Sentences with phrase «traditional sides of publishing»

As I have done in a couple of posts lately, let me divide the major decisions a writer makes on both the traditional side of publishing and on the indie side of publishing and talk about the fear involved in those decisions.

It's tempting to think the grass is greener on the traditional side of the publishing fence, but as we often learn, sometimes those store fronts are made of cardboard.

Not exact matches

Today, we're talking to YA science fiction author, Beth Revis, about being a hybrid author, the differences in traditional publishing and self - publishing, and marketing from both sides of the fence.

It is important to have separation between the traditional publishing contract and the digital side of things.

They had essentially one toe on the side of the e-books and the other foot and four toes firmly in the traditional publishing arena.

Both sides of this take time, both online and traditional publishing.

And those of us old - timers in publishing know that I am being very, very generous on the traditional side in regards to time and sales.

Since I made the decision to part ways from the traditional path for good a few months ago (mutual goodwill on both sides with my former agent — I'm just much happier with the pace and full control of self publishing), I guess I hadn't thought about the fact that I'm free of that restriction now.

By the way, it's unlikely a traditional publishing company will allow you to do this unless you manage to negotiate it into your book deal contract (the publisher gets the majority of the rights — a frustrating down side).

I mean seriously, if Joe Konrath can make more selling his ebooks at $ 2.99 than he would get in royalties off a $ 24 HARDBACK, there's something seriously wrong with the money side of things in traditional publishing.

With so much weight and power shifting from traditional publishing to the independent side of things, book sales just aren't tabulated the way they once were.

Unless there will be a stripe painted down the middle of the conference, relegating the traditional industry to one side and the self - publishing industry to the other, the intention of the event is to empower anyone who has any involvement at all in the world of books to better understand the nature of the industry in its current climate.

I guess it's a vain attempt to convince myself the grass is greener on the other side of the fence and I'm worthy in the eyes of my traditional published peers who raise their brow over my «vanity.»

(Side Note: For those of you who sold North American rights to a book to traditional publishing and you don't have those rights back yet, why not do an indie book and sell it electronically outside the States?

Authors who are attached to major publishers are on the publishers» side, while self - published authors, many of whom have been rejected by the traditional publishers, are siding with Amazon and other digital publishers.

These are the beginning of my traditional publishing market penetration, the peanut butter side to the equation.

I would add on the side of traditional publishing that 1) It is easier to get national publicity because producers give more weight to a traditionally published book, particularly from a larger house (though some self - published authors certainly do get national publicity as well — it's just harder, in general and 2) a traditional publisher is generally going to bring a great deal of experience to the table — from improving the cover or title to layout and design.

Your position of segregation is yet another shriek in the death knell of traditional publishing, and you are on the wrong side of history in this.

Since there is no vetting process, there are hundreds of thousands of indie titles listed side by side with traditional publishing.

As we consider the story of hybrid authors, let's take a look at the elements of traditional publishing and indie publishing side by side.

Too often, the label of «Indie author» or «self - published author» still evokes the unfair stigma of being sub par, unworthy when compared to authors on the other side of that gilded line of traditional publishing.

Also, make sure this person is also versed in both sides of the business of publishing, both traditional and indie.

While authors and industry experts on both sides of the table have almost come to a consensus that there are benefits to both self - publishing and traditional publishing, it almost feels as though some more hardcore fans of either side still won't lay to rest their original sentiments about the other camp.

This is the new normal and nothing much is going to change over the next few years besides minor details and problems on the traditional publishing side of things.

In light of the traditional publishing vs. self - publishing debates we're covering here on the Ether, I want to bring to your attention Mike Shatzkin «s new column, Publishers adding value on the marketing side.

When I write that the traditional book publishing industry sometimes «appears to be operated by 5 big traditional book publishers in New York for their sole benefit, the rest of the industry be damned» I thought it would be clear that I not in the stands cheering for that side of the industry.

If the WD «aspiring writers» aspire to traditional publication, perhaps their lack of income should be counted toward the traditionally - published income side of the ledger.

Over the last couple of days, I've seen a number of posts by authors from both sides of the traditional vs. indie publishing discussion (yes, I'm being nice here.

(3) And if either side is to grapple effectively with genuine questions of authors» rights and the traditional publishing industry's stance on them, is it truly authentic to keep casting all this as something about the readers?

Today, we're going to look at the traditional publishing side of things and explore advances, royalty rates, and just how you can make a living as a writer.

My feeling was more to do with the attitudes of some in the self - publishing community — the whole Us V's Them thing, pick a side, down with traditional publishing thing — but it was also because I didn't have a clue what to self - publish next.

Many of them continue to work for traditional publishing, well as freelancing on the side.

The reason traditionally published authors & the traditional publishing side has such disdain for self - publishing is not because anyone & everyone CAN do it, but because MOST of the ones who DO IT have self - published either unpublishable garbage OR have taken a manuscript with great potential & published it without decent editing & revision (both of which seriously hinder the enjoyment of the reading audience - not an issue if you're a hobby writer who just wants to entertain family & friends, but a serious issue for anyone who thinks that that sort of thing can hold its own against carefully revised & edited work).

Now let's work out what dividing Traditional Publishing by this bi-partisan discrimination (instead of one - sided partisanship) actually does to that pie.

Marc, I have tremendous respect for the authors you mention, and many others who are doing remarkable work on both traditional and self - publishing sides of the industry, such as CJ Lyons.

That's true on both sides of publishing, though likely moreso in traditional.

However, the YA market is still heavily print - dominated on the traditional publishing side, which would suggest that print readership is still an important component of building a young adult fan base.

This site features multiple news stories per day, and it's one of the best ways to keep up with the dollars and cents side of self - and traditional - publishing.

Jon Reed asks bestselling hybrid author Nick Spalding which side of the publishing fence is best — traditional or indie?

Like you I am not on a side so much as acknowledging the publishing paradigm shift happening under traditional publishing's feet, trying to figure out where it's going and what the publishers of the future will.

I've met C.J. at writing conferences, and I find her to be the most honest, reasonable, and experienced author who has success playing on both sides of the publishing field — traditional and self - pub.

We all need the business side of this game, whether indie or traditional no one will read our books if they aren't published.

Well, I don't think the odds are quite that bad, for self - published authors anyway (although I have no way of quantifying the number of writers stuck in traditional publishing's «slush pile» so don't know on that side).

I've talked a lot about the issues facing authors on the Big 6 side of traditional publishing, from agent hunting to contracts.

Some traditionally published authors (if they are able) now self - publish some of their work, and on the other side indie authors sign up with traditional publishers to handle some parts of the process.

But most people in today's publishing industry — on both sides of the self - publishing fence — agree on the definition of traditional / legacy publishing.

Thriller and suspense remained strong in traditional publishing, while romance, of course, has migrated heavily to the self - publishing side of the industry.

You and Data Guy didn't have to do this and I am humbled by everything that you do to help authors understand the business side of publishing and open their eyes to all its different possibilities, be it traditional, self, or hybrid.

Reading this confirmed my dream for traditional publishing, but I totally support both sides and see the pros and cons of each.

Last year the Breakthrough Institute, the pragmatic think tank that's been a thorn in the side of traditional environmentalism since its inception in 2003, published an essay by Peter Kareiva, chief scientist of The Nature Conservancy; Robert Lalasz, TNC's director of science communications; and Michelle Marvier, an ecologist at Santa Clara University.