Releasing updated eBooks

[jhempel24]

In my recent blog review today (link in sig) I stated I liked the idea and the story but that the editing was terrible. Even pointing out that maybe a change of editor was needed since it happened across multiple books.

Well the editor commented saying that my example was fixed in a different version (its been out 8 days).

My point to her was that it shouldn't matter. If it were print you can't recall books and re-print them easily or cheaply. And eBooks shouldn't be treated any different than paper books.

For the record I found 5 mistakes in the 37 page story. Which is why made a point of mentioning it.

What are your thoughts?

[HarryT]

I've said goodness knows how often that the biggest mistake any independent author can make is to think that they don't need the services of a professional editor. Granted, errors are not unknown in professionally-published books, but they are far, far, rarer than in the typical indie book. Some indie authors do it right, of course, but they are the exception.

EDIT: You're saying that this WAS edited? In that case, the author should get themselves an editor who knows how to do the job properly!

[AnemicOak]

Should they get it right the first time? Yes.

Will mistakes happen? Yes.

Is it a good thing that they can issue an update with fixes? Yes.

[jhempel24]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I've said goodness knows how often that the biggest mistake any independent author can make is to think that they don't need the services of a professional editor. Granted, errors are not unknown in professionally-published books, but they are far, far, rarer than in the typical indie book. Some indie authors do it right, of course, but they are the exception.

EDIT: You're saying that this WAS edited? In that case, the author should get themselves an editor who knows how to do the job properly!

yep! And I mentioned that in my review which is why I think the editor commented on the post.

I understand mistakes will happen and I like the fact that mistakes can be changed. But when you release a short story with 5 errors that I can count in over 37 pages to me that is unacceptable.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by jhempel24

I understand mistakes will happen and I like the fact that mistakes can be changed. But when you release a short story with 5 errors that I can count in over 37 pages to me that is unacceptable.

I completely agree with you. The author should demand his or her money back from the editor.

[Dr. Drib]

Sloppily produced work is still sloppily produced work.

The writer needs the services of an editor and a proofreader, and not the services of Aunt May or Uncle Billy.

If these mistakes occurred through the services of a legitimate Editor, then I would demand my money back.

Making excuses such as, "Oh, I fixed that today," is no excuse for lame production values and outright sloppiness.

Pointing these issues out to the 'author' or 'Editor' (I use both terms loosely) may help to wake up this person. If not, then being an 'author' or an 'Editor' may not be the best occupation to invest in...



Don

[JSWolf]

What bothers me most is errors in the eBook edition that are not in the print edition. That means that someone screwed up and added errors.

[CWatkinsNash]

Updating ebooks has become the equivalent of "we'll fix it in post", except that in this case the post-production is public. I'm not saying that most self-pubs knowingly turn things loose too early thinking it's okay to just fix it later, but I have seen things that make me believe that many think that an update makes it all okay. It doesn't. At worst, it's inconsiderate. At best, it's sloppy.

Mistakes do happen. I've got plenty of paper books in which I've seen the occasional error. All too often, however, the issues being fixed in updates are not "the occasional error" but rather glaring issues that never should have made into public view in the first place. Updates are all well and good, but they don't erase my first impression. When an author (or, in this case, editor) says, "it was fixed in an update", my only response is, "So? It wasn't fixed in the version I invested my time and/or money into."

I was once asked to read an updated version after expressing my opinion of a book. Not in a million years. Life is too short.

[morriss003]

I see your points, but it's clear to me that some of us are more forgiving. 5 mistakes in 37 pages would not bother me if I was enjoying the material.

[jhempel24]

Originally Posted by morriss003

I see your points, but it's clear to me that some of us are more forgiving. 5 mistakes in 37 pages would not bother me if I was enjoying the material.

It takes me about 20 minutes to read 37 pages. That's a mistake every 4 minutes. To me, even if I'm enjoying the material it's too much. It takes me out of the world the author is trying to create.

If there were 5 mistakes in a 400 page novel, that would be different.

[medard]

One small mistake every 100 pages is the maximum.

If there are more mistakes in the textfile, you shouln't spend your time with it. You can find some inspiration what to do with such ebooks here.

[BeccaPrice]

For me, it depehnds on the nature of the mistake. 5 hominym or spelling mistakes in 37 pageswould have me screaming. 5 OCR errors maybe not so much, depending on how bad they were. 5 instances where words were run together, I dunno.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

When an author (or, in this case, editor) says, "it was fixed in an update", my only response is, "So? It wasn't fixed in the version I invested my time and/or money into."

I was once asked to read an updated version after expressing my opinion of a book. Not in a million years. Life is too short.

The fixes are for future readers, not past ones. As are any reviews that are left. So a review complaining about something that has already been fixed seems a bit pointless.

I only mention typos when it is a pro-published book. For self-pub (unless they make a big deal about hiring editors) I just send the writer a list of mistakes they made.

Personally, I think if something can be fixed it should be fixed.

[latepaul]

The link in your sig leads to a page with a forwarding link which is broken (missing a .com).

Also there are about as many grammatical errors in your short review as in the story you're reviewing (missing apostrophe, sentence fragments, beginning a sentence with a conjunction).

As someone said the updates are for future readers and one of the functions of a review is for someone to decide whether they want to read the book or not. The publisher probably commented on your review not so much to get you to re-read as to let your readers know that the version they get will likely not have the same problems.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

The fixes are for future readers, not past ones. As are any reviews that are left. So a review complaining about something that has already been fixed seems a bit pointless.

Since a future reader can have an old edition of the book it is very good to have a review pointing out problems with a certain edition. And I really hope that if the book get fixed the edition number is changed.