Yes, it's tricky. This is my main beef with self-publishing - that many people who do it don't ensure high quality. So while we can pick up a book in Waterstones and know it's been through a filter, anything self-published could be anywhere on the quality scale, from great to rubbish.

Bring back the old days. I'm feeling like a Luddite these days. <sigh>

Yes, it's tricky. This is my main beef with self-publishing - that many people who do it don't ensure high quality. So while we can pick up a book in Waterstones and know it's been through a filter, anything self-published could be anywhere on the quality scale, from great to rubbish.

I don't think it's quite that straightforward. Publishers' filters aren't all set to 'quality'; they're more likely to be set to what they believe is sellable. When I pick up books in Waterstones and read the first few pages I'm usually dismayed at the utter predictability of it; the competent but unexciting writing, etc. And if you listen to editors talking about what they want these days, you don't have to look too far between the lines to realise what they want is what's safe and been done before, for the most part.

As for self-publishing, yes of course there is a ton of rubbish. But readers can be discerning: they can check the credits of the writer, read the first few pages, etc. Which brings us back to the value of good credits: they're not just for cover letters; they can be used when selling your own stuff.

I think what would concern me more about AD is the suspicion that it's mainly writers selling to other writers - which is sort of what worries me about a lot of the very small presses I see people signing up with.

At the risk of thread-jacking - I know people (self and indie published) who publicise their books mainly through Facebook groups, Twitter etc. I'm not making a comment on quality per se, because some of it is really very good (much better than some of the stuff published through the big boys) - but at the same time, in the majority of cases, I really wonder if they're selling to anyone outside a kind of online extended writers' group?

I know I've bought stuff purely because it was by the friend of a friend, and I'm sure I can't be the only one.

Terry, I don't disagree, but at least the ones in Waterstones are competently written. They must have features which make them saleable - whatever those are.

OTOH, I know at least one person who has self-published without getting any feedback from anyone and no copy-edit. <cringe>

Astrea, I agree. I am often happy to buy a friend's book because I am interested to read their work. If I don't like it I won't buy another. But that's different from anonymous sales, isn't it? I don't mind people who are being trad published using facebook to let us know about their publication date etc, but I don't really like it when self-pubbed people are constantly pushing their novels at me.

Is that discrimination? Yes, probably.

in the majority of cases, I really wonder if they're selling to anyone outside a kind of online extended writers' group?

I hadn't thought of this but now I'm sure you're right, Astrea. I did have one sale I think on AD and the purchaser, a Womag writer emailed me to say some nice things about it. Immediately I felt pressured into buying one of her stories. I didn't but that pressure exists, doesn't it? SOmetimes you want to by their stuff oc rourse but even in those cases if you bought everyone's book/story written by everyone you'd met on a writing site you'd never ever get round to reading them all because meanwhile other novels would be coming along by writers you don't know personally but whom you very much admire.

Catkin - just read your post. But no - I don't think I've sold even one. It's my own fault because I don't publicise them.

Oh my God - they're not even selling a few? That makes them even less worthwhile, then. It's not your fault - the whole point of putting stories on someone else's site is that THEY should be doing the publicity and making the sales on your behalf. How else can they justify keeping a big cut of the money?

PLEASE BUY MY STORIES!!!!!!!!

Won't! I don't mind reading on screen for work-related reasons, but there's no way I'm going to take up on-screen reading for pleasure. I'll just keep on buying WW.

Catkin, my feelings about reading online are the same.

lol, Catkin! Don't blame you!!!!

the whole point of putting stories on someone else's site is that THEY should be doing the publicity and making the sales on your behalf. How else can they justify keeping a big cut of the money?

Yup!

But I'll buy your stories, too - I'm the opposite to Catkin and Debac, I very rarely buy paper book any more, but I have more than 300 on my iPad mini How did that happen, for goodness' sake?

Curse you, Amazon, with your 'Buy with 1 Click' button!

I don't mind reading on my Kindle but I still prefer a paperback ideally. I just bought a book about writing on Kindle for about £3 which was £24 as a paperback. Couldn't justify the extra for the book, despite wanting to feel the paper in my hands.

I was quite struck, at the Getting Published conference a few weeks back, how the panel I was chairing - Sam Copeland/RCW, Jodie Marsh/UA and Angus Cargill/Faber - said that they took no notice of these kinds of things on a writers CV. They also said they take almost no notice of a synopsis... (the groan that went up from the audience would have been funny, if it hadn't been so heartfelt! I did point out that writing synopses is a very good development tool for yourself...)

I do think that's not universal, since I've also heard agents who say they do like to know if a writer's work is out there, and that if they like the covering letter and the chapters they DO read the synopsis.

But, what that does suggest to me is that it's really not worth sending stuff out to places like the one under discussion, purely for the sake of being able to put it on your writers CV, if it's not somewhere you'd like your work to be anyway. It very unlikely to help.

Good points, Emma. Thanks. Yes, if I had got something into Mslexia or somewhere like that then I'd definitely want to put that in my covering letter. Perhaps I should try to get some shorts in good markets and in comps.

What worries me about that is that I don't think I'm a natural short story writer and many of my shorts sound like novel excerpts, without that being the intention.

Where magazine editors are concerned, the majority ask you to list your best three or four sales in your cover letter. One or two say they're not interested at all in knowing; a few even want all identifiers stripped from the ms so they can read every entry 'blind'. So, if you're planning on getting into the short fiction magazine market (at least where SF/Fantasy/Horror/Crime and perhaps others I'm not familiar with are concerned), your cover letter's going to best served by showing either a few good sales or nothing. I don't know for sure, but I suspect listing a string of low-to-no paying markets could actually damage your chances, i.e. because it could be interpreted that you're writing below the quality line in order to score hits.