Here's another way to look at it: swap out "online presence" and "social media" in the examples for the phrase "self-promotion." Just as a thought experiment, because what the publishers are really asking is what writers are willing or not willing to do to promote their own product. Now, there's a lot of ways to do that, but social media presence is the easiest metric for the publishers to evaluate and compare authors. Thinking about it from the business side, if a publisher has their choice of thousands of manuscripts to make them money, which story are they most likely to choose if author A does nothing while author B takes an active interest in social media, tries to make a name for themselves wherever they can, and actively generates sales for their partners, the publishers. I'm not saying that's right, wrong, or indifferent, but that's a no-brainer business decision when picking between dozens of equally suitable stories. And there's lots of ways to self-promote. It doesn't have to be social media if you've got something else working for you. But as a business partner I would want to see something out of the talent I chose to feature. And as stupid as Twitter is, if one author is going to get 100 people to my store as potential future customers and another author zero....
One of the Agents I was chatting said something that I took to heart: "It's easier to fix a Manuscript than an Author." She specifically gave the example that she avoids the tail ends of the bell curve of attention seeking behaviour. No Prima Donnas; no Shrinking Violets. Having said that, I do think social media follower count is a bad proxy for marketing effort, particularly in 2021 where as I said earlier, I think organic sales yield from engagement has pretty much evaporated. They might as well ask how many doors I knocked on selling it door to door. I don't think that's how it works anymore. Personally, I prepare a draft AIS - Advance Information Sheet - for book manuscripts. Sometimes called an ABI (Advance Book Information?) If the Agent/Publisher doesn't prioritize that over social media activity, they're not the right representation for me.
I think the biggest mindset issue is that we use social media because it has its "advantages". I was reading Digital Minimalism by Cal Newport a while back and he argued that we have to step back, decide what our values and goals are, finding methods to support those goals, and picking the best method for each goal. (I totally recommend the book.) For example, let's say you want to advertise your books. Social media can help you do that but I think we can agree that it is not the best way of doing it. There's no clear line here though. If the benefits of social media weren't considerable it would have been gone by now. =) It's just better to somebody who could do the whole advertising bit for you. I used to have an Instagram account for digital art years ago and it did help out a lot. I got to share my work, receive crticisim, look at other people's work, etc. But I think that's a different story. With writing, I think I'm more prone to writing loads of less valuable chunks as oppposed to fewer, longer, more valuable text. There's simply this feeling of always having something to share. "Or else I will be forgotten". I believe that this "disconnectedness" is required to write with focus and more depth. Social media just produces too much stress and anxiety for me. And about the whole "easy way to contact people" part, I think even that is a bit of a downside. There should be a cap on how many people one knows to get the best out of relationships. After I got rid of social media, I lost contact with a bunch of people. I stayed in touch with a few people over email, and phone calls and let me tell you, my social life drastically improved. Plus, we need solitute too. Social media gives you the option to eradicate solitute entirely. There were lots of other benefits to quitting social media too. I was never an addict, but having the option to constantly be checking social media is still going to drain your will-power at least a little. Disposing of this choice entirely is going to stop that. Another issue people worry about is missing out on information. But again, we check the news too much anyway... A solution that worked for me is subscribe to newsletters based on the writers instead of the topics. Now I don't get overwhelmed with too much information. Everything I like softly lands in my inbox. =) I'm over the "You just have to plan for your time and avoid checking social media too much.". In my opinion that only works in theory. You just can't ignore friction and air resistance in this problem. =) A lot of thiese perspectives are going to affect one's mental health and productivity, be it studying, work, or writing. That's why I ended up quitting social media and I've never ever regretted it. Now I preach this to my parents. (It gets a bit annoying for them sometimes.) Long story short, quit social media and sleep more. Real question though, how did people advertise their books before social media?
This is something I'm exploring as an option. It can't be that hard to do, but the options seem limited for some reason that I haven't been able to identify yet. I was in a Q&A about self pub author book marketing a couple of years ago and it went kinda sideways because I didn't like the answer they gave. So, it went like this... Me: "Given there's all sorts of stuff an author can farm out if they're not skilled at it, like editing and cover art, is there a service that can handle an author's marketing?" Publisher: "Haw, haw, that's rich (wipes tear from eye), good one." Me: "No, I'm serious." Publisher: "Oh. OK, well, no obviously nobody can do that for you. Marketing is like taxes. You gotta do your own taxes right?" Me: "No, I have a tax accountant for that. It gets done, but I'm not an expert so I farm it out, which is where my question's going." Publisher: "Next question please." About 15 years ago when FB emerged, I did a lecture about its prospects and included some predictions about where compulsiveness might lead. At the time, we already recognized the problem of compulsive email checking. I used a cartoon from 1955 where there was two guys in an elevator, presumably on their way to the office, and one of them has bags under his eyes. The other one asks: "Looks like somebody just bought a TV?" I'm pretty sure that self publishing and social media expanded together. It's worth reiterating that a good publisher does something called Distribution. This is distinct from Fulfilment. Distribution is sales and promotion. It comes in lots of forms, some are not obvious. Merchandising is an example. They pay for what's called endcaps, which are the displays on the end of the bookshelves. The payment covers the square footage of shelfspace and the staff's labour to police that the the books are face out, on stands or whatever. Outside of the store, we're talking normal advertising. I'm old enough to remember Stephen King books advertised on the sides of buses, bus stops, radio, magazine and newspaper spreads. Nowadays, they just throw it into the AdSense network and it shows up in sidebar ads on every website the target buyer reads, following her around the Internet like a highschool crush.
Historically, it was something Publishers would prepare, to market a book to distributors like chain stores. In this case, I prep a draft version, to show Agents or Publishers that I've given the sales aspect practical considerations: * working title * genre * audience * approximate word count * cover * whether it contains illustrations or photographs or charts * hook * synopsis * selling features * marketing plan * rough estimate of ARCs required Here's the first google match I got: Advance Information Sheet. It's not exactly the same as the ones I make, but there's a lot of room for variation, and it is only intended as a draft version for the Agent or Publisher to polish up to their in house specs. I do the same for my self pub works that are intended to get sold, as it keeps me mindful that it's going somewhere. It's not a necessary part of being an author - just something I prefer to do to keep me focused. And to circle back to the topic, where this came up was that if an Agent or Publisher dismissed that as irrelevant because I didn't have Instagram Followers, I'd consider it a red flag and move on.
so they don't do this any more? sounds like most of this gets covered in an ordinary query letter. i don't really think follower count is the important part here, though. like you said earlier, it's easier to fix manuscripts than authors. I think the idea that a publisher or agent would say "you only have x number of followers therefore we're not going to sign you" is off base. I think this is a matter of quality of content, and it's not about follower count at all. Which is why i said up there, "if you write an essay or a short story that people like, if your twitter sucks it's actually worse for you than not having a twitter at all." I should have maybe been more clear about what I meant by "if your twitter sucks." your twitter sucks if it's a retweet farm. your twitter sucks if its only content is links to your work. your twitter sucks if your account is full of you having slapfights with people or mean-spirited quote RTs. your twitter sucks if your content is flat and uninteresting.
Second this — good book. I did something comparable a while back. Not a massive user of SM in private life, but I ruthlessly curated all feeds and contacts, which really helped to reduce (mis)information overload. Now, it genuinely adds value when required. In nutrition it is said, ‘You are what you eat,’ and I think this also applies to the content you consume. I seem to recall 2015 as being the year in which humanity passed the mark whereby we now produce more content in 24 hours than in the entire 2000 years prior. Dunno who works these little factlets out, or how, but the rate of production is only going to increase. To curate well is a valuable skill.
They do. I mean, at least the ones that offer Distribution do. Apologies that my wording was ambiguous: I was meaning to say that this is where the practice originated. Today, many self published authors who are hoping to get their books on shelves have also adopted the practice. There's overlap, but they're not the same thing. The intended audience for an AIS is a bookstore purchasing staff - it doesn't 'die' once the book is accepted by a publisher/agent. They will adopt it if they like my version, and ultimately produce their own final version. This is why I refer to it as a 'draft' copy that I would discuss with the publisher/agent. And if it never gets accepted, the author has a relatively mature self publishing marketing packet just about ready to go, when the decision is made to pull the plug on trad for this manuscript. I agree that it's off base, but what frustrates me is that it's a real criteria for some publishers/agents. It feels amateurish, and that's why it's a red flag for me. Yep. The model right now is that my Twitter will probably have one tweet. Here's my 'short bio', follow this link to my website... hopefully that doesn't qualify as a profile that 'sucks'.
well it doesn’t really give anyone a feel for how you handle yourself as a public figure, which is what they’re looking for.
In my case, I write under a pseudonym, and I'm up front about it. I think that is informing them about how I handle myself as a public figure - I'm pretty private. I'm not shy - when theatres were open I did improv and standup and expect to resume that when restrictions are eased... if the venues are still in business. I'm not the Shrinking Violet type, but more the Privacy/Security type. It has to do with my day job. A few of my writing chums here in Vancouver are similar. They're a teacher, a social worker, and a forensic psychiatrist, so their social media is just a placeholder to prevent identity impersonators. It kinda makes it easy for me, because I would estimate that almost all of my friends and family do not use social media, for reasons like this. We all have accounts, but just don't post. The occasional DM when a kid goes into the hospital or grandparent dies. The plan is to create an author page, instead of using my personal identity. Even when I start to use my own name (after I leave my employer and transition to fulltime writer) the expectation is that I'll isolate my real name author page from my personal stuff. "KevinMcCormackAuthor" And as mentioned above, I'd be fine with hiring somebody to wrangle it, farming out this activity I'm clearly not good at, as I do for my taxes and household electricals. I'm not there yet, though. I believe as long as I'm honest about it, I can find an appropriate representation. But if there isn't anyone out there for me and the manuscript has to be self published, I've made an informed choice and done my best within my values framework. And the publisher/agent and I can talk shop: I do project management, which involves working with the marketing team over a product's entire life cycle, which includes launch strategies &c. I managed my business unit's social media response team for half a decade. I can talk about that with any publisher/agent who is interested. And if they're not interested, keep circling back follower count, I think it's a sign we won't work out, and I can move on.
interesting. I think if i had had any idea what was going to happen i would have chosen a pen name and siloed that identity away from my real name, but at the same time, I really don't know how effective it would have been anyway, particularly with the demands for visibility like author photos and public appearances. and oh well. There's no going back now.
I figure it's unlikely that it genuinely insulates my personal and author identities. I know people will figure it out. It's more about demonstrating some due diligence to my employer until I end my time there. I write genre. It would be different if I was writing a nonfiction book about sailing knots. After I finish serving my time in the cubicle farm, I'll have more options. I expect to maintain the pseudonym though. I was chatting about this with somebody who just finished the 'transition' - he was a federal judge, and here in Canada, they're not allowed to have a side income or publish political opinions. He published poetry under a pseudonym and donated the proceeds to charity, and was within compliance, but it was about the optics. After retirement, he actually maintained the pseudonym to maintain continuity with his readership base. I might do the same. Cross that bridge when I get to it.
I don't really know how you are using your social media accounts, but I believe that those who successfully publicize their publications already have an audience gathered through posting other kinds of contents, which may or may not be related to publishing, writing, reading, etc. From what people say online, gathering an audience takes time and is work to maintain, even when one posts content one is knowledgeable about like a hobby pursued for a number of years. From finding a niche users are interested in to editing videos or taking pictures, to planning future content, to enlarging your network (i.e.: connecting with followers and creating joint postings/interviews/etc. with other vloggers/instagrammers/twitter networks/etc.), it takes whole days of work. And you still need a number of months and years to gather a large enough audience to find people willing to buy your book or post it in their own social network (to publicize it for you). my point is: I am not surprised so few have clicked the link, reading is after all a matter of taste, not everyone reads as often, and they might be interested in other genres or other kinds of reading. don't beat yourself down. It sounds you need to do more work in crafting a self-publicizing method that works for you
No. If you are to succeed in social media, you have to become creative and imaginative one step further. Remember how you started writing and noticing this author or that? Well, it's the same thing. Learn from the successful ones, start your own style. How long does it take? Years, maybe. Like someone said above: patience.
This is where I get a bit defeated, because advice like this - which I appreciate is offered in good faith - doesn't help me much. I *do* remember noticing writers when I started writing! It had absolutely nothing to do with social media. I noticed them through a variety of vectors: * they were getting nominated or winning awards * the library had them on display as a librarian's recommendation in its genre * I picked up one of their books in a used book store because it had a cool cover * the author was a screenwriter for a movie i enjoyed, and i learned they also wrote novels When I am directed to their social media (those who are actually alive and participating in social media - many of my favourite authors aren't online) I find the content pretty universally uninteresting. I like reading their books, but I don't care about an author's personal life, political opinions, &c. In principle, as a reader, the ideal feed from an author would be that I get a headsup when their new book is out, and zero irrelevant background noise to sift through. So my personal preference doesn't seem to be the way to judge how I create content. I would create content that is the opposite of the advice given on this thread. Another example of advice I don't know how to follow is: "Just be yourself. Authenticity is everything." - OK, but myself wouldn't be sharing anything about myself on social media, so... what else is left other than linking to my books when they come out.
okay, so delete. put up a website instead. writer websites are dead simple. all you need is your bibliography and your press kit, honestly.
Which works great for preexisting customers--and functions almost identically to an email list--but what about all the people who've never heard of you? Now, I'm not saying you should bomb the Internet with pictures of puppies and silly memes, but if you're an interesting social media person who can attract followers through different means, a few might be like, "Hey, this dude sounds interesting and cool... I bet his books would be interesting and cool, too!"
Haha. Yeah, I know. Gotta have the puppies. The whole thing with social media is to get people to like you or think you're interesting. People who like you will support you and give you money, whether your work is great or not (but obviously not terrible). We see this over and over again in the restaurant industry vis a vis social media. Chef A makes the greatest food ever but isn't very personable, doesn't do social media, and doesn't too much too to attract a following in any sense. Chef B makes okay food but is very personable (a rarity), has a large social media presence, and does everything they can to promote themselves. Chef A opens their own restaurant with the best food ever and goes out of business because nobody likes them and doesn't care about supporting them. Chef B opens their own restaurant with a mediocre product but makes millions because everyone likes them and wants to support them. That's not the greatest analogy but the concept is the same. So much success in business comes down to the quality of the person making the product, not necessarily the inherent value of the product itself. Not all the time, but it certainly helps.
I don't know, which is what I'm getting at. I can't imagine strangers being interested in me personally, because I'm not interested in strangers' personal lives, myself. There's this disconnect that I can't figure out that makes it difficult for me to produce something I don't understand how people consume. This is what my previous post was about. I've never been involved in that scenario you describe, it doesn't makes sense to me. I have zero personal examples of fiction authors whom I came across online prior and followed their personal commentaries and it translated to buying a book. Even with nonfiction, I can only think of one example *maybe* - there's a scientist at UBC that does research along the lines of my grad work, and she has a byline discussing the department's progress. Nothing personal at all. But she did publish a nonfiction book and I bought it. It wasn't social media, though, just the department's monthly newsletter.
Website for sure, that's the hub - in an earlier post I mentioned that I thought the social media strategy discussion is related to the parallel thread on this site about websites. EDITED TO ADD: Link to that thread, for reference: Authors' websites I can't completely ignore social media because of the risk of brand confusion. I think I need at least a basic author profile and link to the website, on each of the majors. This is why I included the example of my parents' vet. Not getting a FB page actually made things worse because a squatter was actively diverting his potential clients. That's easy to avoid with a minimal use of resources, IMO. Just to make that example more concrete, here's the highest ranking search result for his vet service, when searching by name: Harbourside Veterinary House Call Services Inc So it's experiences like that that convince me I can't completely ignore social media if I want to run an actual business as an author.
I think they key part is the last bit of Homer's post, namely: From the sounds of it, you're not an interesting social media person. That's fine, I'm not either. But if you are, and you do have a middling-to-large social media audience who are likely to be interested in stuff you've written, that's a valuable asset to any publisher trying to work out if your book will make them a profit. They'd be dumb not to consider it (or the lack of it) when deciding whether or not to offer a book deal. If you're going to self-publish, then for me it just comes back to the same thing I said above - do the marketing you're going to do. No sense in trying to make sales from social if you hate the idea of it and are just going to keep putting it off.
Gotcha. If I'm already famous then I can use it to sell books. Sure. Agreed. I don't begrudge them for taking it into consideration. I do think it's possibly misguided for anything below millions of followers though. The profit difference between zero vs fifty thousand followers is probably negligible here in 2021. This is the plan.
I hear you. I'm the same way. But--but, but, but--not everyone thinks the same way we do or, more importantly, accesses market products the same way we do. And the way the world is going, those (like me) that ignore social media are going to be run the fuck over by those that do. Maybe not tomorrow or next year, but invariably and absolutely. Think about people 50 years ago that didn't want to make television commercials because of XYZ. How do you think their product fared compared to those that whored themselves for the cameras? For me personally, I was dragged kicking and screaming into the social media "on ramp" of restaurant marketing. Mainly because I didn't use it to access dining options myself and thought everyone who did was an idiot because, you know, you can't taste a picture. Now I have a marketing director and a dedicated social media person just to stay competitive. Granted that's a very different industry than publishing is--at least as far as being conducive to social media goes--but the consumers are still heading in the same direction.
