Fantastic thread.
Bad writing is, of course, the downside of the e-publishing revolution. The demise of the rejection slip has left the culling process in the hands of the consumers and the largely amateur critics and reviewers. There seems to be no incentive for the new publishers to reject writing, bad or not, on anything but technical grounds which would require intervention and hence expense to get the ebook published. In fact, the incentive seems to be the other way. The more ebooks published the more money to be made by the publishers.
I don't mourn the old system. Over the last few years I have read a lot of indie authors who would never have seen the light of day under that old system. A small minority have been absolutely appalling, a majority mediocre, some quite good, and another small minority first rate. Sometimes I do despair when going from a mediocre indie novel to a first rate established novelist, but I remind myself that there have always been many mediocre novels published, and even the odd terrible one. There are just more of them now.
As readers we must recognise this new environment in which we now read and take what steps we are ourselves comfortable with in deciding what to read. Some may simply choose to stick to traditional publishers and/or established authors. Reliance on reviewers and critics and friends can also be helpful, but one must also remember that one person's great novel is another person's trash. Reading samples can be helpful, but like movie trailers, the selections may well not be random. Perhaps sellers or even authors themselves may start identifying whether they have used editors etc to assist with their work. And perhaps some publishers will emerge who market the fact that they are selective and publish only quality works.
And finally, what discussion of bad writing can be complete without a reference to that immortal poem, "The Tay Bridge Disaster". Enjoy.
http://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk/...ridge-disaster