Why Self-publishing is BadPosted by John Woodington on July 7th, 2010
One other interesting tidbit I forgot to mention from the Seton Hill writers conference: on the way down to the conference, a fellow writer said to me, “John, I know your thoughts on self-publishing, but you should keep them to yourself while you’re here, because some people here do self-publish, and they might be offended if you said it was bad.”
I do think self-publishing is bad (or, more accurately, I do not think it provides any benefit to the author) and I’m glad that I’m not alone in my thinking. During a seminar led by Annette Rogers, the acquisitions editor at Poisoned Pen Press, Annette was asked by a writer in the audience what she thought about self-publishing, and if a writer should mention self-published books in their query to her. She said (not verbatim here), “If you have self-published a book or books in the past, don’t tell me about them, don’t tell anyone about them. Ever. Hide them in your garage or burn them in your backyard and pretend they never existed, because legitimate publishers are very wary of working with authors who have self-published content already on the market. They are not considered publishing credits by anyone.”
She (and the two other agents present) went on to say that the only reason a person would self-publish a book was because it was not good enough for a publishing house to accept. This made some in the crowd a touch edgy, but I was glad to hear it straight from these guest speakers. No need to raise hopes when there’s no hope to be had when it comes to self-publishing.
My guess is that some extra drinkin’ went on that night for a few people.
