True Self-Publishing

When actor Jack Klugman decided to self-publish TONY AND ME, his memoir of working with Tony Randall, he didn't go the POD/PublishAmerica route (which isn't so much publishing a book as having it printed in book format). He decided to truly self-publish...he invested $500,000 and created an actual publishing house, headed by his son Adam (a veteran advertising exec) and hired industry professionals to staff it. According to the story in Publishers Weekly, the initial print run for TONY AND ME is 100,000 copies, back by a 19-city author tour and a 30-second television commerical airing on TVLand, among other venues.

"I didn't know the first thing about how to produce a quality book or what the industry standards were," admitted [Adam] Klugman. The first consulting firm he used merely gave him what he asked for, instead of telling him what he needed to do. At BEA, Klugman brought on Sally Dedecker, who advised him on how to handle such thorny issues as book size, binding, paper stock, margins, photo layouts, book tours and distribution. "I thought you hired a distributor and they put all your books into bookstores," said Klugman. "What I found out is that they choose you as much as you choose them."

Client Distribution Services is now on board to distribute the title and publicist Roger Bilheimer is helping to promote the book, which was released last week. "If we're a success, it's because I hired publishing veterans who were able to do about 18 months' worth of work in just six months," Klugman said.

This is still a vanity press publication, but Jack has  got a few things going for him that most aspiring writers who choose this route don't have -- fame, money and the smarts to hire industry pros (instead of relying on get-rich-quick-Internet-hucksters). If the book sells, Good Hill Press will broaden beyond their one title to publish others as well.

Comments

[Ian Hamet]

Lee, what is your opinion of CafePress, and publish-on-demand in general?

I'm not asking about scams like PublishAmerica, but companies that make it clear what they're offering.

And, out of further curiosity, do you take a similarly negative view on self-produced, independent movies?

[Terrill Lee Lankford]

I don't know, Lee. Looks like Jack has done everything the geniuses in New York would do (assuming he also hired a good line editor) and more. Plus he's controlling the show. The only thing he hasn't done is get vetted by some wizard. Why does everyone have to get permission from some marketing guy in New York to be valid in your book?

Klugman will outsell a ton of traditionally published stuff when his book comes out. He cares about his subject and he's putting his money where his mouth is. He should be applauded for trying to do it right.

The Other Lee

[Bob Sassone]

I read Klugman's book last weekend. It's a great read, especially if you're a big Odd Couple fan like me (and it comes with a DVD).

[Terrill Lee Lankford]

Okay. This is what I get for trying to post something after spending all night in a Compton casino.

Sorry that last message sounded so cranky. And it probably came off as maniacal gibberish as well. I hope I can clarify what I was trying to say without forcing my foot deeper down my throat: I realize you weren't really tearing into Klugman for what he is doing, but you do seem very dismissive of anyone who publishes in ANY other way than the most traditional of methods. Which is to run the gauntlet of agents, editors, marketers and sales gurus, beg for acceptance, then turn yourself over to their tender mercies and hope they pull off a few miracles along the way. It's a very time consuming endeavor, even when you get lucky and it goes right. And I get the feeling that Jack Klugman doesn't have a lot of time to waste.

To just casually dismiss what Klugman is doing as a "vanity press" seems to miss the point entirely. He did not want to wait. He wanted to make it happen in his lifetime. And he wanted to be able to do as much as possible to control his destiny and the destiny of his book. Certainly SOMEONE would have published the book if he had gone the traditional route. Look what GETS published already. Would Klugman's book be any more valid if some numbers cruncher had given it the nod? What makes you think these people should always have the final say on what is fit to print? They make mistakes on a daily basis. In both departments: what they publish and what they don't publish.

(And before some joker assumes that this is coming from a sour grape vine on my part, I've only written four books and they've all been published the traditional way, so I don't have any rejected works of genius that I feel have been overlooked by New York. I've been "vetted" four times out of four attempts. Whoop-de-freakin'-do.)

Lee, you are one hundred percent correct about PA and just about every other vanity press there is out there. They are scam artists who take advantage of a frustrated throng who burn to see their work published. They make a business of it. They remind me of the sleaze bags who wait for the fresh faces to hop off the Greyhound in Hollywood or downtown L.A., hoping to take advantage of their innocence and their feverish dreams. I'm not defending them. But there is another alternative to traditional publishing and vanity press publishing. And what Jack Klugman is doing looks to be a perfect example.

I wish him well.

TL

P.S. - Hope he remembered to buy co-op.

[marky48]

Yeah Greyhound bus travelers are easy marks, but for what? Panhandlers after their dreams? PA is the biggest scam in this venue, hands down. Anyone who uses their coined phrase publish-on-demand has been brainwashed. No one else recognizes this distinction.

This post illustrates the true self-publishing picture.

[Jim Michael Hansen]

Terrill, I couldn’t agree with you more. There’s a new breed of people on the scene who have the spirit, drive and fortitude to set up their own publishing houses and perform the same tasks that the big houses do. In the end, that’s all publishing is, a set of tasks: copy-editing, cover design, layout, printing, distribution and promotion.

Anyone doing this, though, must in fact have a good book. That is the key, the cornerstone, the foundation. Get brutally honest feedback from people in the profession. Without a good book you’re doomed to failure. That goes for the big houses too.

But, if you can get past that initial hurdle and actually have a good book, all the rest of the tasks are within reach and doable. Baker & Taylor Books offers wholesale services for every size publisher, which makes the books available to virtually every bookseller in the US. Many book reviewers (Kirkus, PW, etc., aside) don’t care about the size or history of the publisher but about the quality of the title that is sent for review. If it’s good, and they like it, you’re going to get good reviews. Same for booksellers: if they like it, they’ll buy it. Barnes & Noble for example will warehouse all books that meet their minimal criteria, making it available for order at all their stores and online. B&N also has a committee to review all titles submitted, on their merits, by presses both large and small, to decide whether the title will actually be shelved at their stores. There are many hundreds of independent bookseller, many of which belong to BookSense, that will review the brochures and ARCs of any sized publishing house that sees fit to send them. If they like the book and see a reader demand for it, they’ll buy it. Also, any size publisher can set up product pages on online booksellers such as Amazon and even have Amazon do the fulfillment. You can link to Amazon from the author’s website, the publisher’s website, etc. The publisher can also sell to booksellers and readers direct. You can set up a PayPal account to handle credit card transactions.

As far as promotion goes, most of that comes down to the author anyway, whether the publisher is big or small. The author has to network, set up a website, do the author events, etc. That takes individual initiative and has very little to do with the size of the publisher.

Bottom line, books can enter the market from both big and small publishers alike. Although the big established publishers have a definite edge in getting their books into the market (e.g. they can get the “bigger” reviews such as Kirkus, PW, etc.), they don’t have a monopoly and in the end it is the quality of the book that speaks the loudest.

[mapletree7]

This didn't work so well for Rich Shapero.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/26/MNGGP8VC8T1.DTL

[Terrill Lee Lankford]

Oh. Uh, well, then... nevermind.

(That's the best Gilda Radner I can muster at this hour.)

[David J. Montgomery]

The major difference between a situation like this and the typical self-publication effort is that a celebrity like Jack Klugman can get publicity and attention for his book that an unknown will never achieve. He also has a certain amount of assumed credibility (i.e., we know that Jack Klugman has some good showbiz stories to tell) and a built-in audience that 99% of self-published authors simply don't have. In addition to those two factors, he’s putting some significant money behind the enterprise.

On the other hand, any unknown self-published author faces the very nearly insurmountable tasks of getting out the word about their book, and convincing readers to give them a try. Unless they have something extraordinary to bring to the table (e.g., fame, established audience, etc.), it seems destined to be a foolhardy effort.

For those self-published authors who aren’t celebrities, or don’t have a significant number of eager readers, or don’t have a half-million dollars to invest in their book, or don’t have the ability to get serious media coverage… How is anyone going to know about their book and why would they want to buy it?

I’m all in favor of the attempt – and for someone like Klugman it very well makes more sense than going through a traditional publisher – but I just don’t see how it’s going to work for the vast majority of people.

[Carstairs38]

What I want to know is, why couldn't he get a traditional publisher to publish his book? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

[Mary]

I think perhaps he wanted more control than he might have gotten from a traditional publisher. And also keep in mind that this isn't an uncommon route to take in Hollywood. Isn't this how a lot of independent films get made?

[Lee Goldberg]

The PW article suggested that Jack Klugman, 83, wanted to get the book out in a hurry given his age. He's also setting his son up in a nice business (that's my observation, not PW's).

By the way, I think The Other Lee misunderstood me...I think Klugman is doing it right. He is truly self-publishing and he's doing it smart. He hired a good ghostwriter for his book (so it doesn't read like crap) and publishing professionals to sell & distribute it, all backed by a strong promotional campaign and author tour. Of course, he has some major things going for him that most unpublished writers who go this route don't have -- celebrity and wealth. Because of all those things, he has a real chance of success that the vast majority of self-published do not.

[jake]

Jim Hansen writes ---

"in the end it is the quality of the book that speaks the loudest."

So true. Read an excerpt from Jim's book using the link below and that's all you need to know about the future of his publishing venture.

http://www.jimhansenbooks.com/page7.html

[Word King]

Jim:

"Many book reviewers (Kirkus, PW, etc., aside) don’t care about the size or history of the publisher but about the quality of the title that is sent for review."

They will not review self-published books. Period. Book review editors themselves have said so. Ask David Montgomery.

The big box, chain bookstores won't take self-published books and neither will independent bookstores. Go to Holt Uncensored and dig through the archives and read the article where two people took a handfull of what they considered good self-published books and pitched them to buyers at leading independent bookstores. There were no takers.

[David J. Montgomery]

Well, let's say it's 99% true. There are some very rare exceptions. If you can self-publish an extremely compelling book that calls attention to itself for some unique reason, you might get a little ink. This is almost never the case for a novel, though, and particularly not for genre fiction.

[Jim Michael Hansen]

Word King: Maybe I wasn't clear. I agree that many reviewers (Kkirkus, PW, etc.) are not likely to review small press books featuring debut authors. Some newspapers have a blanket policy to not review "self-published" books. That's why some freelance reviewers won't review them: because they have no one to sell their reviews to.

However, there are many reputable book reviewers in addition to the big 5 or 6. They are willing to look at small press books and judge them on their merits. For example, I have 15-20 reviews posted on my website. Most if not all of these are from well known and well established review organizations that have developed very good reputations.

Booksellers of all sizes do in fact consider small press books, even where the small press is owned by the author. For example, I have already secured committment from booksellers in the Denver area to stock my books on their shelves. Many indies across the country have already requested ARCs based on an initial flyer I sent out about a month ago. I will be sending out approximately 200 ARCs to target indies as soon as the book arrives from the printer in early October.

Also, Barnes & Novel is very clear in it's webpage, and it's several communictions with me, that it indeed looks very closely at small press books.

Bottom line, it is not impossible to develop your own small publishing company, obtain reviews, and get your books on the shelves. Hard work, yes. More difficult than having a big publishing house behind you? Unquestionably. But impossible, no.

[David J. Montgomery]

With all due respect, a book from an author-owned "publisher" with 1 title is not really a small press book. It's a self-published or vanity book, which is a much tougher sell. In that case, most reviews would be limited to online-only publications.

(That's not to say that there's anything wrong with web reviews -- I run a review site myself. They are, however, generally not as desirable.)

Books from actual small presses, though, get reviewed in print all the time. I've reviewed books from UglyTown, Five Star, CDS, Intrigue, Speck, Counterpoint, Point Blank (Wildside), Hard Case Crime and probably some others I've forgotten.

What book review editors are most interested in is the credibility of the publisher and the distribution of their books. (Basically, they want to make sure that the publisher is legitimate and that the reader could actually find the book if they wanted to.) If one can convince them on those points, a review is possible. Assuming the book merits it, of course.

Frank Wilson, my editor at the Philadelphia Inquirer, has assigned a couple of self-published titles for review recently that I know of. The first one came back as unreadable, but maybe the second one will make it. Even Frank is very cautious about such books, though, and he's more liberal than most.

[Lee goldberg]

There's a BIG difference between a genuine small press (like Five Star), a vanity press (like iUniverse and PublishAmerica), and a one-author vanity operation (like Jim Hansen). The only ones who can't make the obvious distinctions are, of course, the vanity press authors.

Kirkus and PW review small press books all the time. What they don't review are vanity press titles...with extremely rare exceptions for celebrities and figures in the news.

There is, however, a much maligned off-shoot of Kirkus that will review self-published/vanity press authors (or anyone else with a credit card or check book) for a price. Naturally, that off-shoot publication carries no credibility or respect in the industry. Like everything else in the POD world, it's just another ploy to separate foolish writers from their money.

[Jim Michael Hansen]

Lee: Please define the attributes of a "genuine small press" that Kirkus and PW will review all the time. I'll be sending the book to Kirkus, PW etc soon. Maybe I need to include a page, "About the Publisher," to show address the issue.

[Jim Michael Hansen]

Never mind, I looked it up. PW has the following statement in its submission guidelines:

We NEVER review books after publication. We do not review self-published books unless there is a first printing of 2,000 or greater, and an arrangement with a reputable distributor, in which case we will take the book under consideration.

[marky48]

For Terrell, "nevermind" is not a word.

"The only ones who can't make the obvious distinctions are, of course, the vanity press authors."

I sure can make that difference and I've battered because of it. Right here in fact, but many other places frequented by vanity press authors. The theme is familiar and misguided. Exceptions are rare and don't make the rule.

[Terrill Lee Lankford]

Nevermind COULD be a word if you type it fast enough. And are asleep while typing it.

Thanks for the English lesson. But next time you get out the red pencil please spell my name correctly on the test results.

(Gosh, I think "I've battered" here now as well.)

[marky48]

The same people do that repeatedly, and with "alot." Not a word. Almost all are vanity press writers. That's one reason why. Ideas that deserve to be debunked will. Only fools attack a sound premise based in fact. Vanity presses writers do that en masse.

[--john--]

Terrill, my plans for my day off were "battered" by 'Earthquake Weather.' Damn fine piece of work.
--john--

[Terrill Lee Lankford]

Guess I'm headed for Vanity press land, then. Wonder if Jack Klugman has room in the van?

But I am a bit confused. Looking over your posts on this page I am still unclear about your message. Are you pro or con vanity presses? I can't really understand many of your sentences or paragraphs.

For example: "That's one reason why."

Why what?

Or: "Ideas that deserve to be debunked will."

Will what?

And what is the sound premise based in fact that we vanity press writers attack so foolishly? (And en masse at that.)

Your posts confuse me. "Alot."

BTW - Haven't you gone the vanity press route yourself?

(Not that there is anything wrong with that.)

Just trying to understand where you're coming from.