Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
Why is it that discussions of indie publishing so often center on what is best for the author--what gives the author more control, what makes the author more money, etc. I don't give a damn what's better or worse for the author--I'm a READER, and what's better for me is a book that meets minimum standards of competency. Traditional publishing is no guarantee of that, but it's a lot less of a crapshoot than all the self-published drek that's out there.
|
The more money authors make, the more time they have to work on their writing, and be creative without stressing about whether they'll be able to pay next month's bills, as opposed to having to juggle with at least part-time jobs (a lot of traditionally published authors can't make a living from their writing due to the paltry royalty they get btw).
It also allows us to put money aside to hire editors, audiobook narrators, cover designers, send our books to reviewers who will winnow the grain from the chaff for our potential readers.
While it's true there's a significant proportion of refuse in self-publishing, most of them don't sell more than a handfull of copies. On the other hand, anything that empowers serious authors will only have benefits for readers in terms of cultural diversity in the long run.