publicity

Nomad said:

... without a huge effort to generate publicity, we'd be dead in the water as far as book sales go.

Click to expand...

That is just flat not true for authors.

Publishers do marketing and promotion. Hurrah for them!

But for authors on an individual basis -- it's a waste of time and money.

Amen! Listen to the man. He knows of what he speaks.

Plus, this year marks my tenth year of publication. Almost 2 million words in print. Trust me, no amount of money spent on publicity/pr/promotion equals writing a great book.

Are we saying publicity won't sell books? The book will sell itself?

Here's what sells books (in the world of fiction):

The reader has read and enjoyed another book by the same author.

Recommendation from a trusted friend.

Everything else is down in the single digit percentages.

What's required: The book must be on bookstore shelves.

The publisher's marketing efforts are driven toward getting that shelving. Reviews, catalogs, advertising to the trade, sales reps -- those get the bookstore shelving.

Why? Because if the book isn't on the shelves, the guy who's looking for that neat book his pal recommended won't find it and won't buy it, and the guy who picks up the new book by his favorite author every time he spots one won't. Special orders are tiny.

Another question: does Amazon.com and BN.com, etc. change that landscape ("books have to be on shelves")? Or is online book shopping still in its infancy? That most books are still sold in stores?

so why then?

So why then, do best sellers go on interviews on all sorts of media outlets, if these individual author attempts are totally useless and fruitless.

Why do we see authors like Steven King and Ms. Morrison on television?

No offense to James, but I don't think any one person is the authority on any industry. PR may not be for every writer. But apparently some writers feel that it helps them tremendously.

And these days cross selling is quite common. Since very often publishers are owned by the same companies that own studios, authors who have their agents sell movie rights may find their careers at a whole new level. I've bought books from some rights because I liked a movie based on that book.

I don't necessarily buy books because a friend recommended them, or because I went in the book store. I do take interest in what I see on television and in magazines. And people do buy books because of the name of the author.

Even if I'm introduced to a novelist by a friend, I may not know that said novelist has a new book out. I may very well be alerted by television, or by what I read in a magazine.

As for non fiction, there are obviously different types of non fiction. But non fiction written by a name has a better change of majorly selling than non fiction with no name.

As for how necessary PR is, unfortunately on this forum we don't have the J.K Rowlings of the world who might beg to differ from MacDonald.

And yes, clearly everything I said won't be applicable to every novelist. Many novelists will never see a book of their made into a movie, or be at that point in their careers. And their nothing wrong with that.

I also think part of the disagreement of some people maybe that different people have different career aims. Some people maybe happy to be published writers. Others may very well want to be in the news or on television all the time.

In a nutshell, if you're the kind of writer who wants to be a superstar, yes, you'll likely want and need PR people. If you're someone who has no interest in being in the public eye and just want to be sold, PR isn't all that necessary.

Please stick to things that you know about, lad. You'll be happier for it.

JustinoXXV said:

So why then, do best sellers go on interviews on all sorts of media outlets, if these individual author attempts are totally useless and fruitless.

Click to expand...

That is NOT PR driven by the author; that's entirely driven by the publisher. The publisher arranges the interviews, the transport, the entire schedule and expenses for a press junket. It takes months to do that, and depends on coordinating the efforts of several people, and it's far too much for the author to foot the bill. You can't buy that kind of PR. Even in film/tv, that kind of exposure is arranged by the studios, not the actor/director.

Medievalist said:

That is NOT PR driven by the author; that's entirely driven by the publisher.

Click to expand...

More than that, unless and until you're a bestseller, no one is going to be interested in interviewing you, and if you do get an interveiw, no one is going to be interested in reading/seeing it.

Does anyone really think that Rowling got rich by hiring a publicity firm?

I've never bought a novel based on an advertisement. Ever. I don't rule out the possibility of it happening some day, but it would have to be a print ad and it would have to be about, oh...the length of the book's first chapter.

Those "Try These Other Authors by Publisher X" ads you see in the back of paperbacks are about the only ads that might--might--make me think about buying an untried author's book. But that's a big maybe, and I'd be likelier to ask for opinions first.

The only advertisement that is guaranteed to get me to try a new author's novel is, well...a free novel.

Galoot said:

I've never bought a novel based on an advertisement. Ever.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't be too sure about that. But it would have been an ad that you never saw, in a trade publication aimed at bookstore owners, that got the book onto the shelf in the first place.

I look at it as a simple case of numbers.

Can *I*, the author, spend as much money and find resources to promote my book as a major publisher? Even a smaller one with a catalog and a small marketing department?

Not likely.

The real problem with this whole thread is that some people are misusing the term "PR" to mean "any reaching out to the public in any fashion." That's not what the term means in the publishing industry. PR, in the publishing industry, is restricted to effort to publicize the author, usually "coincidentally" with the release of one or more books. Efforts that focus on a single title are "marketing."
Bluntly, even inside of the publishers, PR is usually viewed as a means of building brand identity for products not yet on the shelves and of stroking delicate author egos. There is virtually no verifiable evidence or correlation between PR efforts and sales of currently available works; all of the evidence with any correlation at all—and it's extremely low, barely passing the 60% confidence level, which means "it's somewhat better than random"—relates to marketing, not PR, and even that is at best both sketchy and undermined by intervening causes and self-fulfilling-prophecy problems.
On the other hand, one can look at this like a chemist examining a flask filled with an unknown gas. (Smartass implications intended.) There is nothing whatsoever I can do to predict or influence the speed or vector of any individual gas molecule inside that flask. Nothing. If, however, I heat (or cool) the entire flask, the probability of increasing (or decreasing) the speed of that molecule is higher, just because I have changed the median behavior. Of course, if I throw the glass flask on the ground, like the industry is so wont to do, my predictability definitely decreases…
OK, that was a fascinating tangent, but what does it mean to this discussion? My point is that Justino (among others) is using the term "PR" in a way that publishing industry people like me, like Uncle Jim, like Victoria, etc. do not. In other words:
None of us place any store in PR (as we understand the term) having a predictable effect on sales of any particular book; only perhaps—and that's a big perhaps—the flask of books from a particular author. The implication of that should be pretty clear: PR (as we understand the term) probably won't work at all for single-book authors. And on this latter conclusion, to quote the young Jed Bartlett, I've got numbers.

This thread is confusing me.

You know my bona fides: I'm a full-time nonfiction author with a good track record.

I do PR. I think it's important. When I do more PR, I sell more books.

My publishers (Nomad included) do PR-- e-mail campaigns, galleys to the trades, review copies to other publications, etc.

I set up a lot of my own interviews, occasional book signings and workshops, writing articles in exchange for a bio with my book info, etc.

Sometimes the results are quantifiable: I can do a radio interview, then check if my Amazon rank goes up or if people have called the toll-free # to order from my publisher.

I think this thread is too full of generalities. I know the Chicken Soup guys... their series exploded because of their own PR efforts. They set up all their own interviews (radio was a great medium for them), speaking engagements, contacted companies for co-op advertising, etc.

Where I think it becomes dangerous is when authors pay a great deal of money for a publicity firm or their own efforts (to get direct mail lists, take out ads in guest-finder services, ads in the paper, etc.) and the distribution isn't in place.

In other words, when you have a self- or vanity-published book that isn't in bookstores, for God's sake, don't spend thousands of dollars on publicity! It just won't work. The book has to be readily available to the general public FIRST. Then, if you choose to take the risk, at least it's a risk that has the possibility of paying off. But never, ever put yourself in the poor house to publicize a book. Too much like gambling.

I've asked people how they learned about my books. Many of them have learned about them through reviews and interviews (especially the books I've written for writers). I do believe that this is more useful for nonfiction than fiction.

Anyway, my point is that whether the publisher gets you on the Today Show or you get yourself there, it's PR, and it works.

Are we miscommunicating somewhere? I'm still confused about the general premise of this argument.

Well said Jenna!

PR is very important!

Everything I had to say above dealt with fiction. As far as non-fiction is concerned I can accept that self-promotion might work. I'll use "self-promotion" rather than "PR" and "marketing" so as not to incur the Great White wrath.

Being such a vague term, though, it's fair to say that everyone here has self-promoted their writing to me in one way or another. I'm far more likely to pick up a book by AW User #X now, assuming I like their style in the forums, than I would have been if I'd seen an ad or heard an interview.

I think I just wasted a reply. I don't know if this has anything to do with the current discussion. Oh well.

"In other words, when you have a self- or vanity-published book that isn't in bookstores, for God's sake, don't spend thousands of dollars on publicity! It just won't work. The book has to be readily available to the general public FIRST. Then, if you choose to take the risk, at least it's a risk that has the possibility of paying off. But never, ever put yourself in the poor house to publicize a book. Too much like gambling."


I agree with this. I hope it didn't sound like I was advocating anything like the above comments.

Publishers, production companies, and studios do hire PR agencies for new releases. And yes, depending on the case, these people may get the authors or other talent on television exposure or magazine exposure. However, authors and other talent often have their own efforts as well.

Things vary considerably, and different author/artists will of course have different needs.

I think I'm speaking more about promotion than PR. Public Relations, to me, is the building up of the author's brand. Promotion is more narrowed, to the book itself. I've rarely seen any successful promotional efforts, but a great deal of money expended on it. For example, the romance community seem gung ho on flyers, bookmarks, posters, etc. Save your money.

When you write a great book, you begin the "word of mouth" cycle, which in turn feeds the PR cycle.

Bottom line for me? Promotion - ehh. Public Relations - great.

We've all heard of authors who have spent their entire advance on a PR firm (or even borrowed money to hire PR firms) and not earned it back in royalties.