Troy

Nah'Sun I listened to the more than two hours of the interview (while driving and working out today). I was actually going to mention Teri's controversy with Kwame and Caleb, here but decided against it. I've seen Teri enough times to know she is "eccentric". Nothing she said surprised me, but it was still an interesting interview. It is interesting that Teri recognizes that publishing has changed but fails to recognize that it is those changes that makes it almost impossible for someone to replicate her success. That is not to say other writers can not be successful. However if Teri Woods came out in 2012 I seriously doubt her success would have followed the same trajectory. Listening to her it seems the bootlegging of books has gotten worse. If she thinks the ebook world is any better she'll be in for a rude awakening. Treasure Blue, the first caller, is my man. A good writer, humble and appreciative of any support he gets. He told me the story about Shannon Holmes years ago. I'm glad people like Mack Mama are doing programs like this. I even added her show to Teri Woods Page. I wish there were journalists covering the industry a lot of the nonsense could be eliminated by simply finding out what is actually happening. I can also see, after listening to the interview why you feel Teri had so much influence on the self publishing. I would concede that she may have help influenced urban/street lit authors, but there were just too many other self published authors that came before her. Plus the fact that technology improvements which coincided with Teri rise probably had a bigger impact on the self-publishing revolution Nah'Sun check out my bestsellers list from 1998 several of the books were self-published -- most notably Jesscia care Moore self published not only her work but that of Saul Williams as well. Some of these book were self-published in 1997, well before Teri "hand made" books. The revolution was sparked before Teri came along. By the time urban fiction became wildly popular the self-publishing revolution was sparked and in the history books. I witnessed this too.

Nah'Sun I honest believe that you and Hickson have a good strategy by making you content available exclusively on your websites. You are slightly ahead of the curve as it will take time for consumers to feel completely comfortable purchasing from a non-brand name site. I was selling books online long before people (especially Black folks) felt comfortable transacting online -- or even had computers connected to the internet. But I've also watched sales grow as our community because more connected and more comfortable buying on-line What I suggest you Brothers do, to increase your reach, is to setup affiliate programs so that others (including the likes of AALBC.com), can sell your products in exchange for a commission. I've been working to strategies to make this happen with others with varying degrees of success. Once I get my thoughts together I'll begin to outline them with specifics actions. I believe cooperative strategies is only way we will be able to keep the Amazon's out of our pockets and survive over the long haul Nah'Sun (all authors here) take a page out of Hickson's play book an use the signature capability to insure a link to your website is included with each of your posts here.

Hey man I checkout the mag -- thanks for the plug. Would you mind if I posted a image of the cover here?

Hickson Amazon is a beast and will be difficult to contend with. I'm both and affiliate and a competitor. I view Google and social media the same way. The reason I have this schizophrenic relationship with all of these entities is that they produce value and useful services but at the same time are monopolistic and greedy and because of their greed they are also a negative force in the marketplace. As you know Amazon is now publishing big name authors. The idea of preventing them from acquiring content will become increasing difficult over time. In fact Amazon is in a better position to control access to content over the long haul. Even authors you and I know are now saying please "check me out on AMAZON" and providing a link -- skipping there own websites the website of their publisher, and of course AALBC.com (AALBC.com still has more content on many authors than anyone else). Until the day comes that someone competes with Amazon on price, Amazon will remain dominant. The first thing I learned when I went into business for myself over 20 years ago is that people want the cheapest one. People are not, for example, going to buy book from AALBC.com because we are Black owned and support Black writers. Now I can sell a product that Amazon does not have and if it is sufficiently desirable people will buy it -- so Hickson on I'm not disputing your strategy. I'm just saying it is very difficult -- especially for new entrants who don't have a following or serious paper to create one. I used to sell Dr. John Henrik Clarke's "A Great and Mighty Walk," (an excellent historical film narrated by actor Wesley Snipes) on AALBC.com for about $45 -- for a DVD! At the time no one could find it. My wholesale cost was something like $32 -- I could not buy enough to fulfill demand. Today, just a few years later, the entire film is on YouTube, for free,..."FREE ENTERPRISE". Hickson "FREE ENTERPRISE" is not free. But that is a topic of another conversation...

Nah'Sun, you are right about what I said about Omar. In Omar's day he was what I considered the hardest working man in publishing - a relative machine. But by today's standards he would be par for the course, based upon standards set by many of today's urban authors. While I would agree that an independent making millions on their own has no incentive to sign a deal with a publishing company, all of the authors we are talking about have signed deals -- including Teri. While you may be right about the relative popularity of McMillan versus Morrison we really don't know -- that is what makes the point moot. Which is why I suggested the survey. Cynique, you are motivated by the desire to write -- and yes technology made it possible. Technology absolutely launched the self-publishing revolution you took part in. Many writers are motivated by solely by money and fame. Often writers motivated by money will sell better than writers motivated by writing. They simply work harder and are more aggressive at self-promotion -- technology helped in this regard too. Many writers especially the literary types brittle at the idea is aggressive self-promotion. They need a publicist to do the work for them. The problem is we have reached a point where writing solely to make money is crowding out writers motivated by the art. This is not just self-published author trying to get rich. Big publishing houses are asking writers to add more sex or make the novel "grittier" is not unusual. My guess is that Black writers are asked to do this most often. Authors interested in money comply and write for the market, those who don't, don't get deals or are forced to go to a small independent press, or self-publish. By mainly they just op-out of publishing altogether. I don't think anyone believes, for a second, that the best writers are the ones being published, and selling the most books today. This system is simply not setup for that. It is setup to make money. ...and the downward spiral continues.

True Cynique, but I can even get that far. Having difficulty believing it all. The first story I heard made it seem like the kids were prepubescent. But they may have been of legal age or presented themselves as such. If that is the case it may just be a case of a gay dude caught out there banging the wrong cats. Again, in my mind, this is gossip, not newsworthy, and certainly does not warrant a man losing his livelihood. I know I'm biased now because I saw the film and have some insight into Kevin's journey. I hope he did not take advantage of underage kids...

Last night I stumbled across a movie called Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey on Netflix last night. Elmo was more my kids generation than mine. Even they were more into the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers than Sesame Street. Anywhoo... I decided to watch the movie 'cause Elmo's puppeteer is a Brother. So I watched the movie it was fine; your basic Brother from humble beginnings makes good -- really good in Kevin's case. Low and behold I learned later in the news that homeboy actually quit his job yesterday in light of allegations of having homosexual sex with a minor. The first cat took the allegation back and a second dude has now made another accusation. What a shame. If the accusations are false, look how much damage has been caused. I'm not even sure if the media should report allegations. Shoot maybe I'm just contributing to the mess -- but I cat is out the bag and I want to make the point that the media should not be able to destroy lives so easily. Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey

Shawneda, there is some information about Teri Woods and other Black authors on this site Nah'Sun I can't speak to how much money E. Lynn, Terry, Omar or Woods generated as self-published authors as I don't have that information, I suspect you don't have their financials either. I was not aware that Harris and Tyree wrote chick lit or sista-girl books. Besides I'm talking about an industry not any one genre. Again we will continue to disagree on who had a greater influence on other authors in terms of self-publishing. I'd be willing to bet that Author Shawneda is not alone, and that more self-published authors, and authors in general, are more familiar with Omar Tyree than Teri Woods. One can not be influenced by an author they are not familiar with. A Sidebar: Nah'Sun (anyone) do you think popularity of Urban/Street is waning? I see that Teri Woods had a new book come our last week. I did not heard a peep about it anywhere on-line, but it could be a function of what is happening with Black books on-line rather than the waning popularity of the street fiction. I'll see if I see the book on 125th street later... Hickson will be happy to know the eBook is price at $9.99 -- Hachette Book Group USA, takin' no shorts!

Na'Shun Admin=Troy I happened to be deleting spam account and forgot to switch back to my regular user accounts. I think I read your post and understood what you wrote -- I just disagree. To say the E. Lynn and Terry were not know for their guerrilla markets belies a lack of knowledge of these authors. But lets forget them for a second. Have you ever heard of Omar Tyree? He was out there grinding, slinging self published works before anyone ever heard of Teri Woods. There is nothing that Teri has done that Omar did not due first. Teri did not start anything, she successfully rode the wave, initiated by others. You are right, this really shouldn't be a debate...

I just read the article it was interesting but largely misses the point of what is actually harming publishing. Actually some of the comments to the article were more enlightening. Take point #1 for example: 1. Publish for readers, not authors. The 21st-century publishing environment has tipped the balance still further towards the importance of the reader. The garrote that Amazon has applied, using its market share to obtain ever higher discounts from publishers that, in turn, allow price cuts that secure still more customers, is possible because of the behemoth's direct relationship to readers. To break this stranglehold, publishers must start selling direct. The longer-term advantages of using their own customer databases to sell at full price, rerouting the additional revenue into marketing, will outweigh any initial discomfort about eschewing the services of the world's largest booksellers. This assumes that all publishers will work in concert with each other when selling directly to the consumer to keep prices at an artificially high level. They will not happens because they are in competition with each other -- besides that is called collusion and there are laws against this. Besides publishers already sell directly, but customers prefer to purchase from Amazon because of the lower prices. Consumers, if given a choice will usually opt the lowest price for a given product. Sounds obvious but this is apparently reasoning lost on the big publishers. This also ignores the role of the bookseller. Booksellers know their audience and can steer their customers to or away from book in a way that an obviously biased publisher will not.

So Hickson, I gather from your response that you think the strategy is a good one for a big publisher? But bad for a publisher your size? See here is the thing: Before eBooks became so popular. Independent publisher were all hyped up on print on demand (POD). One of biggest mistakes I saw self-published authors make was pricing their POD books too high. They all said the same thing, they had to price the book at this price because it cost them so much to get printed, and if they priced it any less they would not make any money. Sure their reasoning makes sense, until they realize no one wants to pay that much for a book by an unknown author. It is not a pleasing thing to see dejected authors at an event unable to unload their $19.99 paperback books. Now Hickson you may have successfully positioned your product as a high end, but the vast majority of self-published authors and small presses will have to content with competing against the prices set by the big houses. Also the rationale that ebook prices have to subside the print books is a rational the big houses used and largely failed with in the consumers eyes. I suspect big houses will move toward eBooks only publications with prices like Zane's book above. This is the environment authors have to compete in today and many are cutting bait and calling it quits. Have you read Donna Grant and Virgina DeBerrys recent letter about putting their career on hold? Have you seen Zanes Free sample (eBook)?

Actually, Terri was following on the heals of authors a decade earlier like E. Lynn Harris self-publishing Invisible Life and and Terry McMillian's with her novel Mama. Even these authors were proceeded by independent Black presses like Glenn Thompson's Writers and Readers, Haki Madhubuti's Third World Press, Kassahun Checole's Africa World Press, and others. People always thought bout making books, but the financial investment was just too high prior to all this technology which made it possible for almost anyone. It was not until Terry McMillan started selling book out the proverbial trunk of her car that big publishers began really publishing Black books in earnest. Today instead of technology continuing to democratize publishing it is raising the barriers to entry as independents can not afford the sophisticated technology to market, promote and compete on price.

Who the heck is "elias gutierrez"? Six of the top 10 Google searches, bringing traffic to my site yesterday was for "elias gutierrez" or some variation of that name. Each time the page from my site returned was one about the life of a famous author Bebe Moore Campbell I went to her page and found out that Bebe's daughter Maia Campbell was married to an Elias Gutierrez. The 1st result on another search on both names was a website called celebrity hook ups. If these are all the same people, Maia is an actress who broke up Elias. But why are all these people looking for elias gutierrez all of a sudden? Bebe Moore Cambell

Hickson; Time is time and money is money. Your equating time with money is fine, but know that it is that is an artificial construct, a matter or opinion really, not some immutable law of nature. Hickson I suspect if you had the power you would have all publishers set a minimum price for an eBook and I right? Today (11/20/12) Zane's publisher Simon & Schuster one of the Big 5 publishing houses released Zane latest in eBook format only for $2.99 Do you (anyone) think this is a good idea or a bad idea? Why?

Nah'Sun, exactly. And this is natural because that is the way our system is designed to work; people will do anything that someone else will pay them to do. This leads to conditions and behaviors that do not produce the best products. For example, there are people who are not very good at writing and may not actually care very much for the art, but who can generate more revenue from their writing than a much better writer could -- because of skills that have nothing to do with writing. Now that is not to say the only those who love and appreciate the art of writing are the only ones who are good at it. It is just that when given the choice between people who write solely for money and the trappings of fame and those who write for love of the craft -- I'll choose those who write for love of it, every day of the week.

Cynique I was hoping someone would eventually articulate what I truly believe is the truth. As usual, you did it better than I could have. Though I doubt the majority of people will actually "get" what you wrote -- for free :-) See we were raised in a system where everything is for sale. The problem is our focus on making more and more money which perverts the product we were originally selling. Whether is sports, music, clothing or food. Now nothing is free, really, there is a cost for everything. I just don't think the price we pay for most things reflect cost in the least bit... And we all worse off as a result.

Mel your daughter is obviously a chip off the ole block. The statement is indeed profound. With so much written material being published and delivered to the reader, without costing the reader a cent. It is amazing readers are willing to pay $0.99 to read anything. Newspapers still struggle get enough of us to read content behind their pay walls so that they can fund journalists to do some actual reporting. In their struggle to make money, newspapers subject us to a distracting number of advertisements and span articles, unnecessarily, across multiple pages assaulting us with even more banner ads. Meanwhile readers post the fee based articles on their blogs undermining the fees and advertising revenue publishers might otherwise collect. The result is fewer newspapers, making due with fewer journalists who are paid less, and spending more time simply talking about the news pulled off the AP wire. Look at what has happened to all the big black websites; look at the material they publish. It is like the Black internet has become "BETized". One can argue you get what you pay for, huh?

Romney and the republicans are largely irrelevant, having permanently alienated gays, Blacks, women, non-Christians, environmentalists, the poor, the educated and it appears Spanish speaking immigrants. Look out for Hillary 2016.

Hi Joseph, because some writers are paid does not necessarily mean all (or any) writers should be paid. Consider this; every Blogger on the Huntington Post and other popular websites, that I asked, are not being paid. I would be willing to bet after expenses are accounted for most self publishers authors haven't made any money. There is a stat floating around saying that 70% of traditionally published books are not profitable. Many smaller publishers pay authors no advance at all, offering instead 50% of revenues (after expenses), with no guarantee of ever earning a cent. Sure this is anecdotal and not supported by data. But there is enough evidence to make similar argument: There are writers for popular websites and authors of published book who are not paid, why should anyone else be paid. But of course the statement above is flawed for the same reason.

At the risk of beating a dead horse; Hickson your books are not published with all caps. I presume you don't think that is a good idea for a book. Why would you think it is a good idea here, particularly when the all the feedback is negative -- at best indifferent? Everyone don't get me wrong I don't think eBooks are inherently bad. In fact, I think eBooks are a great alternative to have. The problem is the currently business models simply do support a world with eBooks very well. Hickson I think the business model where an eBook is a "rental" is perhaps the best way to think about it. I'd prefer to call it "On Demand". Ultimately, I believe, all the world's content whether it is music, movies, encyclopedias, novels, whatever, will not be owned but available on demand. No one buys encyclopedia's any more. They are costly, take up room, and are out of date the second you buy them. Do one really need to have that expensive Blue Ray Disk sitting in a cabinet gathering dust, when you can call the movie up in a split second over a Netflix type service. Music is leading the way. I can find more music, more easily, for free, on Youtube than I can on iTunes. I see book following a similar trajectory as music. People expect information to be accessible, when and wherever they want it -- for free. Technology is driving the world in this direction. Content creators and publishers are fighting back, but technology is winning... This of course leads to one big problem; How do content creators get paid? With so much information being made freely available how do the musicians novelist and encyclopedia contributors get compensated? Do we want a world where are encyclopedia are cobbled together by a hodgepodge of volunteers like Wikipedia? Can a musician survive in a world where their music is freely available for anyone to download, on-line the second it is made available. Can a novelist earn a living wage in a highly competitive environment where a $0.99 ebook is considered the norm? Until these issues are sorted the book world will be in trouble and as I've written before I simply do not see anything on the horizon the address these issues. One way to think about this issue is to question the very premise of whether writers should be paid to write.

As far as I'm concerned Miracle Whip can bite the dust too. Hellman's Mayo -- accept no substitutes! I was raised on the Wonder Bread (what a great name for the product). I stopped eating it long ago when I learned whole wheat bread was much better and I discovered fresh baked bread of various varieties tasted much better. Besides who the hell eats Twinkies and Ho-Ho any more? When I was a child I LOVED Suzie Q's (truth be told every few years or so I'll buy a pack of Suzie Q's). Several years ago, out of culinary curiosity, I brought a Twinkie that was battered, deep fried -- and if that was not enough it -- covered with confectioner' sugar. Honestly it was rather tasty but my rational side would not let me eat more than a bite. I think the demise of Hostess may be a signal that America is trending toward healthier eating.

The only thing that distinguishes an amateur writer from a professional one is that the professional is paid. One can not make assumptions on the quality of writing based upon the writers professional status. In an ideal world the best writers would indeed be paid and the best writers paid the most. We all know this is simply not true. Every agent has many stories of good writers who can't get published by a traditional publisher. Writers who simply don't have the constitution, temperament, ability, knowledge or energy to Hustle like a Hickson and no money for advertising and promotion, so are ill suited for self-publishing and their books never see the light of day. When money is involved market forces become a factor and has a direct impact on the writing. If there is no demand for one's writing, there is no money to be made; and therefore no professional writer emerges. Some writers, good and bad alike, write solely for money and are more than happy to write whatever they, or their publishers, have determined the market demands; Black characters in a gritty urban environment, a little violence, some sex, reenforcing those negative stereotypes -- no problem. Too much focus on money perverts the art. In our current environment their is even more pressure to write to a known formula. I think there is a correct answer to the question. I'm just not sure I know it. I do think journalists show be paid, just not by big corporations or wealthy individuals interested more in ratings and propaganda (all tied to revenue generation) than discovering and sharing the truth. Writegirl it was actually Cynique who was kind enough to post the email from Donna and Virginia.

Hickson would you believe the question I posed, was actually a statement by an well known writer, someone who has been writing professionally longer than you have been living. I did not post his name because I did not want to misinterpret/misconstrue him as I play devils advocate in defense of the statement (which may not reflect his thoughts). Hickson what do you think about? libraries that loan eBooks to people from anywhere they have internet access (without stepping foot into the library). People paying 0.99 cents for an eBooks but being able to loan them to friends electronically as many times as they like Cynique I'm not sure "art for the sake of art" applies to making money from your work, but more to the idea that art stands on it own, independent of anything else. Some artists argue that "art for the sake of art" is a sake is nonsensical, as would I. And readers do pay to the extent that they waste valuable time reading garbage that should never have been published. Prior to the self publishing and eBook revolutions. Gatekeepers; agents, editors at publishing houses, and played an importation role ensuring that bad writing was not published and quality was recognized. (ignoring the fact diverse, quality Black stories were also shut out as well). Since anyone with a keyboard can create a book today we need a rational system for sorting out the good books from the bad ones while creating an environment where skilled writers can flourish. The system we have where the best "marketed" book wins gives us just that -- the best marketed books. Writegirl I would not devalue anything you create based upon the price you charge. Ideally price is a based upon demand for your product. It is perfectly rational to give a product away, to build a name for yourself and begin charging more when demand increases. Just 'cause you give away some books to build your brand does not mean your writing is not as good as it would be if you were a house hold name with the ability to charge full price. A brand new, unknown author, even with a great book will need to promote, advertise or "Hustle like a Hickson". Since most people can grind like Hickson, they will need to promote which usually entails giving away a TON of books. A good way for an author to build a brand would be to purchase advertising, using a quality banner and advertise the fact that they are giving away, for a limited time, free book. If the book is good they will jump start their fan base ...but I digress.

You call it free thinking, some call it blasphemy

Should writers be paid to write? The question does not come out of thin air. It is born out of the fact that there is pressure from businesses to pay writers increasingly less for their work and it is getting harder for a free lance writer to make a full time living writing. As a result, it is harder for all the intermediaries between the reader and the writer; editors, reviewers, booksellers (on and off line), publishers, publicists, distributors, etc, to make money. This starts a process which feeds in on itself. As the writing profession becomes more challenging it discourages talented new writers from entering the profession, which reduces quality, which in turn reduces customers and a downward spiral begins. Author Victoria Christopher Murray was asked recently, by a reader, why doesn't she make a eBooks available for free online? In an environment where many authors make their eBooks available for free (usually as a promotional measure), the expectation of the reader that eBooks readily available for free is increasing. The availability of free ebooks today is such that I can legally download a new or classic title, and have enough reading material to last me the rest of my life. Besides, aren't writers supposed to write for the love of writing? How many writers have you heard say they write to live -- they need to write they way others need air. They would write even if they were not being paid.... It is not like writers provide food, shelter or any of the things our society need to actually survive. Don't garbage collectors, teachers, policemen, doctors and farmers deserve more of our financial resources? Maybe what we are witnessing today is the market just making itself more efficient and just. “The moral justification of capitalism does not lie in the altruist claim that it represents the best way to achieve ‘the common good.’ It is true that capitalism does—if that catch-phrase has any meaning—but this is merely a secondary consequence. The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man’s rational nature, that it protects man’s survival qua man, and that its ruling principle is: justice.” — AYN RAND