After reading how Thomas Nelson's CEO loves Twitter, I signed up for it. (Click here to sign up for Twitter.) I am easily found if you want to follow me there.

Writers love to admit they're terrible at sales and marketing. Somehow, if they admit they're bad at it, they think it means they're off the hook. "Well, I'm just a writer, I'm not a marketer." Or: "I don't feel comfortable selling—I feel like I'm selling myself out." Or, best of all: "I would never shill my book." (Or, sometimes, "I don't have the time and money to self-promote." Egregious error! But to be addressed some other time.)

I have two philosophies to share with all writers:

1. If done correctly, marketing and promoting your book does not mean you are selling out or shilling.
   
2. Even the most introverted writers, with no marketing and promotion experience, can take effective, meaningful steps to sell and publicize their books.

These concepts are at the front of my mind lately because I'm working with author Christina Katz on her upcoming fall 2008 book, Get Known Before the Book Deal.

The concept I find us returning to, again and again, is one of authenticity.

AUTHENTICITY works two ways.

First, whatever you do to market and promote yourself and your work, it needs to feel good to you. It needs to make you even more excited and passionate. It should not feel like bad medicine, otherwise you won't do it. Your efforts should fit with who you are as a person (build on your strengths) and make sense in the big picture of your career.

Second, your actions need to appear genuine and authentic to your intended audience. Your actions should be from a "real" person offering a benefit (whether that's information or entertainment); you should not be just another huckster selling another widget. Nobody likes a shill, so don't be one.

Your marketing and promoting journey (which is really about platform-building too) involves leveraging who you already are (in an honest way), identifying and understanding your readership (in a genuine way), developing your own unique approach to that readership (that feels good to everyone), and building an authentic connection. People should trust you.

Now for the latest conundrum Christina and I have discussed.

What about author blog tours, where the author pays for the promotional opportunity. Is that shilling?

What about the bloggers who promote products for companies in their blogs (for money or free stuff)?

What about authors (or coaches/consultants) who employ the you-plug-my-product and I'll-plug-yours strategy?

Is this stuff shilling?

I don't think there's a clear-cut answer because it involves so many factors, but whenever there's pay for play, or a quid pro quo, your authenticity comes into question. Or, even if it doesn't come into question, why would you want to invest your time, money, or energy into anything other than a genuine and authentic opportunity to reach or serve your target readership? Sometimes, when you pay for a certain type of promotion or publicity (or accept fringe benefits in exchange for helping someone else promote), the results are less quality. You hurt yourself in the long run. (If marketing and self-promotion were only about having enough money, couldn't we all just pay for enough of it to make our books bestsellers? But it's not that easy.)

To be clear:
It's absolutely shilling if you're touring blogs with audiences who aren't interested in your book/expertise; it's shilling if you promote products or companies for quick gain (and not out of a true partnership, or a desire to give your readers a benefit); it's shilling if you're pushing any kind of product-person-service that you don't believe in and/or that isn't related to your readers. It's about your relationship with your readership. Put yourself in your readers' shoes; would it look like shilling to them? Would it look questionable? (Do you look desperate or gross doing it?) Then don't do it.

I would love to get your viewpoints on the questions above. What have your experiences been? Do you think it's OK to pay for play? When does an author cross the line into shilling?

Last weekend the Bluegrass Festival of Books took place in Lexington, Kentucky. Our senior marketing manager Scott Francis was there, promoting his book (and other authors from F+W also attended), but unfortunately no one from the Writer's Digest editorial staff was able to go and give our usual writer's workshop. (I was there in 2005 and 2006, but attended Pennwriters this past weekend and couldn't be in two places at once.)

Through some strange mix-up, the festival thought I would be attending in 2008, and created a sign to excuse my inability to attend. F+W's publicity director, Greg Hatfield, brought it back as a gift, so I am keeping it handy for out-of-office occasions. I believe there may be many more unexpected uses for it.

Even though I love pontificating on the future of book publishing, I'm developing severe innovation-fatigue, so this will be last post (at least this week) on this topic. I hope.

The Information Age columnist at the Wall Street Journal has written a piece, "The Digital Future of Books", basically about the Kindle. Even the kind, happy types at Shelf Awareness comment in today's newsletter, in reference to this article, "Stop us if you've heard this one before …"

There is a nice nugget in the article from Jeff Gomez, author of the print book, Print Is Dead.

Much is at stake. As Mr. Gomez concluded, "what's really important is the culture of ideas and innovation" books represent. But "to expect future generations to be satisfied with printed books is like expecting the BlackBerry users of today to start communicating by writing letters, stuffing envelopes and licking stamps."

The article concludes, "With innovations like the Kindle, digital media can help return to us our attention spans and extend what makes books great: words and their meaning." Unfortunately, only someone of an advanced age could've wrapped up like that (without a note of cynicism).

There's an excellent post over at The Digitalist, a blog by the digital team of Pan Macmillan (a UK publisher): "A book publisher's manifesto for the 21st century." It's the first post in a six-parter about what the future of book publishing will look like. (Note: I found this via PersonaNonGrata, another publishing blog.)

It takes issue with publishers who focus on digitization at the expense of the big picture: it's not just about changing formats or going electronic; it's about how people's behaviors and attitudes are changing toward content. The article says:

 … multimedia mash-ups—not text—holds the attraction for the digital natives who are growing up fast into the mass market of tomorrow. Will there even be a writing and reading culture as we know it, tomorrow? Is the publishing industry acting fast enough and working creatively enough to adapt to the new information and leisure economies?

There are no shortage of futurists who proclaim that the book will die, or print will die, or reading will die. (Or that these things are already dead.)

I agree publishers (and authors) should think more about "content" and "benefit" rather than the shape/form/method of packaging (e.g., "book" or "e-book"), but I can still envision a place for editors, publishers, and books in the world. My reasoning thus far:

• The world is exploding with more information, not less. The role of an editor (or a publisher)? To make sense of all this information, to edit this information, to ensure the quality of this information. (At the Pennwriters conference, I spoke with a writer who was trying to pinpoint birth/death dates for famous people. Attempting to do this through an Internet search is an exercise in frustration. Who do you trust when you find conflicting information?)
  
• Perhaps it is old-fashioned to think there is still a need for a gatekeeper (or at least an opinionmaker), but I hold onto this notion because people have less time than ever, not more. Consumers want to find someone they can trust to give them good, accurate (or entertaining) information. And maybe editors/publishers won't be doing what they used to do 50 years ago (or even 10 years ago), but they can still act as aggregators, distributors, and checkpoints for content. Much will hinge on: Who do you trust?
  
• Aside from the trust issue, there is also the niche/specialization factor. You can see online how people segregate themselves into distinct communities. Publishers (or content providers) who can get inside these communities and learn how to serve them may still have a profitable business model to look forward to.
• In the future, perhaps creating, editing, and publishing a "book" (whether as a physical product or not) will be the mark of the most quality content available on a topic. Books will not be the only way to share information/opinions/content, but they may end up being the most respected way, because of investment (presumably) required in their creation.
  

The one argument I don't have yet is why people will still be reading text. That might be the most difficult question of all, since I can see how we might become a culture that's predominantly visual (movies, TV, computer screens). But that's a discussion for another posting.

A recap of the final day.

My Session on Nonfiction Queries, Submissions, Proposals
This morning I received excellent and insightful questions from the writers attending. (Thank you!) Some of the high points of discussion:

• Credentials and platform are not the same thing. Credentials give you the authority to write on a topic, or inspire trust in the reader. Platform is your visibility to your audience or readership, which helps you promote and sell books. Credentials can help you grow your platform, but alone they do not act as a platform.
• Early in the process it is essential for you to identify your book's category, or where it would be shelved in the bookstore. Publishers pitch books to chain stores based on the book's category (because there are different buyers for each category). It is not possible for your book to be shelved in two different categories in a store (at least not deliberately). This is why it is so difficult to sell hybrid works (like a self-help memoir).
  
• The No. 1 weakness in book proposals that come across my desk? Authors focus too much on themselves or their own ideas and not enough on the audience or market for the work.

Finally, a couple bits and pieces that didn't fit anywhere else:

• (Friedman Watch!) I met Melanie Donovan, an executive editor from HarperCollins, who said when she saw my name in the program, it gave her a small chill. Apparently, the HarperCollins Jane Friedman is one imposing lady!
• I spoke to several attendees who said this year's Pennwriters conference offered one of the best programs ever—the sessions were hardworking, practical, and useful for anyone trying to break into the industry. Based on the sessions I was able to attend, I agree the information presented has been top-notch for anyone trying to get published.
  

A thank-you to everyone at Pennwriters who organized and volunteered at the event; what a devoted group! The environment has been friendly, relaxed, but also professional. The staff take excellent care of the presenters, and are very passionate about their mission to help writers succeed. As Carol Silvis said during yesterday's lunch, "You reach down, and lift someone up."