Guardian: Publishers respond to "who needs a publisher?" article

Ben Thornton · 08-28-2010, 11:55 AM

There was an article in the Grauniad the other day by Ray Connolly called "Who needs publishers?"

Today, there is this response. I didn't find it convincing; I think that they missed the biggest benefit of publishers - that of being properly edited and proofed.

Logseman · 08-28-2010, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Thornton

There was an article in the Grauniad the other day by Ray Connolly called "Who needs publishers?"

Today, there is this response. I didn't find it convincing; I think that they missed the biggest benefit of publishers - that of being properly edited and proofed.

Maybe because that "biggest benefit" hasn't shown for a long while, particularly in the digital publishing field.

tompe · 08-28-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Thornton

There was an article in the Grauniad the other day by Ray Connolly called "Who needs publishers?"

Today, there is this response. I didn't find it convincing; I think that they missed the biggest benefit of publishers - that of being properly edited and proofed.

They mentioned "editorial input" which seems to me to be the most important thing. This probably inludes being edited and proofed. But proofing something anybody can do. It is the editorial input that is important.

mr ploppy · 08-28-2010, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Thornton

There was an article in the Grauniad the other day by Ray Connolly called "Who needs publishers?"

Today, there is this response. I didn't find it convincing; I think that they missed the biggest benefit of publishers - that of being properly edited and proofed.

Ha. I haven't read a new book (either paper or e) for years that hasn't had lots of mistakes in it. I think in-house proof readers were the first to be made redundant when times got hard. That sort of thing is left to the writer to send out pre-release copies to fans, something they could easily do on their own.

They can open doors for you with paper books, but the only real advantage of publishers with ebooks is to take away some of the effort. There isn't anything you couldn't either do yourself or hire a freelancer to do. Certainly nothing that would make it worth giving away 90% of your income and being tied down for years.

GA Russell · 08-28-2010, 11:05 PM

I didn't find the response to be convincing either. For starters, she says that publishers have embraced digital publishing from the get go with both new and backlist titles.

I just don't think that that is true. I was quite surprised to find a couple of weeks ago that of the 80 Perry Mason stories, not a single one is available legitimately as an eBook.

meromana · 08-29-2010, 12:38 AM

Uh, yeah, talk about phoning it in. That was the best they could come up with?

All the response does is reiterate the services that publishers theoretically provide, such as editing, proofing, editorial "input", marketing and publicity. As others have already pointed out, an author can purchase the editing & marketing services for himself, and whether a mid-list author actually receives a healthy dose of these from a publisher is questionable. Certainly, the industry's publishing of back-list books so far shows little editing/proofing or marketing. They are simply scanning old books and throwing them up on the web to make an easy buck--in many cases, without even a cursory read-through of the OCR'd output.

The other points she makes are laughable. She offers up DRM technology and legal services in the case of copyright infringement as huge favors to the author, when they are really about protecting the income of the publisher. The "proper remuneration" remark is just stupid. All she is saying is that publishers are forcing higher prices for ebooks, which does not necessarily mean more income for the author, as a) he may well sell fewer books at those inflated prices, and b) most of the take goes to the publisher.

Sorry if this sounds like a rant, but sheesh, that article had the opportunity to come up with some viable arguments for using a publisher in the digital age, and instead, the points given were old, tired, and untrue. What a waste of digital space.

--Maria

GERGE · 08-29-2010, 01:03 AM

She is right on some parts.

If the debut I am thinking about is from Pantheon or Orbit or Gollancz, I would more inclined to buy it. Some editors are doing good things. And if I see a new fantasy series from Tor, I would know not to buy it without reading some reviews from reviewers I trust.

tompe · 08-29-2010, 04:28 AM

What do people mean by "editing" here? Is working with the author and developing the authors skill included?

What you cannot buy if self publishing is an option is editing that you have to accept.

GeoffC · 08-29-2010, 05:17 AM

Surely a good publisher/editor would include services such as nurturing for authors as well as to provide critical appraisal which would highlight the need for improved phraseology as well as picking up on obvious hoohaas ?

mr ploppy · 08-29-2010, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeoffC

Surely a good publisher/editor would include services such as nurturing for authors as well as to provide critical appraisal which would highlight the need for improved phraseology as well as picking up on obvious hoohaas ?

I doubt anyone who wasn't already word perfect would be picked up by a publisher these days. Not unless they were the latest Sleb.

GeoffC · 08-29-2010, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I doubt anyone who wasn't already word perfect would be picked up by a publisher these days. Not unless they were the latest Sleb.

word perfect doesn't necessarily mean that the novel wouldn't benefit from an experienced editor to help 'tighten' it up.

tompe · 08-29-2010, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I doubt anyone who wasn't already word perfect would be picked up by a publisher these days. Not unless they were the latest Sleb.

You are wrong. They are looking for "voice". Spelling can be fixed. Lack of "voice" cannot be fixed. A lot of published successful authors are dyslectic.

CaraM · 08-29-2010, 09:49 AM

When you submit a manuscript to a publisher it has to be as perfect as you can make it. Gone are the days when a publisher will nurture a new writer. I have three published books with two publishers, one from Avalon Books, a print publisher, and two from The Wild Rose Press, an epub. Once they accepted my manuscripts, the editors and I worked to edit the book and make it better. Usually my grammar and punctuation are good. The editing mostly was about tightening up the story to make it flow better and to quicken the pacing. I recently got the rights back from Wild Rose for my romantic suspense, "Logan's Redemption." I went through the entire book again and edited parts I thought could be better. Then I put it up on Kindle. Editing is important. You need someone to look over your work. As an author you get too close to your story and miss things that either don't move the story along or muddle it. Editing is necesssary either by your publisher or if you pay someone to professionally edit your manuscript.

www.caramarsi.com
Logan's Redemption
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0040JI3PG

L.J. Sellers · 08-29-2010, 09:56 AM

In addition to being an author, I'm also a freelance fiction editor, and I still pay another editor to proof my work before it goes out to a publisher or to Kindle. Even that sometimes is not enough. One editor usually can't find everything. Especially with fiction, which readers tend to get caught up in, if it's a good story. Editing is essential, and once is not enough.
L.J.

tompe · 08-29-2010, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeoffC

Surely a good publisher/editor would include services such as nurturing for authors as well as to provide critical appraisal which would highlight the need for improved phraseology as well as picking up on obvious hoohaas ?

Exactly. I doubt authors can buy that as a service or that they afford it if it is possible to buy it.

08-28-2010, 11:55 AM	#1
Ben Thornton Guru Posts: 900 Karma: 779635 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: UK Device: Kindle 3, iPad 2 (but not for e-books)	Guardian: Publishers respond to "who needs a publisher?" article There was an article in the Grauniad the other day by Ray Connolly called "Who needs publishers?" Today, there is this response. I didn't find it convincing; I think that they missed the biggest benefit of publishers - that of being properly edited and proofed.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is Fictionwise acting in good faith over a "screwed-up" book from a publisher?	Dr. Drib	News	2	03-02-2009 04:39 PM
Amazon: "Tell the Publisher" request links disappeared	Alexander Turcic	Amazon Kindle	14	08-27-2008 11:08 AM
"Reading things electronically is a dissatisfying experience" - Publisher crying	searcher	News	49	03-26-2008 10:37 AM
"Dear Author" list of e-book publishers and vendors	Bob Russell	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	0	06-05-2006 04:08 PM

08-28-2010, 11:05 PM	#5
GA Russell Bombers clinch first. Posts: 7,627 Karma: 31487351 Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Raleigh, NC Device: Paperwhite, Kindles 10 & 4 and jetBook Lite	I didn't find the response to be convincing either. For starters, she says that publishers have embraced digital publishing from the get go with both new and backlist titles. I just don't think that that is true. I was quite surprised to find a couple of weeks ago that of the 80 Perry Mason stories, not a single one is available legitimately as an eBook.

08-29-2010, 12:38 AM	#6
meromana Zealot Posts: 129 Karma: 11430 Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: NC, USA Device: my laptop	Uh, yeah, talk about phoning it in. That was the best they could come up with? All the response does is reiterate the services that publishers theoretically provide, such as editing, proofing, editorial "input", marketing and publicity. As others have already pointed out, an author can purchase the editing & marketing services for himself, and whether a mid-list author actually receives a healthy dose of these from a publisher is questionable. Certainly, the industry's publishing of back-list books so far shows little editing/proofing or marketing. They are simply scanning old books and throwing them up on the web to make an easy buck--in many cases, without even a cursory read-through of the OCR'd output. The other points she makes are laughable. She offers up DRM technology and legal services in the case of copyright infringement as huge favors to the author, when they are really about protecting the income of the publisher. The "proper remuneration" remark is just stupid. All she is saying is that publishers are forcing higher prices for ebooks, which does not necessarily mean more income for the author, as a) he may well sell fewer books at those inflated prices, and b) most of the take goes to the publisher. Sorry if this sounds like a rant, but sheesh, that article had the opportunity to come up with some viable arguments for using a publisher in the digital age, and instead, the points given were old, tired, and untrue. What a waste of digital space. --Maria

08-29-2010, 01:03 AM	#7
GERGE Guru Posts: 733 Karma: 5797160 Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Istanbul Device: Kobo Libra	She is right on some parts. If the debut I am thinking about is from Pantheon or Orbit or Gollancz, I would more inclined to buy it. Some editors are doing good things. And if I see a new fantasy series from Tor, I would know not to buy it without reading some reviews from reviewers I trust.

08-29-2010, 04:28 AM	#8
tompe Grand Sorcerer Posts: 7,452 Karma: 7185064 Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Linköpng, Sweden Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW	What do people mean by "editing" here? Is working with the author and developing the authors skill included? What you cannot buy if self publishing is an option is editing that you have to accept.

08-29-2010, 05:17 AM	#9
GeoffC Chocolate Grasshopper ... Posts: 27,599 Karma: 20821184 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Scotland Device: Muse HD , Cybook Gen3 , Pocketbook 302 (Black) , Nexus 10: wife has PW	Surely a good publisher/editor would include services such as nurturing for authors as well as to provide critical appraisal which would highlight the need for improved phraseology as well as picking up on obvious hoohaas ?

08-29-2010, 09:49 AM	#13
CaraM Guru Posts: 924 Karma: 1000000 Join Date: Aug 2010 Device: Kindle	When you submit a manuscript to a publisher it has to be as perfect as you can make it. Gone are the days when a publisher will nurture a new writer. I have three published books with two publishers, one from Avalon Books, a print publisher, and two from The Wild Rose Press, an epub. Once they accepted my manuscripts, the editors and I worked to edit the book and make it better. Usually my grammar and punctuation are good. The editing mostly was about tightening up the story to make it flow better and to quicken the pacing. I recently got the rights back from Wild Rose for my romantic suspense, "Logan's Redemption." I went through the entire book again and edited parts I thought could be better. Then I put it up on Kindle. Editing is important. You need someone to look over your work. As an author you get too close to your story and miss things that either don't move the story along or muddle it. Editing is necesssary either by your publisher or if you pay someone to professionally edit your manuscript. www.caramarsi.com Logan's Redemption http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0040JI3PG

08-29-2010, 09:56 AM	#14
L.J. Sellers Novelist Posts: 287 Karma: 387979 Join Date: May 2010 Location: Eugene, Oregon Device: Kindle	In addition to being an author, I'm also a freelance fiction editor, and I still pay another editor to proof my work before it goes out to a publisher or to Kindle. Even that sometimes is not enough. One editor usually can't find everything. Especially with fiction, which readers tend to get caught up in, if it's a good story. Editing is essential, and once is not enough. L.J.

Advert

Advert