Self-pub in the Washington Post

Kathleen,

Thanks for posting this. It was very good. I liked this part especially.

"There is still a stigma about self publishing versus traditional publishing channels, but that is quickly going away as more and more talented writers buck the system and more quality work gets out into the marketplace. Today readers have more book choices available than ever. This is one reason why the larger publishers and movie producers are beginning to pick up more and more material that started off on the self published route."

These days, the reader can basically get enough info on a novel (genre, cover, brief descripton, samples, reviews) and make the choice wether it is decent, before they buy it. No different than buying music is now.

Going to follow the next installment as well.

Sean

Nice to see but the Amazon rank is not terribly impressive.

The Washington Post has a history of up and down coverage with self publishing. The problem I see with most of the Post coverage of this topic is no depth to the articles. They are mostly generic coverage you can get just about anywhere, especially in the self publishing circles. Even their coverage of Publish America was lacking with what is known about PA...

I don't see how the Post journalist can compare a few successful self published writers with a turning of the tide. Has the Post done a study of the number of self published books to see a tide turning? What does the Post journalist consider successful? How many self published authors are successful compared to the number of self published authors out there? What is the percentage? If its more than 2% then yes, they have commercial publishers beat...