[fjtorres]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch the evidence mounts *against* the self-pub books are amateur rubbish meme:

http://lauraresnickauthor.wordpress....ished-writers/

Here’s a typical example of why self-publishing is such a great development for the traditionally published author:

• In 2010, the earning life and market potential of all my backlist books was completely over. Nothing of mine released prior to 2009 was in print, none of it was earning a penny anywhere, and none of it was realistically viable for re-sale to publishers. And in traditional publishing, this was a typical position for a writer. Few people besides bestsellers had a backlist that stayed in print and earning for more than a few years.
• In 2011, I started self-publishing those backlist novels as ebooks—and promptly started earning income from them again, as well as hearing from new readers who’d never found my work before.
• In 2012, these same books, which had been dormant for years, accounted for one-third of my annual income as a full-time self-supporting writer, and they were a crucial factor in my being able to buy a house last year.

This is a typical example of why every traditionally published author with the sense that the gods gave to overcooked broccoli (and that’s most of us) is thrilled to death with self-publishing and elbow-deep in our own self-publishing programs.

Presumably she means the nay-sayers *fail* to meet the "cooked brocolli" basic intelligence test.

So whenever some poorly-informed writer with a big media megaphone claims that self-publishing is destroying literature, I ask you to keep in mind that such statements are no more representative of traditionally published writers than is a statement by some politician claiming that women don’t actually want equal rights and equal pay.