This is an interesting article and the comments from Tara Johnson at Writer's Digest are thought-provoking.
"“Fifteen years ago we got books that weren’t much more than copies from Kinkos,” said Tara Johnson, who manages the self-pub awards program at Writer’s Digest. “Now I would say that 95% of the books that come in look basically the same as the books you might see coming from a major publisher.”
This is an interesting article and the comments from Tara Johnson at Writer's Digest are thought-provoking.
"“Fifteen years ago we got books that weren’t much more than copies from Kinkos,” said Tara Johnson, who manages the self-pub awards program at Writer’s Digest. “Now I would say that 95% of the books that come in look basically the same as the books you might see coming from a major publisher.”
According to Johnson, the number of submissions has grown in step with the level of quality. Nearly 2,900 submissions poured into the Writer’s Digest Self-Published Book Awards in 2014. Writer’s Digest also received about 700 submissions this year for its Self-Published E-Books Awards, which was founded two years ago for self-published authors who choose not to go down the printed path." From the site - [Note: this article was originally published in February 2015 and was updated on April 10, 2017.]
My only question is, why is there still a distinction made between "traditionally published" and "self-published" when it comes to the contests? A good or bad piece of work, regardless of the publishing mechanism utilized by the author of the work, should be granted the same consideration when being evaluated.
Just my opinion. What are your thoughts on this, members? Many of you are both traditionally published and self-published. Does it concern you or bother you to know that your self-published works may be considered less credible or of lower quality, without closer scrutiny, merely because they weren't "traditionally published"?
No comments:
Post a Comment