Whom I really wanted to insult are the “ja(y)nes” on this post who think they are actually reviewers. The founder, Dear Author, Jane, I believe, is a lawyer, who must not be a very busy lawyer at that, thinks she (and others) can insult behind factious names. This post and its reviews go beyond the pointing out of typos, it goes after the individual, be it an author or publisher. To be honest in a critique is to critique the work, professionally pointing out its weaknesses and strengths.

You, my dear Ja(y)nes, are no better then the bullies in High School, and if I had to guess, you were probably picked on by the bullies and now you discovered the internet and it's anonymity, you justify your bullish behavior with the righteous “nose-in-the-air” “tell it like it is, if you like it or not”.

Come out from behind your false names; publish your true identity and your worth. Prove your talent and maybe your post will gain the respect it should deserve.

Your posts are no better than any blog out there on the internet, what gives a newspaper credibility? You all know the answer, it is just deplorable you don't live by that same rule of publishing.

Enough.

Well, Dexter is doing rather superbly well for itself. It maybe that there is a market for it?

Shit, is Dexter gay? How did I miss that?

I was referring to the serial killers portion of the “a series about gay serial killers.” statement, rather than the gay portion. Does anyone really care if the protags in their serial killer fiction are gay or not? *shrug* probably… *double shrug*

BTW, I've seen your promos for your current release including today's. Typos right in the subject line. I think you've even promo'd on Trinity's Yahoo group, possibly even with the one that has HUMOROUS spelled wrong.

Oh, noes! I saw this one. It did have humorous spelled wrong in the subject line. I don’t think it was today. Might have been yesterday since I have most groups on digest, but I could probably go back and look in my deleted emails and find it. Not that it matters all that much. I just happen to remember it because there’s been a lot of promos from this author recently. Three separate ones for the same book on the same day (yesterday) on Raine Delight’s group alone. I can see why Sarcastica might get annoyed.

Give me the top five or so most recognized epublishers and most of us will probably be able to agree on their general brand.

I would be tremendously interested in getting your, and anyone’s, opinion on what the general brands are of the top epubs. So, Samhain, EC, Loose ID, Amber Quill, LSB is what I consider the top five. What is the branding of those, do you think?

It’s an interesting topic and one that I think could help new authors especially when they’re looking at where to sub their MS for the first time.

@AnneD: Probably because with epub books there is less distance between the reader and the publisher. Pbooks are generally bought from a publisher neutral bookstore either online or in person. Many readers probably don't even notice who publishes the books they buy. I know I don't. Whereas ebooks can be purchased directly from an epub and readers are encouraged to purchase directly to cut out middleman costs. So unless the reader buys from a publisher neutral ebookstore she can't help but identify the book with the epublisher.

I bought Ilona Andrews' short story from Samhain. I went to Samhain to buy it – it's a Samhain story. Who is Andrews' print publisher? Not a clue. I don't pay much attention to book spines so I'd have to go look.

I want to comment on this without commenting on anything having to do with either the review, the author or publisher involved, because I think this has been skated around in the comments but no one has quite said it.

The reason is because epublishers, more than just about any print publisher, have developed two levels of branding: author branding and publisher branding. I suspect this has happened for two reasons: 1) because readers have become understandably wary of the quality of ebooks, given the ease with which anyone with a computer and a few tech skills can start a website and 2) because, originally, the online audience to which epublisher were marketing was limited and so the publishers were more intimately known by that audience but also needed to find ways to distinguish themselves within that small audience. Give me the top five or so most recognized epublishers and most of us will probably be able to agree on their general brand.

I would say, arguably, that the only print publisher that’s specifically also done this is Harlequin with their category lines, where readers know what to expect with each line, and where readers would consider their trust to be broken if, for instance, Harlequin published a paranormal erotic romance within the Presents line.

But within epublishing, publishers have developed a company brand, where readers will go buy not just based on the author, but on the publisher. This isn’t a phenomenon that I’ve just pulled out of nowhere, at notable online book retailer commented about it to me while in conversation with a Publisher’s Weekly writer, noting that Samhain had two levels of branding in this way, and it was something new to him.

I think this two-level system of branding is the reason that epublishers bear much of the responsibility in readers’ eyes for poor quality of books, and why, when a reader has a bad experience with one book from that publisher, s/he will assume it’s going to be likewise throughout the publisher’s catalog. In other words, the publisher branding works both for and against the publisher as well as the other authors writing for that publisher. It’s why, in my presentations on epublishing, I stress so much that an author know exactly what a publisher is publishing before they sign a contract with them.

You wouldn’t want to be my critque partner would you? :)

LA

Second, I review for more than one site. You Gotta Read is one of them. I’m honest and nitpicky about my reviews. I tell it the way it is, whether the world will like it or not. You should not boycott one review group because you didn’t agree with one review. We choose;we give our opinion as readers or whatever line of work we may be in.

I am soon to be published with two different publishers. I can only hope someone edits my work to death after I have done the same, is honest when it stinks, and that I will learn something constructive about my writing. We all can learn to improve. I’ve read bestsellers that were so ‘off their game’ I think a name was all that sold the book. Not a single writer starts out a bestselling author, no book begins as absolute perfection. Think on that. Think about you’re work. So, I guess what I’m trying to say in an essence is you are flaming my reviews and my work as well. I really don’t like it, but I don’t plan to leave a good review site because of the negativity.

by Laura Ashton June 9th, 2009 at 9:09 am Reply to this comment

1. Despite the obvious inadequacies of The Claiming, in defense of the publisher, I feel should point out a couple things. (I feel should point out a couple things? Did you leave something out?)

2. I believe she has a short story with Freya Bower. (That should be Freya’s Bower.)

3. I believe the prepondurance of SirenBookstrand books are well written and if they're like mine, well edited. (That should be preponderance.)

4. Are they yours or do you get them done. (You need a question mark.)

5. What kind of name is that BTW. (You need a question mark. Actually, there are several instances in which you need question marks, so I won’t post them all.)

6. Heavens to Bettsy. (I think that is usually spelled–Betsy.)

The fact is you are upset and the typos are forgivable here in my opinion. I’ve probably made some myself. However, before posting I hit preview and check, then when I see the actual comment I check again. And I’ve honestly had to go back in and edit for a typo twice.

Like I said, it’s forgivable here. I think. But I don’t see it that way when an author is promoting. Best foot forward. Be professional in your promotional posts. The typos don’t look good there. It’s amateurish. If it was something you caught and corrected, wonderful. But you keep posting the same promo over and over and evidently never check.

And no. This isn’t meant to be “mean girl” mentality. Just saying. Hopefully, from now on you’ll check your promo posts carefully. And if so, then the discussion on this blog has been helpful in yet another way.

And that means using spell check, my dear.

Boy some of us are really running out of things to talk about. When they put spell check in the subject line I’ll do that. Thanks for your help, dear.

I'll tell you what Sciatica, when they're ready to publish my subject lines, I will exercise more care.

@Laura Ashton

If you want people to think you’re a competent, professional writer, you need to produce competent, professional promotion. And that means using spell check, my dear.

I bought Ilona Andrews’ short story from Samhain. I went to Samhain to buy it – it’s a Samhain story. Who is Andrews’ print publisher? Not a clue. I don’t pay much attention to book spines so I’d have to go look.

In fact I just spent two weeks going over the edits for my second book. My first book, Jasmine's Urban Cowboys was the next Menage Amour novel released after The Claiming.

Don’t you just love blatant self-promotion?

Well, Dexter is doing rather superbly well for itself. It maybe that there is a market for it?

Shit, is Dexter gay? How did I miss that?

I haven't read this book but if it has major editing problems as you all claim then you should badmouth the publisher or wow, here's an idea- the EDITOR.

Methinks you have reading comprehension issues.

Opinions are fine- we all have them but what I've read here today is true slander.

Hey, have we had the “You’re all jealous bitches!!” yet? If not, it’s coming. After that, “You’re all Nazis!!” will probably be next.

I have to wonder how many of you actually read this book or are you simply jumping on this ‘crucify an author' bandwagon and then promoting your own book here.

Jesus, here comes Misery.

Someone said that e-publishing has a bad rap and you're right- this doesn't help. I'd like to think that as a group of e-published authors we would stick together. How else will we turn reader's ideas about e-publishing around?

For that comment, you have now become The Fucktard of The Day. Congrats.

Dropping out of the group was fine. Speaking of it afterwards was not. You can see that I'm not one for strokes but malicious talk and ongoing banter when the book is not even available anymore? That is not productive at all.

God, but you’re stupid.

If you’re on your vacation, what are you doing wasting your holiday time online? Shouldn’t you be wearing a satin kaftan singing Koom-by-ya around a campfire or something?

Everything else I could have done without.

Hey, is somebody making you read this crap? If I was you I’d punch them and run away as fast as you can. Nobody should be made to read an online site against their wishes. Seriously, you should sue.

First – I think you are all dried up old HAGS and have no life at all. You are probably post menopausal, divorced, because your real life never amounted to your ROMANCE NOVEL fantasy life and because of that, you have no hope in ever finding a partner except in your romance novels.

Darling, you’re ever so angry. I’m guessing you weren’t breast-fed as a child?

I AM GAY – Donna – can't be a homophobe

Of course you can, you obviously feel bitter towards lesbians darling.

You are fairly stupid methinks W.H.

Ok, that was fun, now I gotta scoot.