Sentences with phrase «why editors and publishers»

It seemed bewildering why editors and publishers weren't chomping at the bit to push back new creative and commercial frontiers.

Alan Jacobs and Timothy Carmody will examine how readers» experiences and expectations are changing in response to the new digital reading landscape, and how and why editors and publishers can address those expectations and soothe those anxieties.

Not exact matches

-- Scott Waxman, Literary Agent and President of the Waxman Agency As a successful author and acquisitions editor, Terry Whalin knows why some proposals bring publishers to attention and why others put publishers to sleep.

• As if we needed another reason to love John Green, his frank discussion of why he feels The Fault in Our Stars has been so wildly successful — in which he credits his editor, publicist and publisher — frankly made this former book editor swoon.

Hell's bells, if we have to make sure we send an edited manuscript to our agents and editors before they «edit» it — and yes, there are a number of authors who pay freelance editors to go over their work before submitting it because they know there will be no real editing done by their editors at certain legacy publishers — and we have to do our own marketing and promotion and do it on our own dime, why are we giving legacy publishers the majority of money earned by our hard work?

It is why you are not hearing a huge backlash against self - publishing writers, and in fact why many editors and publishers in New York actively say this new world is a good thing for everyone.

I still like publishers, literary agents, editors, promotional people, and all the rest of them, which is why I still feature them at my blog while self publishing my books.

John Sinn, a librarian at the Johns Hopkins Sheridan Libraries, said bluntly: «Why don't the editors, who are generally faculty, and the reviewers, who are generally faculty, and the authors, who are almost always faculty or government researchers — why don't they just [publish] on their own and not deal with the publishers?&raqWhy don't the editors, who are generally faculty, and the reviewers, who are generally faculty, and the authors, who are almost always faculty or government researchers — why don't they just [publish] on their own and not deal with the publishers?&raqwhy don't they just [publish] on their own and not deal with the publishers?»

«As a successful author and acquisitions editor, Terry Whalin knows why some proposals bring publishers to attention and why others put publishers to sleep.

Sorry I don't get that idea, and I don't understand why people wouldn't want to have an editor rip the manuscript apart before sending it to a publisher.

Then they can track down these horrible watchdogs... the gall, to try to keep writers informed, how dare they... all those millions they make; strange that they've never asked me for money... why are all these published authors, established agents, publishers, editors agreeing with them... I'm aware that some «innocents» have lost their dew but still refuse to admit the truth - it's not called vanity press for lack of reason - but you've saved many a lamb from the jaws of the wolves, and it's hurting the predators.

Why take the time to highlight the work that a publisher's editors, graphic artists, and production people did to create a quality book in world filled with trusted gatekeepers?

Editors of four of the most interesting and innovative digital publishers sat down with L.A. Times book critic David L. Ulin Saturday to discuss how they do what they do, and why.

The erosion of traditional gatekeepers like reviewers, critics, newspaper book editors, and other refined literary tastemakers makes it clear why even a conservative publisher might lose its head over the prospect of all that money — and be tempted to go into another racket.

And this is one of those «carefully curated» works that are supposed to rise above the «tsunami of swill» and demonstrate why agents / big publishers / editors / big publishers are so very necessaryAnd this is one of those «carefully curated» works that are supposed to rise above the «tsunami of swill» and demonstrate why agents / big publishers / editors / big publishers are so very necessaryand demonstrate why agents / big publishers / editors / big publishers are so very necessary...

Why take the time, energy, and money to do all the work yourself (or hire designers / editors to assist you) when you could pitch the book to traditional publishers, hand the book over to them, claim a nice advance, and sit back while they do the heavy lifting?

E.g by promoting both the publishers name and the editors name in ebook titles (and refuse to sell to stores where these are not equally as browsable attributes as author and title - unlike movies currently I only rarely know the editor / publisher of my favourite books) and redirect remaining marketing spend to fund fan / reader groups to gain «seed knowledge» to push recommendations as to who will like their new authors (ie feeding «if you liked the books of Charles Stross, why not try Richard Winslade's new opus» into amazon's recommendation engine, but with an eye to maximise the authors / editor / publishing houselong term brand appreciation rather than short term sales through erroneous linking only to top 10 authors).

So why should editors, publishers, and agents come up with stats?

Author, editor, and publisher Rosalie Morales Kearns discusses why she started a feminist press (and what it takes to run it), favorite writing exercises, the deeply held interests that fuel her own writing, and more.

That is why I am thrilled to announce that I am joining LexBlog as publisher and editor - in - chief of a new arm of the company that will make legal news, information and analysis more easily and intuitively accessible to legal professionals and the public and that will shine a light on the many bloggers who are writing all this.