Self-Published Books: the Bias Goes Marching On!

Every week, Jane Friedman posts the "Best Tweets For Writers" on her blog.

One of the items mentioned on Sunday (I know, I’m behind on my reading. Again. Still.) was this:

The media comments on self-published books (via @MoriahJovan) [for everyone who wonders why the self-pub stigma continues]
@thecreativepenn

I’m not going to comment extensively on all of the things I found in this post, but I thought some of them were certainly deserving of more discussion. Read the entire post first, to get the context from which I have taken these quotes.

Ms. Denise Mort, Book Reviews Editor, Great Falls Tribune

If it’s not good enough to be real-published, it’s not good enough to be published at all.

Note the use of the phrase “real-published.” Note the idiocy of the statement itself. Some of the assumptions behind this philosophy are:

• No self-published books are good.
• All self-published books are bad.
• All “real-published” books are good.
• No “real-published” books are bad.

Albert Einstein once said “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” Since every single one of these four premises can easily be proven wrong, the entire statement falls on its face.

Meredith Jacobs, Book Reviews Editor, The Fayetteville Observer

We do not review POD or self-published books.

Given the number of “real-published” books that are actually produced using POD technology, I certainly wouldn’t be willing to make that statement, myself. Also consider the fact that fair number of books are “real-published” by one-author firms, using Lightning Source as a printing and distribution channel. If Ms Jacobs found a book she considered worthy of her time, but it was from a small press she wasn’t familiar with, would she actually take the time and trouble to be sure the book wasn’t self-published? Or does she take the safe way out, only considering books from big-name NYC houses, so that she’ll never have to run the risk of testing her hypothesis?

Mr. Jim Adams, Book Reviews Editor, The New Hampshire Union Leader

We don’t review self-published books. The general feeling is, if the book was good, a "real" publisher would have published it.

What all of these people are missing is the fact that self-publishing, in all of its forms — POD, short-run belt presses, and e-publishing — is the future. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, and I’ll keep saying it until someone proves me wrong:

Self-publishing is the future.

The “real” publishers can (and will) adapt, migrate, or die. My books (and those of many others) could never have been published by a “real” publisher, for the simple reason that they were never submitted to a “real” publisher. By the time any of my books were finished, I’d already had it with the funnel of the whole query/rewrite/requery process. Ever notice that everything coming out of a funnel is the same shape? I’d rather publish my story, on my terms, and let it sink or swim, than to have it be shaped into something more “suitable” and lost in the river of pablum flowing from the funnel.