Scribd -- a friendlier self e-book publisher for authors

I seriously don't know much about self publishing. All I know is that it's definitely getting more attention.

Today I read on NYT about Scribd, an Internet start-up that introduced today a way for anyone to upload a document to the Web and charge for it. Already Scribd is the most popular document-sharing site, the Times say, as it takes a YouTube-like approach to text.

But now there's a store too, which allows authors or publishers to set their own price for their work and keep 80% of the revenue, which apparently is a much higher percentage than higher services (I really don't know, does anyone know how much Lulu.com charges for example?)

Other features include security measures, or unprotected PDFs, which gives them the ability to be read on any device (not just the Kindle).

The Times writes:

So far, no major publishing houses have signed on to the store, though the company says it is talking to them. The independent publishers Lonely Planet, O’Reilly Media and Berrett-Koehler will add their entire catalogs.

The Scribd store will also give unpublished authors, or authors who are in a hurry, a well-trafficked Web forum on which to post their books, charge for them and see immediate results.

There have been some success stories of self publishing, although not many. Regardless, I definitely it's exciting there's another service for writers in the Internet age.

Anyone with some self-publishing experience can give a better insight into the new service?

Editors demistified

For those writers out there submitting stories, those interested in submitting and just for general knowledge, I found this: 5 Lies Writers Believe About Editors from Jeremiah Tolbert, an editor at Escape Pod:

LIE #1: Editors give every story fair consideration. OR: Editors reject stories without reading them at all.

LIE #2: Editors never reject a good story.

LIE #3: Editors don’t foster new writers like they did in the old days, and don’t care about new talent.

LIE #4: Editors are people too.

LIE #5: Editors (and critics) are failed writers.

Via Futurismic

Sign of the times: Pulitzer will accept online work

I know, I found it hard to believe too, but the Pulitzer Prizes -- probably the most prestigious awards for American newspaper reporting and commentary -- will begin immediately accepting submissions from online-only publications.

Yup, internet newspapers and news organizations that publish online will be considered for all 14 of the journalism awards. No doubt, some blogs that mainly report on news may be eligible. This is definitely a sign things are changing in our world.

With print newspapers going out of business at a rapid pace -- Tribune just filed for Chapter 11 the other day -- there's not even a question of the increasing importance and influence of online media. Print newspaper may disappear at some point. Gosh, I haven't read a print paper in probably eight years.

For writers, though, this is very meaningful. If anyone still had doubts about the "legitimacy" of internet work and online writing, they're living in the past.

As for fiction and novels, Well, I have way too much to say and it will have to wait for another post.

Categories: writing, pulitzer, blogging, online, internet

About word counts (oh, and ze blog)

I know I've deviated lately from the main topic of this blog -- writing. At least, that's what the topic used to be once upon a time, about two years ago, when it was still an active blog.

Then the war happened and I was outed and I had a hard time returning to blogging. Seems lately, though, I've been back blogging a little after all. Only I don't feel like blogging just about writing all the time. So I won't. My blog, my say.

But this post is about writing.

I participated in NaNoWriMo this year. I knew I'd likely fail, but I knew it would give me an extra incentive to write anyways. So I joined, and yes, I "failed" but I don't count it as failing. I wrote over 12,000 words during November. I think that's not too shabby at all.

You know I'm also an editor at BloggingStocks, right? So I have a running word count on the system there. To date, I wrote 991,557 words over two years and half. That's nearly ten standard size novels. In two and half years. If you do the math, that's just over 1,000 words a day. Every day.

Since no one is expecting anyone to write 10 novels in two and half years -- that's about seven and half novels too many -- then do the new math and you get that by writing only 274 words a day you get 100,000 words a year. A novel.

Point: Anyone discounting any amount of words written is doing injustice to herself. Anyone thinking a goal of just 200 words a day would get him nowhere is dead wrong. It adds up. Don't argue with the math!

Or, in the words of one Insane Writer: Writing: It’s All About the Numbers.

I know I get discouraged sometimes when all I can manage is a measly 150 words, so I guess I'm writing this more for myself following my undisputed, gynormous failure in NaNo...

Categories: writing, process, blogging

Be Ryan Oakley - Ghostwrite for The Grumpy Owl

Sorry!!!

I started my come back well enough, at least in terms of how often I posted. I still didn't find my groove as far as post topics were concerned, but I was willing to give it time. I actually even had a few things (that I thought were interesting) brewing.

And then, the markets tanked and I got real busy at work. Since the days were so full, it was hard to do anything in the evening, and I just needed to clear my head -- usually that entailed mostly reading with a bit of TV. I just couldn't look at the computer past a certain hour, except maybe to play Mahjong or Chess.

But today, a good friend quit being himself. I have often mentioned Ryan Oakley and his blog The Grumpy Owl here. Ryan is a good friend and a fellow writer. And Ryan wants to hire you as a ghostwriter.

The idea behind it has many aspects:

• You get to be Ryan Oakley. You get to make him say things.
  In return, Ryan gets the benefit of different point of views, the benefit of diversification. No longer a white, catholic male, but perhaps a woman, an Asian, a Muslim, Ryan can be anything, anywhere.

• You get to say things you never dreamed you would actually express -- anonymously.
  Ryan, just like a politician reading a prepared speech, will assume the words -- your words -- and never reveal who wrote them.

• Unless you choose incomprehensible bigotry, you will not be edited.
  Ryan Oakley gives his word as a gentleman that your name will never be revealed and that all posts will go under his name as if he wrote them. Complete confidentiality.

• No rules, no guidelines. Write whatever you want. Anything you ever wanted to say but were too embarrassed to even admit to yourself you had such thoughts!
  You are Ryan Oakley and he takes responsibility for your own words, as offensive as they may be.
  Use Ryan Oakley and the platform he gives you to voice some things you never dared!

And of course, being me, I have to add my little nasty twist to it. What you ghostwrite as Ryan doesn't necessarily have to be offensive. Declare your secret love for Barbies or your crush on Lindsay Lohan and let's see how he deals with that!

For more info and how to contact Ryan, go here.

Categories: ghostwriting, writing

The future of reading; the future of books

Recently, I came across a blog post in a more finance-oriented blog that related to the future of media. The blogger, aware his sample size of his own three children don't really constitute any meaningful, scientific source, didn't really come to any conclusion, but rather to several suppositions about the future of media.

The post is rather interesting with respect to all media and entertainment types, but naturally I was really interested in what the written word. Here's what he said from his finance point of view:

- mass market magazines might be undervalued. [...]
- books may be the one category of media and entertainment that aren't
disrupted by digital technology. or maybe we just haven't seen the technology
that will do it. i honestly don't know. and i don't know how the book business
is faring versus five or ten years ago. but at least in my family, books are
still a growth sector.

I've compared my own sample size of 8 nieces and nephews (the ninth is three-month old tomorrow, so I didn't count her yet :). With respect to digital media, the post was bang on. With respect to magazines, I didn't find a similarity. As for books, I find that depended more on the house the kids grow up in, but most are avid readers.

Alas, statistics is not proving our small sample size. Americans (not sure if that represents "world," but it was easiest to find) are indeed reading less, as I think we've all been feeling. Interestingly, "teen fiction is a rapidly expanding category," but that can be attributed, at least in part, to Harry Potter. Overall, there is a decline in sales according to the National Endowment for the Arts report. One saving grace is that reading scores among nine-year olds are soaring.

So, what is the future of books and reading? Would there be alternatives to fiction?

I'm pretty sure print will not decline in favor of digital books, which is fine -- reading is reading -- but fiction itself - will anyone be reading?

Writing is ... Arrogant ?

"Writing is arrogant." I don't remember where I've heard this before. Perhaps it was Ryan, The Grumpy Owl, who mentioned it to me first, and at the time I don't believe I gave it much thought, if at all. But I find myself thinking about these words every so often; they've landed somewhere in my brain and wouldn't leave. I was wondering what others are thinking about it -- is writing arrogant?

Well, on the one hand, writers assume that their word is important enough to be read. They assume they have something to say to the world that is of value (added). They assume they can teach / influence / affect people. They want their words to do that.

Then again, so does any other art form, no? Show me an artist who doesn't want his work to affect the person experiencing his art, and I'll call him on it. So does that means that art in itself is arrogant?

This concept pains me. I don't know why but it does.

Take even non-fiction writing, say articles. They have to sound authoritative to pass even the first acceptance level. Say blogs, this post. I make very strong statements and I make them in a way that sounds as if I believe I'm right (which I am, of course... :).

See why the concept pains me? Or is it me?

Take a fictional work, say a novel. You want your readers to be at the very least moved enough so they would turn the page. But you want more, no? What you really want is for them to cry and laugh, bite their nails and sigh in relief. You want them to think your words are important / interesting enough to be read. You want them to experience them same thing you do when you read a good book.

Is that such an arrogant thing to want to be able to affect people? Or is it something else?

Tags: writing, general

Procrastination? No, not again

I don't know a writer's blog that hasn't, at some point, tackled the subject of procrastination. Surely many other people have too.

Sunday, with the storm, was a perfect example. I knew I was going to have the whole day at home doing nothing - hubby said he'd cook, so I had planned to do some dreaded laundry, some filing, unpack the second suitcase and start a (secret) new blog. Why did I have to plan any of these? Cause these were chores in my eyes. Guess what? None got done.

Instead, I jovially went out and shoveled our whole front, including the entrance to the basement (which we never use), I shoveled the sidewalk and the neighbour's sidewalk for good measure. I constantly washed the dishes and cleaned after the vigorously cooking hubby. I surfed, I read, I wrote, I even blogged for the first time in two months. All to avoid my chores. I was procrastinating glamorously.

Procrastinating (surfing) brought me to this article in NewScientist, Procrastination: The thief of time. At last, some scientific truth to shed light on this problem, I thought. Understanding leads to solution, no? I was already half way there in solving my problem. Alas, I couldn't read the article because it's behind a subscription wall, but I could read its beginning. Who do you think the article uses as an example??? Douglas Adams. That's right, a writer. We're doomed, I tell ya. It's probably in our genes!

Categories: writing, process

Getting the itch again

Am I back? I'm not sure. I just know that in the past few weeks I've really been getting the itch to write in this blog again.
I could not believe how many of you wonderful people occasionally popped by and dropped me a line. It was just amazing. I have these friends I've never even met, and they've become true friends...

Okay, so really, NaNo is only a month and a half away and I hope to be able to participate again. Hey, why not? It can only help, right? Et tu?

Meanwhile, great news for fellow Toronto writer Stephen Kotowych, who won the grand prize in the Writers of the Future contest. Just amazing! A little bit of a belated congrats is in order.

One more thing before I end my first post in ... what ... a year? I'm thinking of changing the focus of ze blog a bit, or rather have it less focused on writing. Oh well, too early to talk about that. Better see if I keep this up first, right?

I guess Hello (again) World is appropriate, no?