10 Reasons You Should Skip Traditional Publishers

"Indie publisher" can be a bit confusing, as it's actually the term for an independent press - NOT a self-publisher. It was co-opted by self publishing to deal with some of the stigma, especially for that reason.

"I've been Indie published," at least until the last few years, meant you'd been published by a small, independent press.

For example, you could say that both Eragon and Fifty Shades of Grey were Indie Published. They were originally put out by small, independent presses with a particular focus. They are not, and never have been SELF-published. However, you'll see both of them listed among self-publishing success stories because they're called "indie."

The confusion is still there, caused mainly by people who don't realize where the terms came from.

For the sake of clarity:

"Trade publishing" is the business of publishing for the book trade--books to sell to the general public. It's been called "trade publishing" for at least the last thirty years, which is how long I've been working in it.

"Academic publishing" is the business of publishing textbooks and academic journals.

"Self publishing" is what happens when writers publish themselves.

"Vanity publishing" is where the publisher makes the majority of its revenue from the authors it publishes, rather than from selling books to their potential readers.

"Independent publishers" are trade publishers which are independent of the big conglomerates. Again, this term has been in use for at least thirty years that I know.

"Indie publishing" has recently been used to describe self publishers. But its use creates confusion with independent publishers, and so for the sake of clarity we ask you not to use that term here.

If you'd like more background, read the room's guidelines.

If you have trouble conforming to a mod's request, in future take it to PM.

Old Hack said:

For the sake of clarity:

If you have trouble conforming to a mod's request, in future take it to PM.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone had trouble conforming to it. I didn't see anyone insisting on using the term after you said not to. A couple people, me included, asked why it was out of favor here. Is that not allowed? Asking for the purpose behind the rule? Or does that have to be restricted to a PM? Because it would seem that a public declaration of the reason behind the rule, as was done here, is more efficient in making it clear to people why the term is banned and much less likely to cause hard feelings.

RikWriter said:

I think most people here would know exactly what was meant by the term "traditional publishers."

Click to expand...

...have you spent much time in the PublishAmerica threads? They claim to be a traditional publisher. The number of people who DON'T know exactly what is meant by that term is heartbreaking.

And I suppose, if you're using your definition, they are in fact a traditional publisher. But they are not doing any of the things a publisher "traditionally" did for authors, so separate terms are pretty handy.

RikWriter said:

A couple people, me included, asked why it was out of favor here. Is that not allowed? Asking for the purpose behind the rule? Or does that have to be restricted to a PM? Because it would seem that a public declaration of the reason behind the rule, as was done here, is more efficient in making it clear to people why the term is banned and much less likely to cause hard feelings.

Click to expand...

People keep asking about the Trade/Traditional thing and keep getting the same answers answers, and I can tell you I guess ad-infinuitum threads with the same "but why" followed by the "here's the long suffering link" followed by "I'm not going to a link, tell me in the thread!" gets old! It's the biggest derail in the SP threads!

Being a little facetious, I know, But better a P.M than pages and pages of circular arguments. The FAQ and links are pretty exhaustive, but helpful.

Nm I answered my own question... Lol

magical things can happen when you read the forum guidelines.

Treehouseman said:

People keep asking about the Trade/Traditional thing and keep getting the same answers answers, and I can tell you I guess ad-infinuitum threads with the same "but why" followed by the "here's the long suffering link" followed by "I'm not going to a link, tell me in the thread!" gets old! It's the biggest derail in the SP threads!

Being a little facetious, I know, But better a P.M than pages and pages of circular arguments. The FAQ and links are pretty exhaustive, but helpful.

Click to expand...

The thing is, the link (at least the one given in this thread) only says "these are the terms we're going to use and not use." It doesn't explain why the terms that are forbidden are not acceptable.
Perhaps if the staff simply added the explanation given in this thread, that "traditional publishing" is too often used as a pejorative by hucksters, then the questions wouldn't be necessary.
Me, I don't think of the term as pejorative. Hell, I'd still turn handstands if a trade publisher picked up my stuff and gave me a contract, despite the fact that I've made quite a bit of money at self publishing. It would be cool to walk into the Books a Million and see my stuff on the shelves, money aside.

The staff?

RikWriter said:

Perhaps if the staff simply added the explanation given in this thread, that "traditional publishing" is too often used as a pejorative by hucksters, then the questions wouldn't be necessary.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

The staff?

Click to expand...

Yes, the site staff. Usually on a message board, you have moderators for each forum and staff that run the whole website.

No "staff" here, to my knowledge--at least in the traditional sense. We're all volunteers, including for the most part, the site owner. You probably noticed there's no fees associated with the site.

Cathy C said:

No "staff" here, to my knowledge--at least in the traditional sense. We're all volunteers, including for the most part, the site owner. You probably noticed there's no fees associated with the site.

Click to expand...

It doesn't imply a paid position, simply that it's a position above a moderator. Most of the other message forums I frequent have moderators for specific forums, then site staff that are in charge of making decisions such as banning people or making policy. None of them are paid, all are volunteers on all the sites I go to. It's just a title that's usually given for someone in that position.

Cathy C said:

No "staff" here, to my knowledge--at least in the traditional sense. We're all volunteers, including for the most part, the site owner. You probably noticed there's no fees associated with the site.

Click to expand...

*considers GoFundMe page to raise money for Mac's Staff*

We can carve it with the words "clue stick" and "ban hammer" and see if it can't be charmed to do that neat Gandalfy power-surge thing when she smacks it on the ground and says "You shall not pass!"

Oh wait... ya'll meant employees as staff. Well that's just silly.

And this is why we ask people to take their questions to PM: threads are derailed and end up getting closed.

The guidelines for this room are highlighted at the top of the room, in the Announcements section. I'd appreciate it if everyone could go and read them now. Thanks.

RikWriter said:

The thing is, the link (at least the one given in this thread) only says "these are the terms we're going to use and not use." It doesn't explain why the terms that are forbidden are not acceptable.

Click to expand...

Follow the links in the guidelines thread. It's all there.

If it isn't there, try searching AW for discussions about this. There have been several.

Perhaps if the staff simply added the explanation given in this thread, that "traditional publishing" is too often used as a pejorative by hucksters, then the questions wouldn't be necessary.

Click to expand...

Perhaps if the members read the guidelines properly the staff wouldn't have to.

Me, I don't think of the term as pejorative.

Click to expand...

It was invented in order to disparage trade publishers. You need context here, I think. If you'd read the guidelines properly, you'd have it.

Hell, I'd still turn handstands if a trade publisher picked up my stuff and gave me a contract, despite the fact that I've made quite a bit of money at self publishing. It would be cool to walk into the Books a Million and see my stuff on the shelves, money aside.

Click to expand...

That's great: but it has nothing to do with the origins of the term "traditional publisher".

This thread's finished. Let's all move along.