Author friends and casual acquaintances often express to me a reluctance to wade into the Bloggy Facebooky Twittery waters. I hear many reasons, but the top one is usually:
“But shouldn’t I wait for when I need to promote something/when my book comes out/when my book is popular/when I already have a following/some arbitrary point in the distant future?”
Nope, nope and nope. There’s no such thing as too early.
Seth Godin famously said (the things Seth Godin says usually become famous) that for authors, the best time to start your promotional efforts is three years before your book comes out.
Why? Because it takes “three years to build a reputation, build a permission asset, build a blog, build a following, build credibility and build the connections you’ll need later.”
If you start when your book comes out you’re way, way too late.
Promotion vs. Social
Seth’s bit of (famous) advice is often applied to social media. It’s great advice, and even Seth’s explanation has a social component, but note that Seth is talking about promotional efforts. Not social media as a whole, which to me has no timeline at all. You should just start now.
Because if you’re using social media solely to promote, well, chances are you’re doing it wrong.
My new favorite catch phrase, which I have trademarked, patented, and have paid to have etched into the moon, is this: Social media is social.
It’s not about promotion, it’s not about broadcasting, it’s not about you you you. It’s about connecting with people.
Do you need to be famous to connect with people? Do you need to have a book to connect with people? No! You just need an Internet connection, dedication, an open-mind, and a willingness to reach out.
It takes time to build up those connections, and eventually, if you’re providing good content or a good experience, those one-to-one connections transition into a following.
But make no mistake: It’s still about making a personal connection with your audience and being a part of real lives. It’s still social.
Whuffie
In our hyper-connected time, social media is not only increasingly how word of mouth spreads and how we connect with one another, it’s almost becoming a new kind of currency.
In Cory Doctorow’s uber-prescient novel Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom, money has been replaced with “whuffie,” a reputation-based currency that rises and falls based on what people think of you. Basically, if people like you you’re rich and you can get all the best tables in restaurants. If they don’t like you, an unfortunate scandal can send you to the poor house.
We’re obviously not there yet (and thank goodness), but just look at the measures of “influencers” (social media buzz word for someone with a high following) that are cropping up right and left. Sites like Klout and Peer Index are hard at work trying to quantify online popularity and influence, and the idea of offering special perks to people with high influence scores is starting to percolate. The Sacramento Kings, for instance, invited 25 fans and business leaders with top Klout scores for a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
Now, the idea that you’re going to be objectively judged someday on your Twitter presence may well send a chill down your spine, but I wouldn’t read that much into it. It’s more of a sign of the omnipresence and future of social media and how the ability to broadcast is a kind of currency.
Blogs and Twitter and Facebook… those are just the tools. What we’re building is a network. And what was once ephemeral (reputation) can now be sort of kinda quantified.
Whuffie has basically become real.
What are you waiting for?
But aside from all that buzz about influencers and reputational analysis, let’s not forget that whole social is social thing. And the thing about being social is that it’s fun!
Sure, you may be an introvert like me, but you can pick and choose your experiences. You can make reach out to people, and soon enough those virtual friends may become your real friends. This is increasingly how we connect with like-minded people, and the best part is that it works.
It’s really fun to do, and you can make the experience whatever you want. If you like Twitter, do that. If you like blogging, do that. If you are a Facebook maven, go for it. There’s no right or wrong way to go about it and you can invent your own way if it doesn’t exist.
But what it all comes down to is this: Social media is the future, and the time to start is now.
Wow, great post. I learned how important social media is when I found a writer called Kaleb Nation on YouTube, who has built up a following of over 60 000 people (kids and teens). You can check out my blog at http://www.ellipsisstation.blogspot.com
So you're the introverted genius who tagged the moon?! (Did you pay in "whuffie"?)
hello….
sumanje visit your blog today…
This advice is often given, but I think there's very little actual proof that it's effective, or if it is, which types of social media is most effective at selling books. I think it's pretty clear that blog don't sell books. I mean, how many here are actually going to buy Jacob Wonderbar? Not many. Why? We're not the audience.
Konrath might sell a few books because of his blog, but he's selling because of all the word of mouth he's getting from it, and not because people are saying his stuff is great, and that everyone has to read it–but his name's out there. He screams "look how rich I'm getting with my books!" and people say "Hmmm, people are buying his book, so maybe I should too."
I think most people shouldn't blog, because they don't have anything interesting to say. Not that they aren't fantastic writers, but I agree that having a blog that hasn't been updated in a while is worse than having no blog. I have never visited the blog of my favorite authors (if they have any), or facebook page, or looked them up on twitter. I don't think anybody does.
You hear about a book from someone, or read a review, or Amazon says "others who bought this book also bought…," or you're searching for something else and cool cover catches your eye–that's how people buy books.
I always learn something here. I'd never heard of Klout and Peer-whatsis, but I've just signed up. I seem to have a whole lot more Klout than Peer-whatsis, but I guess I'll learn. I find it all fascinating. Social media is really about forming tribes–groups of like-minded people. No geographical, socio-economic, or age barriers. Just people with shared interests. Love that.
I find sometimes it's difficult to think of something to say/tweet/update. What works best for me is to have a plan and make sure I consistently do something every day.
When I'm doing that, it's easier to come up with content. So, flex that social media muscle.
Well said. AND informative. Just checked out Klout and Peer Index, neither of which I've ever heard of until now. Thanks!
The sad part about this in regard to writers is that, on many chatty sites, the most intelligent writers are often ignored, while less skilled writers get published based primarily on their online social connections. Even here, you tend to respond to every comment about sports, but rarely respond to many of your followers who have been contributing lengthy, well-thought-out comments for years. Since this has been a writing site for years, I always wondered why so many of those regular commenters have been mostly ignored. It reminds me of middle school where the smart, nerdy kids aren't invited to eat lunch with the cool kids. And this isn't a personal issue for me, by the way. I ate lunch with both the nerdy kids and the cool kids. 🙂 It's just an observation.
anon-
It's impossible to respond to every intelligent comment (which, btw, is the vast majority of comments). That's why I spotlight my favorites in This Week in Books.
And no one gets published primarily because of their social media presence, excepting SH*T MY DAD SAYS and other blog-specific books. As other people have pointed out, the jury is still out on whether social media even sells books.
Was that bait? I guess I took it.
Dear Nathan,
I agree with what Mercy and Kaitlyne said.
I had a blog but I quit because it was turning into a full time job. It wasn't just about the writing-which I loved-it was SO much more than that. It was a designing, editing, tweeting, updating, picture finding; comment responding; stat recording; subscription managing; post promoting; monetizing mess!
That's a ton of free work that may or may not pay off three years down the line.
And it's SO true about the content. The bar has been raised craaaaazy high for new authors, almost impossibly high, because the blogger is required to be brilliant, witty and/or fresh with every post/tweet/update (honestly, Nathan I don’t know how you do it). Essentially "the industry" asks bloggers to do in one day what published authors do over several months.
I have also seen good writers go bad on their blogs. Good writing turns into posts about ailing ficus tress or slide shows about their kids/cats/iPads. Or worse, weekly giveaways for the soul purpose of boosting stats. These blogs have turned into that awful guy who nobody likes but everyone puts up with because he buys the first round of drinks at the bar.
I read over 40 books a year and I've never chosen a book because I had a social-networking relationship with the author.
There has got to be a better way.
Sincerely,
Frustrated
Off topic: No pressure, Rick Barnes, but the only consolation I will have after picking such a silly first round is if Texas goes all the way.
On topic: Thanks for the pointing out that it takes 3 years to become established. It makes me feel better about my blog rankings (even if I'm still sad about Penn State's loss).
D.G. Hudson said:
Question: For a writer using a pen name, what name should be used on Facebook?
Only Facebook accounts have to be a real name. Fan pages have different rules, so it's fine to start a fan page for a pen name. Your real name account will be an admin of your fan page, but that information can be hidden (it is by default, as I recall).
Once you have a fan page, you can use your fan page persona instead of your main account (for liking things, commenting, etc). There's a link on the fan page to switch between your main Facebook account and your fan page persona.
Separate names would actually make it a bit easier. My pen name is my real name, so I have to triple check whether I'm using my account or my fan page.
I love the internet! Here’s how other people’s social networks recently helped me. I read about Amanda Hocking’s success through an article mentioned on Twitter, a post on your blog, and another post on Alan Rinzler’s blog. So then I went to check out Amanda Hocking’s website/blog. She does a lot of her own book cover artwork, but she mentioned getting artwork from another website. I checked out that website, http://www.phatpuppyart.com, and the artist’s work is so exquisite, I’m now working with her to have book covers designed for some of the works I’m about to publish for 99 cents on Kindle. Annnnd, come to think of it, I also learned about the big boom in 99-cent Kindle books through the same sources where I found out about Amanda Hocking. 🙂
I think it's difficult to go into the online world expecting to build a huge fan base and either get a publishing contract or sell a lot of books. And I've seen people get frustrated because they start a blog or a Facebook page, and when that kind of fame doesn't descend on them, they wonder what it's all for.
That isn't what it's all for.
Some people do get attention and monetary rewards from being online, but overwhelmingly, they seem to me to be people who genuinely LIKE being online. They have fun with their blog or their vlogs or their Twitter account, and people respond to that.
I've heard people sneer that blogging writers are "only talking to other writers." My answer to that is: Other writers are very good people to connect with. Pre-internet, I longed for other writers to connect with, because I didn't know a single other person who was seriously trying to write a book. The amount of professional collegiality and mentoring I've found online has been incredible. I have also gotten book signings and conference-panel slots and discovered new publishing markets and, yes, sold books from the connections I've made online, but that isn't my top reason for being here.
I also get most of my new-book news and book recommendations online. I still read only what looks good to me, but I have definitely bought books because an online friend blogged about them or someone tweeted a synopsis that sounded interesting.
disagree. there is something to be said for, "Less is more." What this set of suggestions doesn't address is the risk of being perceived as pandering, and / or boring your audience / readers.
S'G's position as media guru is wholly self-serving and – what you leave out – based on non-fiction. His timing makes sense if you're trying to network your way into speaking at business conventions, but fiction? People are not interested in being sold in such a hard core way. Yes, putting yourself out there is important however, Facebook/twitter have been around for a while, and are not the panacea's they were even a year ago. Too many newsfeeds, too much information, it's all easy to ignore.
Look at Amanda Hocking: she balances her hawking of books with other blog topics. Although I don't read that genre, I have read her blog, and found her voice to be open yet not too personal. I think part of her success has been striking a balance between "knowing" her, the fact that she's selling books, and non-related topics.
In contrast, S.G's approach is akin to the post-gym -tour battery of phone calls one receives (before taking the tour.) There's something to his attempt to translate his self-obsession into other's reality … it's narcissism squared by the net. Where is his service? What is he giving back? In an increasingly shrunken world, where resources are being sucked by the few at the expense of the many, an approach that's disconnected from even a little bit of giving back is .. nauseating.
One reason I refer back to your blog is because you actually engage people. Curiously, I find your presence in other social media less accessible or visible. I'm not sure how being an agent now tech advisor and YA author is going to pan out, but it will be a real time test of these theories. If anyone has a following, you do.
True, social media is important and it is the future. I wouldn't be commenting here if that weren't true. I've made some great connections through blogging.
BUT I think some writers, and society in general, seriously underestimate the value of in-person face time. There is no substitute for that. Sometimes meeting one person IN person, can do a lot more for you than "meeting" a hundred online. Let's not forget to be physically present.
Anon @4:04 PM,
I agree with many of your points. It’s extremely easy to open up a publishing company or sell books about how to sell books to writers right now. Every time I see that an author has made it big-time selling books about writing to the throngs of desperate writers all struggling to sell their own books, I discount their success as being even remotely relevant to a fiction writer with no connections to the publishing industry. And I noticed the same thing you did about Amanda Hocking – her blog has a quiet mood, lots of blog conversation about things other than books, no hawking of her products, and a kindness through which she actually promotes other people’s work. I know I’m drawn to writers' and artists' websites where there’s a sense of quiet thoughtfulness and daydreaming, two important ingredients in the creation of art.
If only all those artistic cavemen had foreseen the advent of vegtarianism.
Great post, Nathan! Thank you.
Great post, Nathan. Thank you. Who knows when my book will be out but my blog has sure grown over the past two years.
Spot on Nathan, esp your point about being "social". I can't tell you how many authors that plug their book on Facebook & Twitter 24×7. And that's all they do. Too much!
This will not get me to buy you're book–and I buy a ton of 'em 🙂 it seems like such common sense.
I'm much more likely to buy a book if you engage with me, not try to sell me something.
I'm doing all the right things; so maybe you can take me on as a client, Nathan. Oh Darn, too late. You've flown the coop! ; )
Well said. It's a great way to meet fellow writers and learn the tricks of the trade. If you wait any longer, you might just get left behind.
It seems crass to me when people in publishing hawk products to writers, even if they do it in a friendly kind of way. Writers gravitate toward publishing people because they think they will help them to succeed. When those people turn around and take advantage by selling them things, that seems kind of yucky. 🙁 I've actually seen writers who tried to make it as fiction writers, failed to sell enough copies of their books, then went on to make a lot of money by selling books and other services that supposedly teach writers how to market their books. Something isn't right about that.
I like social media when it comes to visiting the sites of others but not when it comes to attracting people to my own. I don't have the confidence, really. I do have a blog presence and a Twitter and Facebook, but I'm not using them correctly. I appreciate the information I get through your blog, Nathan.
Did you know that no one sold any books before the internet came and revolutionized everything? If only "social media" had come along earlier, little Stevie King might've had a chance at a career. Might've written and sold a book or two. Well, when he wasn't facebooking, Goodreading, kindleboarding, tweeting, twatting, twerping ….
If you write books people want to read, they will find you. If you don't, no amount of social media cred is gonna help you.
@Polenth – Thanks for that information about pen names. Your explanation was clear and answered all the questions I have for the present. I'm glad someone heard the little question in the dark . . . much appreciated.
hmmm…I'm not entirely certain where I stand in the social networking, unless you are counting Farmville. 🙂 I've had a blog for a few years, but just 'outed' myself as a writer on there recently. So if I have a blog, but it's not always about writing/reading/publishing, then I suppose that means I'm behind schedule, right?
I was a reluctant joiner of Facebook and now I don't know what I'd do without it. Matthew Rush couldn't write NCAA updates on my wall, and Rick Daley couldn't leave sarcastic comments on my updates. I seriously love FB, which says a lot coming from a total introvert!
Thanks for the info on Klout and the other one…I've got to check them out. 🙂
Yes, yes, and yes. More please (blogs like this!). You continue to rock! 🙂
Thank you for saying social networking is social! Yes! Very true, and very clear.
I wrote a whole long post, but it got lost in cyberspace, so I'm assuming it wasn't meant to be.
But I will say that I appreciate the discussion. I have some mixed feelings about social networking,for myself, for a variety of reason, but all in all, how can I be anything but for it? I would never have come to this wonderful blog! And I have so much fun here and learn so much!
3 years! If I'd starting blogging three years ago, I would have been 12 years old!! Yikes. Well, that's not exactly good news.
Nathan said: "And no one gets published primarily because of their social media presence, excepting SH*T MY DAD SAYS and other blog-specific books. As other people have pointed out, the jury is still out on whether social media even sells books./Was that bait? I guess I took it."
No, I didn't mean that as bait. Here's what I was basing my comments on … Several authors, myself included, were actually TOLD by well-known agents that they weren't interested in representing their novels, since they weren't in a popular genre and we only had thousands of followers on our blogs, but they would be much more interested if we developed a larger following. So, that tells me very directly that people do indeed get published because of their online presence. Same thing happens with sales for self-published books. Amanda Hocking got rejected by both agents and publishing houses until she sold over a million copies of her self-published books. Right after that, she got one of the best agents in the business and a three-movie deal.
And I didn't mean to say that the commenters you reply to don't make intelligent comments. I meant that, since most people who spend years posting what amounts to hundreds of well-thought-out comments are mostly ignored, saying that blogs are "social" isn't exactly true for everyone. It's a false type of social for most people. There have been articles written about this recently – the lack of a real social experience within social networks.
– Anon at 3:08 PM, March 17
great, a world in which networking means everything even more than content. This world needs to become less of a schmooze-ocracy than it already is, not more
I just wanted to hit on something Anon said. My biggest problem with social networking is that it feels so insincere. I'm not an old fart who isn't technologically compatible–I'm great with computers, love the internet, and I'm in the demographic that should be embracing this.
I've been involved enough to know that it leaves me longing for the days when people would email and carry on meaningful conversations. I frequent message boards, but the only people I consider "friends" on there are those I've started emailing and talking to on the phone.
The lack of personalized attention and sincerity has always been one of the big negatives for me. I hear other people saying that it's a great way to get to know people and stay in touch, but every time I've tried, it's felt very…false.
Maybe that's just me.
Well, I think a possible misconception may be that it's true, you're not really going to be able to interact with everyone who stops by your blog on a personal level. So on the one hand it could feel insincere if you're judging it on that basis.
But you can make those connections. I've made really good real life friends with people I met through other blogs and through this blog. So from that standpoint it really does work. And Kaitlyne, it sounds like it's worked that way for you too, right?
Nathan,
I'm glad that all worked out for you. 🙂 I don't think that's the same type of experience most people have, though.
– Anon at 3:08 PM, March 17
I started my blog now, I'm not even on chapter one of my novel. But I do also send out a lot of short stories and plays and I wanted somewhere potential theatres/publishers could go to see my work which I post every Friday. I don't plan to build a readership quickly, but I do hope to have one some day…
Totally agree with Anon 11:53. Agents and the like have 'great' relationships with their readers because the reader is hoping to make a business connection. Regular Joes aren't going to have the same following because they can't offer the coveted keys to publishing.
Thank you for this wonderful post. It's easy to get overwhelmed with all the possibilities that social media offers, specially if you're an introvert (as I am too!). This post is a good reminder of what's really important: the people and the connections we build.
Maven… good word.
i don't know if i really agree with what's being suggested here. i mean, sure, now is the time to start blogging. also, now is the time to get in shape. and now is also the time to start eating right. and furthermore, now is the time to call your parents because you haven't in a while. and now is the time to take that trip to africa. and now is also the time to really push yourself at your job. and now is also the time to read those classics you haven't read, which you will do later tonight, because now is the time to pick up the kids. and now is also the time to start leaning japanese, remember that? so you will definitely learn japanese soon, but now, precisely now, is the time to do your laundry, right after you read a blog post, and then comment on it, which is what you have to do right, RIGHT now. and…so on.
from what i can gather, if you're going to be a writer, write a great book. no one disagrees on that. NO ONE. write the best possible book you can, and make that number one two and three on your list of three things to do. for those of us with full time jobs, with kids, with wives, with friends, with all sorts of time constraints, you simply have to prioritize.
i'm not saying social media is a waste of time. i'm not saying it can't help. i'm just saying amid the great and endless clamoring of life's demands you have to prioritize. For some, it's about getting known, getting an interview, being considered an authority on this or that, gaining Klout, passing a thousand twitter followers. For others, there is something majestic and sacred in the pursuit of great writing. If you believe in that majestic pursuit, as i do, and you do what that belief requires of you, then the rest of must and will take care of itself.
but ah….i could have been working on my book the whole time i was writing this post….
Amen Mark, AMEN!
Nathna, Nathan, Nathan…
The real question is whether the person you are on f/b or twitter is really you. Most people think it is when they're doing it. But most pyschologists will beg to differ.
THIS IS NOT REAL. NONE OF IT.
Understanding the above is the future. Social media is yesterday. I'd rather go to lunch.
Oh, I hope that didn't sound rude. I only meant to differ. 🙂
As for too early, I would say in most cases you are right. But there is a too-early if you are trying to create and/or build "brand" through social media. Your personal and professional "brand" may change radically from the time you begin using social media to become an online known entity.
A wrong brand could actually be damaging. Better no brand at all.
Say, you spend a few years branding yourself as an erotic novelist. And, say lots and lots of people interact with you through social media as the same, while you work to make professional and social connections to get your first book published by one of the Big Six.
Then, say an editor offers you $50K to take out the naughty parts and focus on the thriller aspects of your most recent work.
You know what happened to Saul could happen to you. You might want to run for the state senate next year. How often can you change your name?
Social is fun…only if you're social.
There are people who are good at social media. They were the popular kids at school. They're the ones in the middle of the crowd at every party, the ones who can make friends standing in line at the ATM. They're the ones who know everyone who works at their company — all 20,000 of them. They're good at social media because they've been doing it all their lives. They're wired that way.
For a lot of us, social is at best hard work and at worst a form of torture. Like painters and sculptors, we engage in a solitary artform because it fits our personalities and our strengths. After all, if we could sparkling conversationalists who could maintain networks of hundreds or thousands of people, we'd be agents, not writers.
It's not like we can even be ourselves in the social-media universe. We have to be interesting, witty, original and engaging in order to draw strangers to our blogs/Twitter feeds/websites. We have to be a character we've made up, and be able to "make friends" with characters other people have made up. As Jen P. noted, God forbid you should ever slip out of character. That's a lot of sweaty hard work for many of us. And it pays not one dime.
I'm not a technophobe, I'm an unrecovered introvert. I view social media the way I did dances in high school — yet another way to feel awkward and uncomfortable and inadequate, the ultimate revenge of the popular kids. It's going to be hard to change at this late stage of my life.
Nathan–
In response to the question, I'd have to say I don't know. I follow several industry blogs and one that's just for fun, but I couldn't call any of those people friends. The online friends I've made were through message boards with PM systems in place and then, after a few private conversations we'd exchange email addresses and what not.
Your blog is one of my two favorites. I've learned a ton from it and it even helped me land an agent. You're funny and clever and I often share things you with my boyfriend just because I know he'll get a kick out of it. But I still wouldn't expect you to know who I was other than perhaps recognizing my name as a result of the comments I leave, and I've been here for more than a year. Even if you remembered something specific, it's not the same as knowing me. I have a bit of insight into you because I read your blog daily, but you don't have the same levels of insight into me.
The more followers one has, the more that's going to be true. When it's just a few, you can easily develop relationships, but if you have a hundred thousand people following you, it's going to be impossible to develop that with everyone. I feel that social media gives the illusion of relationships more than the ability to follow through. It's very one-sided. And maybe that's okay. Maybe that's what people are looking for.
I admit, I might be very off the mark with this.
I think Lance has a good point. On one hand, I'm more comfortable online than I am in a crowd of people (I'm rather shy in person), but the interesting thing you said is that we have to be a character rather than our true selves.
I'm not sure I would have said it that way, but I will say that I'm much more comfortable with the idea of actually being a character than with being myself. I'm a private person and I am cautious with details that I share. On the other hand, I think creating a Facebook page for a character from my book would be hilarious and fun. My favorite author does this sort of thing, and I've always thought it was a blast.
I'd do that in a heartbeat. That's kind of what I meant earlier when I referred to thinking outside of the box, though. I'd like to have fun with this sort of thing, and I'd have a lot more fun with goofy things like that than with maintaining a page about myself.
I definitely agree that blogs can transition from a very one-to-one relationship into more of a broadcasting relationship. After a point it just becomes impossible to maintain those one on one conenctions. That part I definitely can agree with. I'd still say it's about making a connection with people, but the nature of that connection can be, as you say, a bit one sided.
But wow, I really disagree both with the idea that people who use social media were all the popular kids in high school or that you have to be some sort of hybrid character. The Internet can smell a lack of authenticity a mile away. The best bloggers are themselves. It may be a somewhat censored version of themselves or people may invent a bit of a character, but that's true of any public face we put on, whether on the Internet or "real" life. At the core I think you really can get a sense of the "real" personality of the best bloggers.
I don't think the qualities that make a good blogger are necessarily the same qualities that make a person popular. Don't get me wrong. I think Lance had an interesting point concerning the concept of the person who we are online is a bit of a face, and expanding on that.
I'm not particularly comfortable in groups of people, but I have no problem interacting online. I think having a bit of separation and time to plan and think about responses actually makes it *easier* for people who are socially awkward to communicate online. I also think that in order to have a good blog, etc., you need to be someone who writes well, and that has nothing to do with popularity.
I definitely agree with you on that one.