Today’s links of interest:
- In which I get frustrated and plead with authors
Authors, agents, editors, pay attention. Bookavore has some advice. If you’re trying to kill a market, this is how to do it (re: YA): All I’m saying is, I’m starting to get to a lot of third chapters and wondering if maybe the author chose to write about the wrong character in the story. - NOT Happy Nook Release Day!
Um, it appears the Nook is shipping a bit late. Of course, we’re also fascinated by the fact that nookboards.com exists. Reading, ftw! - Debrief: A month into my novel’s lifecycle
Author JC Hutchins takes a look at the sales of his novel one month after release. Here’s an author who is busting his butt to get the word out, doing everything right, and still worried. Very worried. - Ten Predictions For The E-Reader/E-Book Market In 2010
Adding to the trendwatching/books 2010, some predictions from PaidContent (which, if you’re paying attention, dovetail nicely with our thoughts this week and weeks past). - A Library Card Under the Christmas Tree
Joe Esposito writes about library subscription models, or, as we like to think of them, exploring new markets and ways to connect people and information. - My Hilarious Warner Bros. Royalty Statement
There is so much wrong here. So. Much. Wrong. And the fact that Warner Brothers is failing in its contractual obligations (basic reporting) is just the beginning. Recouped or not. If I were this guy, I’d be making a huge public stink, because it’s happening to many bands, and those bands may be closer to recoupment. Also, seriously? Reporting normal course data is only done for recouped bands? That doesn’t even make sense in an era of automated reporting systems. Surely, WB has real systems? (via Jim, who may have done his own rant) - BookSurge, CreateSpace Merge
Interesting. They are coming together under the CreateSpace name. - The New York Times, Publishers Weekly, and Book Bloggers
Martin Shepard of Permanent Press calls out the New York Times book reviews for their lack of diversity. Once upon a time, someone told us the reason the NYT didn’t review genre fiction because it focused on books people wouldn’t discover for themselves. Four or so Philip Roth reviews later, we still chuckle over this. Shepard’s post makes that comment all the more silly.
