN when self-publishing, or publicity for a self-published book or getting it reviewed...that's nothing to do with the format your book comes in. It's a self-publishing question, not a format one.

People don't seem to have this problem of distinction when discussing hardbacks or paperbacks, but because it's so easy to get ebooks out there -- it only takes the click of a button -- it's also easy to think e- and self-publishing are the same.

And they're just not.

scarletpeaches said:

Paperbacks can be self-, indie- or traditionally-published too.

"Ebook" is nothing more than format. If I say I'm reading an ebook, you don't know whether it's self-published or not. Because it's me, chances are it won't be, but you see my point.

Click to expand...

This is something that an alarming number of people fail to realise.

Print and ebook are FORMATS which can be used by both self and traditional publishers.

Okay then, my understanding of the distinctions are, well, an understanding. Got it.

Perks, stop being all smiley when I'm trying to be .

D)

Dunnae be angry, lass.

Ah'm gunnae bang ye in--

Oh, wait. Never mind.

scarletpeaches said:

"Ebook" is nothing more than format. If I say I'm reading an ebook, you don't know whether it's self-published or not.

Click to expand...

Indeed.

There are brown things and there are cows and there are brown cows.

But "cow" is not a color,

Self/third party publishing is more cow versus horse.

Format is more black versus brown.

So questions predominantly about species go in one forum, and questions predominantly about color go in the other.

swhibs123 said:

Self published authors, serious ones, are doing the work to polish and package their books.

Click to expand...

Very few are serious. They think they are, but they aren't.

I don't know what the percentage is for "readable" books, but I'd venture it's a fair bit more than "fewer than 1%".

Click to expand...

Depends how you define "readable," but I define it as "something I'd be willing to pay money for," and I say it's still down around the 1% level.

Amadan said:

Very few are serious. They think they are, but they aren't.



Depends how you define "readable," but I define it as "something I'd be willing to pay money for," and I say it's still down around the 1% level.

Click to expand...

do boi cao cap quan ao nam chan goi so sinh cho be vay cong so nu vay cong so nu chup anh da ngoai dep nhat
Then you need to qualify that comment by saying "fewer than 1% of the self published books I've seen in the last year are ones I'd pay to read." That, or provide a link to where the figure came from. Otherwise people might think it came from a hat.

I've read about 100 review copies of self-published books. Authors that send out review copies tend to be the better ones but I would say most were readable. Only 5-6 were terrible and a similar number were excellent. On average the quality, as subjectively rated by me, was lower than conventionally published work but with a pretty respectable overlap.

Amadan said:

Depends how you define "readable," but I define it as "something I'd be willing to pay money for," and I say it's still down around the 1% level.

Click to expand...

That's true of trade published books for just about everyone who reads too.

The baseline of prose quality is higher for trade published books, but 99% of books go unpurchased by any particular reader due to reader tastes alone.

The substandard self-pub books happen to be the easiest of the undesirable books to weed out quickly because covers, reviews, and ad copy often send a signal before even looking at the sample.

Because of this:

pfinucan said:

Go read through this e-publishing forum. About half of the threads on the front page are about self-published books.

Click to expand...

and this

scarletpeaches said:

too many people on AW have been saying lately, "I epublished my book," when their query or discussion is less about format, more about self-publishing.

If you want to ask about getting an ITIN when self-publishing, or publicity for a self-published book or getting it reviewed...that's nothing to do with the format your book comes in. It's a self-publishing question, not a format one.

People don't seem to have this problem of distinction when discussing hardbacks or paperbacks, but because it's so easy to get ebooks out there -- it only takes the click of a button -- it's also easy to think e- and self-publishing are the same.

And they're just not.

Click to expand...

and this

amergina said:

But no one seems to want to talk about e-presses because there's a perception that e-publishing = self-publishing.

Click to expand...

I asked for a separation. This response baffles me because it seems to support the very confusion that's trying to be sorted:

Old Hack said:

I'm not going to impose a subtitle which excludes anyone, or which implies that e-publishing does or does not equal self-publishing, because that would be wrong...Now, if we can get back to the topic under discussion, which is the differences between e-publishing and self-publishing, I'd be grateful.

Click to expand...

If epublishing is just a sub-format of self-publishing, then why are there two forums? Asking in all seriousness. If it's your stance that having self-publishing topics (e.g., Bookmarks and Smashwords, Grand Total of 1, KDP Select & Kindle Owners Lending Library, E-publishing With Graphics, etc.) in two places (the epublishing forum and/or the self-publishing forum) makes more sense than having them appropriately housed, then I'm lost. I guess I really don't know what else to say other than there is redundancy and you might as well combine the two forums. Or have a paperback forum, a hardback forum, etc.

J. Tanner said:

That's true of trade published books for just about everyone who reads too.

Click to expand...

Fine. Adjust for genre and my reading preferences: I will still stand by the statement.

I definitely don't think it applies across all genres and to traditional publishing too.

Because it's easier to self-e-publish a book than go the agent-publisher-editor route, it stands to reason that self-published ebooks will have a greater number of...well, books that just aren't up to scratch.

The percentage of traditionally-published books I've enjoyed is far higher than self-published books I thought were any good. Most of the time I think, "There's a reason this had to be self-published."

If a novel is (allegedly) wonderful, amazing, enlightening and entertaining, I have to wonder why the author self-published and didn't go the gatekeeper route.

Dee Carney said:

If epublishing is just a sub-format of self-publishing, then why are there two forums? Asking in all seriousness. If it's your stance that having self-publishing topics (e.g., Bookmarks and Smashwords, Grand Total of 1, KDP Select & Kindle Owners Lending Library, E-publishing With Graphics, etc.) in two places (the epublishing forum and/or the self-publishing forum) makes more sense than having them appropriately housed, then I'm lost. I guess I really don't know what else to say other than there is redundancy and you might as well combine the two forums. Or have a paperback forum, a hardback forum, etc.

Click to expand...

I agree the organization seems redundant, and if that redundancy is annoying some then it might be best to reorganize a bit including moving the self-pub exclusive format/cover subforum over to the self-pub forum too. (There seem to be almost no threads about professional e-publishing however, so I expect a dead forum if such a split gets enforced...)

But I'm glad to see our discussions are currently in line with the moderator's intent for the forum for now.

Believe it or not, I have never read a self-published book! Not even been tempted, to date. If a self-pubbed book has been extraordinarily succesful, I do scan the sample pages, out of curiosity; but never have I been tempted to buy. Not even Amanda Hocking; not John Knox; certainly not Konrath. I guess these are just not the kind of books I read. But then, I'm very choosy anyway. I've had my ereader for two weeks but have used it mainly for reading and revising my own ms -- it's great for marking up.
I have bought one public domain work, downloaded a few book samples, and bought ONE trade e-book at a "normal" price: (The Night Circus). I don't think my reading habits are going to change much, now that I have an ereader. I will still buy the books I bought before. I am not going to buy SP'd books just because they are cheap. And I think that in time other readers will see that buying books just because they are cheap ends up being expensive in the long run, and the market, which is a bit crazy right now, will normalise.

I had several very specific reasons to choose self-publishing for two mss; and they had all to do with e-format.

veinglory said:

I've read about 100 review copies of self-published books. Authors that send out review copies tend to be the better ones but I would say most were readable. Only 5-6 were terrible and a similar number were excellent. On average the quality, as subjectively rated by me, was lower than conventionally published work but with a pretty respectable overlap.

Click to expand...

I've been sent a few self-published books for review too, but most of the ones that I've seen have been so very bad that I've not discussed them on my blog.

I used to receive press releases from Bostick Communications but one author (who received a less than favourable review) complained to them about me and so I got taken off their lists. The books that I received following a Bostick press release were on the whole just awful. Really, terribly bad.

Out of the three-hundred-and-counting self-published books I've been sent since I began my review blog, I've chosen not to review around two hundred because they were so bad I would struggle to pinpoint where the main problems with them lay.

I've read a handful that held my attention, and only a very few that I'd have paid to read.

Dee Carney said:

Because of this and this and this I asked for a separation. This response baffles me because it seems to support the very confusion that's trying to be sorted:

If epublishing is just a sub-format of self-publishing, then why are there two forums? Asking in all seriousness. If it's your stance that having self-publishing topics (e.g., Bookmarks and Smashwords, Grand Total of 1, KDP Select & Kindle Owners Lending Library, E-publishing With Graphics, etc.) in two places (the epublishing forum and/or the self-publishing forum) makes more sense than having them appropriately housed, then I'm lost. I guess I really don't know what else to say other than there is redundancy and you might as well combine the two forums. Or have a paperback forum, a hardback forum, etc.

Click to expand...

Let's recap.

As I recall you told me, via PM, that when the e-publishing room opened you were thrilled because it would give you and other e-published authors a place to discuss working with your publishers and so on. You then suggested that it was confusing having both a self-published and an e-published room here, where self-publishing was discussed in both. You felt that the threads discussing self-publishing should go in the self-publishing room even if they discussed a book which had been e-published, and that the e-publishing room should be used exclusively for writers who had e-published "with a publisher" (your italics). You even offered to take over the modly duty of sorting out all the posts into two piles, and heaving the ones from self-published authors into the self-publishing room.

I sent you this in reply:

The e-publishing section of AW is for our members to discuss e-pubilshing. For many, this will involve self-publishing and there's bound to be an overlap. That doesn't mean that the room is exclusively for self-published writers. Feel free to start appropriate discussions about being e-published by publishers there, if you have something to say. I'd love to see more discussions of that sort in the room, and will only applaud when it happens.

When you spot threads which you think would be more suited to self-publishing do feel free to report them, so that the mods can take a look and decide whether or not to move them. We don't always, because there is that overlap there: but we do look at every reported post we get, and we do our best to keep things on-topic.

Click to expand...

Dee, if you didn't understand my response you're free to ask me more questions by PM: however, if you didn't like my response, dragging the issue out into the open forums isn't going to make me change my mind.

J. Tanner said:

I agree the organization seems redundant, and if that redundancy is annoying some then it might be best to reorganize a bit including moving the self-pub exclusive format/cover subforum over to the self-pub forum too. (There seem to be almost no threads about professional e-publishing however, so I expect a dead forum if such a split gets enforced...)

But I'm glad to see our discussions are currently in line with the moderator's intent for the forum for now.

Click to expand...

Again, Mr Tanner: you're free to report posts if you feel threads have been started in the wrong room. But please be careful: your use of "professional e-publishing" implies that people who self-publish e-books are not professional. Trade publishing is a much better term, and is far less likely to cause offense.