Why Authors Should ALWAYS Respond To Negative Reviews | Digital Book World


See on Scoop.itWriting and reading fiction

At Digital Book World, Elle Lothlorien lays the foundation for her argument that authors should respond to bad reviews as other businesses do, in an attempt to rectify a bad customer experience. This is a very interesting blog post for a number of reasons, and you may find the comment thread even more compelling. You may even find it disturbing. The post appeals to my affinity for the contrarian viewpoint, but it was the comment thread that had me thinking, “Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Slow down! Save this level of vitriol and nuclear response for really serious problems, like family reunions!”

This is just Part 1 of her argument and that’s where the disturbing subtext emerges in the comment thread. Some commenters rise up, prematurely, I think, to condemn Lothlorien’s advice before she’s given a chance to lay out her strategy. They attribute motivations and actions to the author and reviewers before she’s had a chance to show what steps she takes and recommends. Condemnation before full presentation sounds like a trait you don’t want in a book reviewer.

Since the reaction in some cases (in the comment thread) is very defensive so far, I’ll be very interested to see how Lothlorien defuses her critics, one of whom goes so far as to threaten her with a bad review now that the author has dared to express an opinion. Wow. It’s ironic that Lothlorien is accused of intimidating reviewers to bump up the stars in her reviews in the same thread. Are we so cynical we can’t imagine that a listening ear and being nice might actually change a reviewer’s perspective? Are all opinions set in granite? Some objectors to the article assume their initial reaction is the best and purest one. Maybe not.

I don’t respond to negative reviews because I have accepted dogma (yes, I’m saying I haven’t really thought about it past “Don’t do it!”) and I’ve seen where it goes awry. As soon as I read the headline, I thought of The Greek Seaman debacle, which Lothlorien even mentions as an example of how not to do what she’s recommending. I have to concede that Lothlorien makes some good points.

“Anecdotal evidence!” someone cried. Well, what other evidence might there be? No one is studying this problem wearing a lab coat and clicking on a calculator. That said, I’m not (yet?) convinced responding to bad reviews is ever a good idea. I am willing to hear her out and in the meantime, I’ll reserve judgment until the follow-up installments.

Even if by some miracle of business pschology she manages to convince me otherwise, I’m sure it’s something I’ll never want to do. No one wants to be on the wrong end of the 1-800 line dealing with complaints, though as Lothlorien would point out, that is what businesses do.

There’s a fundamental question about ourselves that bubbles up through the cracks in the subtext: Do we have to get so angry about this stuff? We can change, can’t we? Flexibility in mind doesn’t necessarily equate to flip flopping. Mental agility means intelligence. I’m scared Lothlorien might be right and I hope she’s not. If I end up thinking she’s right, though, I won’t be mad at her. Click the link below for the article and read on.

See on www.digitalbookworld.com

UPDATE:

Today’s podcast, The Unintended Consequences Edition, covers this issue, as well, in case your prefer your commentary in audio.

7 Comments

Filed under publishing

Elvis has left Linked In


English: Graph of social media activities

English: Graph of social media activities (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I thought I was a social media gadfly with unlimited capacity and patience. I was wrong. I thought more was always better. Usually more is better unless we’re talking gunshot wounds. However, as the reminders and posts from Linked In piled up, I found Linked In had the least to offer me of the social media options I’ve explored. Linking with friends or old acquaintances was fun. Finding out what horrible job afflicted an old enemy filled me with inappropriate glee. However, the rewards were brief. Most friends, readers and dreamers are on Facebook or Twitter anyway, so Linked In quickly became redundant. After the bottom dropped out of Facebook’s IPO this week, some pundits are saying the big FB has past its peak and will tank to become the next MySpace. Facebook still looks plenty active to me.

The primary reason for my ennui has nothing to do with Linked In: I’m not looking for a job. Publishing keeps me very busy. If I were looking for a job, I might feel differently.

However, I had thought the groups related to my interests could be useful. Theoretically, they could have been, but that’s where the corpse floated up. I’m not going to name any names, but I can tell you that far too many posts seemed to fall into one of two camps:

1. I know nothing about X and could someone explain all the basics to me so I won’t have to do a pesky Google search or look at Wikipedia or read a blog or a book on the subject?

or, far worse,

2. Everybody sucks but me and I know everything and I’ve been in this business for 40 years and you all know that because I start every snarky post with, “After 40 years in this business…”

Ugh. No, thanks. I’ve had quite enough of that attitude, thank you. I really have to protect my time, especially from big green meanies. I hadn’t encountered that much rudeness in one place in other branches of social media and my policy is I give rude people no time.

If you were trying to connect with me, there are still plenty of fun and friendly ways to do so (Twitter, Facebook, email, puppetry and interpretive dance or possibly even G+.) I don’t think Linked In is a great communications opportunity for indie authors or at least it isn’t for me. Joining was an experiment. Staying with it too long was my mistake. Leaving means one less thing to track.

(Hm? Pinterest? What’s that? Never mind what it is! Quick! Sign me up!)

4 Comments

Filed under publishing

Half of self-published authors earn less than $500?!


See on Scoop.itWriting and reading fiction

Comprehensive survey of DIY writers suggests that despite a few high-profile successes most authors struggle to sell…

 

The way is uphill.

See on www.guardian.co.uk

Leave a Comment

Filed under publishing

Thought, Word & Deed: To win, we have to reach


Image

This is how I felt when I found out a college friend is dead. 

This is what I said about it.

Here’s something we can do to punch back at cancer.

1 Comment

Filed under publishing

DAVENPORT DIALOGUES: MARRIED TO THE HIT MAN


See on Scoop.itWriting and reading fiction

A theme is emerging today: Another remarkable story from the trenches. When Kiana Davenport dared to publish a couple of stories on Kindle, things got ugly and Penguin demanded the advance on her novel back. Fascinating post at the link, and frankly, the author comes out the end of the feces storm smelling of roses and lavender. Read on at the link below.

See on kianadavenportdialogues.blogspot.ca

(Tomorrow we’ll go back to being our usual, happy and positive selves in a dimension without conflict, sadness or anxiety. It’s going to be awesome. Of course, we’ll all be on mushrooms, but still…)

Leave a Comment

Filed under publishing

Top of the Pack


See on Scoop.itWriting and reading fiction

I said I would write a bit about my experiences with literary agents. Here is the first one that is worth noting: A few years ago a friend who is in the publishing industry allowed me to use her name…

This post, among others, got into some interesting discussion of trad vs self-pub vitriol across blogs (Nathan Bransford’s blog, Sarah LaPolla scolding us for calling ourselves indie authors and The Passive Voice‘s wry take). I report Laura Novak’s link here as a tale of endurance ending in success. For the record, I don’t think Ms. Novak’s post is vitriol at all. It’s reportage on dealings with a specific agent. I replied in the comments thread on the Passive Voice blog because I felt the crowd was a tad more evenhanded in the discussion there. As for the whole, don’t call yourselves indie thing, please don’t tell me what to call myself. I don’t wear a collar and you’re not holding my leash so I call myself an indie author proudly, even if you scream at me in all caps. As someone pointed out in one of the comment threads, self-publishing connotes less than all that I do to publish and arguments over semantics might get somebody riled up but it’s doubtful anyone will be moved to change.

If you read across the blogs, you’ll also notice a recurring theme: Some folks in traditional publishing seem to resent indies and don’t like it if we complain in a similar fashion. Then you’ll see stories of agents and editors who gushed about how great a manuscript was just before they rejected it. Gee, why is this model not working? Of course, there doesn’t have to be an enemy. We could tend to our own businesses and respect each other’s choices. We could be happy for each other’s success. We could, but sometimes we choose otherwise.

See on www.lauranovakauthor.com

Leave a Comment

Filed under publishing

Carolyn Arnold: #Amazon “Lag Time” – Just the Beginning?


See on Scoop.itWriting and reading fiction

Carolyn Arnold asks some uncomfortable questions about Amazon sales tracking. Are all your sales getting tracked? Pull out your sales report and follow along as she breaks down her questions at the link.

See on sassy3421.blogspot.ca

1 Comment

Filed under publishing

I can’t come to the phone right now. I’m dead.


A man speaking on a mobile telephone

A man speaking on a mobile telephone (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Usually I laugh at the weird stuff that pops up in my spam filter. However, this morning I seem to be inundated with crap and the spam filter isn’t catching it for some reason. It’s not that it isn’t easy to spot: Yoda-like syntax and the fourth or fifth word is always twisted around.

But this one annoyed me very much:

“You are an excellent wrietr even if I have thought your writing seems sad sometimes! I am so glad you are honest! The truth will set you free, is true! I love you and I am so blessed to be your Mom!”

Thanks for the shitty surprise reminder, spambot! My mom’s dead. Lung cancer. When I call my dad and he doesn’t answer, the voice mail kicks in. The recorded voice is my mother, saying just two words: my father’s name. After she died (and a long and terrible decline, it was) I wrote some fairly bad and very dark poetry. I mulled mortality’s cruelty and our shared helplessness. I was crying after the funeral when my wife came into my childhood bedroom. I pretended to be asleep on the bed and when she covered me with a blanket, I pretended it was my mom, covering me one last time. Later, I called to hear my mother’s voice again and again and again.

Maybe I should leave a new voice mail message: “I’m sorry I’m not here. I’m elsewhere, or maybe I’m not, but if I could get back to you, I would. If I can’t, know that I tried. I really wish I could talk to you right now. But whatever we talked about, it would all come down to the same thing: I love you.”

PS I reject helplessness to the end. Go here if you reject helplessness, too. And spread the word for Indies Unite for Joshua.

3 Comments

Filed under publishing

Are agents still necessary? | TeleRead: News and views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics


See on Scoop.itWriting and reading fiction

Are agents still necessary in the new e-publishing world? I’m running across a number of people who don’t seem to think so.

 

(Personally, I think there are some specialized situations where I’d still like to have an agent [such as negotiating foreign rights], but there are more situations where an entertainment lawyer would be a better choice for me. Interesting article that encompasses the spectrum of opinion. ~ Chazz)

See on www.teleread.com

1 Comment

Filed under publishing

VIDEO: Yes, you could be Batman Jesus!


This week I posted about how the Internet rose up in indignation and, with one voice, condemned a small press publisher for his treatment of a writer and her work. The Internet has so much power for good when an idea goes viral. It’s not all about harsh German porn. Okay, a lot of it is, but we could do something really amazing here. You, sitting at your keyboard right now, could do something amazing. Joshua is a young man with leukaemia and he is suffering. I’m asking all of my loyal followers, casual readers and cranky haters to please harness that same fire we used for righteous condemnation to rise up and help ease the financial burdens on Joshua and his family during this terribly trying time. You know cancer sucks. Let’s punch it back in its smug face.

Please spread the word to help the son of author Max Cyn.

Raise the cause and raise the money and raise up this family.

If someone were drowning, you’d throw them a rope. If someone yelled for help, dangling from a cliff, you’d help. You don’t have to be Batman. It’s just tossing a little rope, but that still makes you a hero. This IndieGoGo campaign is about tossing this family a rope. Working together, we can help pull them up and out.

Please donate if you can and if you can’t, then just spread the word. Tweet (Twitter tag: #indiesunite4joshua), share, reblog, tell your boss, tell the woman beside you on the bus, whisper about it to whomever’s in the next bathroom stall. Spreading the word can help  immensely. Even small donations pile up. We’re very close to meeting this worthy charity’s goal, but there’s only 13 days left in this campaign so please help out Joshua today! Thanks for this. When you help this young man with leukaemia, not only will you get perks from awesome indie authors, you will feel a little like Batman. Or Jesus. Or both. ~ Chazz

Leave a Comment

Filed under publishing