I want to talk a bit about an article that I read via Twitter yesterday: Has book blogging hit the wall?. There was a little debate after the link was posted. Bloggers were cast as a whole, an amorphous blob of want and entitlement, satiated only by free goods. I got a little miffed, like I do. I responded that I've reviewed three free books here, one of which was offered to me on the blog itself. The other two are from the one publisher list I'm on. I'm careful to only ask for books I know I'll read even though many more are offered. This is only fair: copies are limited and the books should go to someone who wants them. I don't really understand that idea that if something is "free" it must be taken, especially since the books they send are ARCs, so it's not like they look pretty on your shelf or anything. Raj Patel says interesting things about "free" stuff in The Value of Nothing. Paraphrasing Marcel Mauss' The Gift he says
in sociology as in economics, there's rarely anything that comes free from expectations of reciprocity and respect.Patel is talking about companies much larger than Harper or Penguin, like Nestle or AT&T, but the concept is the same: companies are not your friends, they (probably) don't know you or care about you as a person, they are entering into an agreement with you. There isn't ever something for nothing. Yes, there is a sense of entitlement among some, and my Twitter pal did state that entitlement is definitely not limited to book bloggers. But it's also not a defining characteristic of all book bloggers. I can't be the only one out there who doesn't feel that my internet connection means I'm owed something. The article, however, makes it sound as if my pal's initial assessment was correct. Wow, these are unsavoury people!
I know a bit about how all this works. I've sent out free books myself, when I had the opportunity to do such things. It's a relationship, and it should be one of respect. To diverge a bit, in the days of Panic Yore, I was a club and college radio DJ. Those are pretty much the only venues non-top 40 music gets played, or were before the Rise of the Machines — er, internet — so genre labels would "service" DJs with new releases. However, the DJs had to keep playlists and send those back to the record label. As with book blogging and free books, you need to prove to the publisher or label that their investment in you is worth it. Further, it seems to me that if book bloggers want to be taken seriously they need to act professionally. If they want to treat their blog as a hobby, with no deadlines or professional courtesy, which is probably closer to what I do, then bloggers need to be prepared to pay for that hobby. If you wanted to be treated like a professional (from the article, "Can you imagine them sending this to Horn Book or The NYTimes?") then you must be prepared to meet deadlines and act responsibly. (Note, I say "be prepared" to do so: there doesn't need to be a deadline involved, but if one is provided, it should be respected.) The relationship William Morrow wants to have with its bloggers is sensible and reasonable, and it's exactly how the one publisher I deal with runs things now. You can't just send books out into the dark and hope they stick. Targeted and focused marketing just makes sense. Larry from the article just doesn't understand the concept of "relationship" or "fairness."
It's not enough that it is 'your job' to review their books within a one month span before or after its release date," wrote Larry at The OF Blog, "but they couch in sweet talk the threat to pull review copies because you don't want to play their game.""Play their game"!? Getting adversarial is no way to conduct a relationship, Larry. Perhaps publishers who operated like William Morrow, with a buffet style, have to shoulder some of the blame for not figuring out a better strategy from the get-go. Though maybe they were just optimistic about human nature. Fools!
It's really too bad the article has the tone it does. It does make bloggers seem whiny and entitled, where most of the ones I know are anything but. I wrote a garbled Tweet about the number of books I own but haven't read (I blame the head cold), which sounded a bit like I had no intention of reading them. What I meant was, I buy so many books, and have so many in the library queue, that I sometimes get a bit bogged down in the To-Read List. What I wanted to convey in that Tweet, was that I spend my money at readings, and launches, and indie bookstores (and the chains when all else fails) because it's important that I put my money where my mouth is.** I want those publishers and writers to have my dollars, because they are providing me with the thing I love the most: the written word. I'm saddened that there are bloggers out there that feel it is their right to receive freebies, especially in an industry with such low margins, where the producers of of the content almost always have a second, 40-hour a week job.
Update! I've compiled responses from other bloggers here. If you know of others, let me know and I'll link them. It's interesting, to me at least, how others have reacted.
From Pickle Me This: What I Hate About Book Bloggers
From Books Under Skin: On book blogging
From Bella's Bookshelves: The Book Blogger’s Responsibility: What?
Larry, of the OF Blog, responds to the uproar (and to me): Fallout from last week's posts on reviewing/William Morrow letter
*I've been the same with running, coincidentally. The year I don't set a goal or do any races is the year I have the best results, and most gains. I thought I worked well under pressure. Turns out, maybe not so much.
**I use the library system pretty extensively too. I wouldn't ever have enough space in my tiny apartment for all the books I want. But I want to.
Posts
8 comments:
Very thoughtful piece about the role of the blogger in the grand scheme of things.
Admittedly I cross over a bunch of territory with my volunteer work: Books on the Radio, Advent Book Blog, W2 Real Vancouver Writers' Series. So I can approach the publisher, author, blogger relationship from a few different angles.
Here is how I angle my relationship with publishers and authors:
These channels are enthusiasm channels and the expectations on both sides are kept minimal and open. Timelines can be discussed but at no point does any of this work translate as 'marketing or publicity' for the book or the author, tho those things are without a doubt potential fringe benefits of inclusion in any of these channels.
Morrow and other publishers are fine to have the expectations that they have. I find their expectations unnecessary, tho.
As a resourceful blogger who only does this because I think it's fine and interesting I am more than happy to buy the books that interest me and to contact the author directly if I want to speak to them or work with them in some way.
The publisher is NOT required to be a part of the equation.
That is what I think of their expectations.
I hustle like a M%F to do the things that I do because I think that it's cool. I am a publisher's ally and I'm ready to work with them if they see value in the work that I do.
If they don't that's fine as the 'direct to author' channel is usually much easier.
For other bloggers it might be different.
At the end of the day it comes down to the relationship that the publisher/author has with the blogger and whether the blogger is doing work that's worth supporting.
Blanket expectations are a tendency of bloated hierarchies and serve little positive purpose in the hype-specific world of creativity as it's pushed across the web.
"Getting adversarial is no way to conduct a relationship ..."
Panic, tell me you mean this ironically.
Affectionately,
Yr. Twitter pal
Context is everything, my dear.
Sean:
Morrow and other publishers are fine to have the expectations that they have. I find their expectations unnecessary, tho.
Morrow didn't really have expectations to begin with though, if I understand it correctly. They only have them now, as a result of abuses to a more open system. It's a shame, but it's probably necessary. I look at this stuff from the dollars end, as well. I can't help it, it's what I do all day. The marketing folks have bosses and budgets to answer to, and if they can't show tangible results from their programs, they have to change those programs. Which leads to
Blanket expectations are a tendency of bloated hierarchies and serve little positive purpose in the hype-specific world of creativity as it's pushed across the web.
Absolutely. Agree. But, publishing is a business like any other, and especially for the big houses (Morrow being a subsidiary of one), that's the structure we have to work with. I think there's probably more wiggle room and less expectation with small presses, and more personal relationships can evolve there as well.
I do like the term "enthusiasm channels." Very much.
You're right, Panic: as you said on Twitter, we do feel much the same way. We even used the same words (whiny, entitled, etc.) I was nodding right from the start.
I agree with your answer to Sean's comment as well.
Sean: I like this: "At the end of the day it comes down to the relationship that the publisher/author has with the blogger and whether the blogger is doing work that's worth supporting."
But like Panic I'm not sure I agree that the publisher's expectations are unnecessary. This could be because either I'm not informed enough or because I have a different relationship with publishers than you do.
Your last paragraph makes sense in light of the one I quoted above, but I wonder, then, if maybe publicized blanket expectations are okay, and then the publisher can adjust those per blogger as they see fit, privately. You know, so long as there's some sort of standard or policy in general to cover things.
Which actually is pretty much what Panic was saying, I think.
Great conversation!
Let me clarify something that I didn't get quite right in my first comment: it cuts both ways in these relationships. I totally understand why Morrow would want to turn off the tap and/or be more selective about who they deal with and how they manage their relationships with bloggers.
Bloggers are bloggers. They can be the perfect reader and perfect voice for a book to their audience, and by virtue of the random nature of the web that audience can expand and contract and flare off in unpredictable ways.
Or they can be needy nerds with too much time on their hands, no audience, no chance of ever having an audience and/or only in it for the resale value of the books in question.
Or a combination of these things.
Anyway, defining the rules of engagement is not a bad thing.
Basically, it's all about trust and respectful interaction. NOT about payola (*cough* #fridayreads *cough*) and not about one side trying to please the other. They should like each other but we should try to keep the subtext to a minimum.
And that's the thing for me. There has to be transparency - as much as possible - respect and a willingness on both sides to develop the relationship without weird expectations that could compromise the audience's trust.
I think that this is common sense but then again sometimes common sense gets misplaced.
The power of what a blogger can do, the voice that they can achieve through interactions with their communities can't be done by most of the standard channels. The Globe's book section has no discernible human voice. It has a few great voices but they don't command the (dial) tone that the paper broadcasts every day.
Good blogging brings authenticity and a broad audience to any book review and that works best for everybody.
As a blogger, not receiving a copy of a book from a publisher doesn't diminish my enthusiasm for a book or a writer or a publisher.
BOTR, W2RVWS, the ABB. Those are all enthusiasm channels.
They exist because people love books and the web makes it easy to share enthusiasms.
Great conversation!
Let me clarify something that I didn't get quite right in my first comment: it cuts both ways in these relationships. I totally understand why Morrow would want to turn off the tap and/or be more selective about who they deal with and how they manage their relationships with bloggers.
Bloggers are bloggers. They can be the perfect reader and perfect voice for a book to their audience, and by virtue of the random nature of the web that audience can expand and contract and flare off in unpredictable ways.
Or they can be needy nerds with too much time on their hands, no audience, no chance of ever having an audience and/or only in it for the resale value of the books in question.
Or a combination of these things.
Anyway, defining the rules of engagement is not a bad thing.
Basically, it's all about trust and respectful interaction. NOT about payola (*cough* #fridayreads *cough*) and not about one side trying to please the other. They should like each other but we should try to keep the subtext to a minimum.
And that's the thing for me. There has to be transparency - as much as possible - respect and a willingness on both sides to develop the relationship without weird expectations that could compromise the audience's trust.
I think that this is common sense but then again sometimes common sense gets misplaced.
The power of what a blogger can do, the voice that they can achieve through interactions with their communities can't be done by most of the standard channels. The Globe's book section has no discernible human voice. It has a few great voices but they don't command the (dial) tone that the paper broadcasts every day.
Good blogging brings authenticity and a broad audience to any book review and that works best for everybody.
As a blogger, not receiving a copy of a book from a publisher doesn't diminish my enthusiasm for a book or a writer or a publisher.
BOTR, W2RVWS, the ABB. Those are all enthusiasm channels.
They exist because people love books and the web makes it easy to share enthusiasms.
It's a shame that all book bloggers are seemingly lumped into this "amorphous blob".. having become more involved in book blogging this year, I've seen quite the wide range of it. There are people who blog for the genuine interest of reading and sharing what they read - myself included. I've never outright requested an ARC from a publisher. I'll accept it if it's offered - and one I'm interested in reading.
However, I have seen a lot of "book bloggers" (and I use the quotation marks in this case) who are solely out for the free books. It gives the legit ones a bad rap. I've seen more and more lately some blatant hounding of publishers and authors for "free copies" - which completely disgusts me at just the blatant lack of manners, let alone that sense of entitlement that they feel they can do that!
Post a Comment