social media

The Cool Table

~ SarahLaPolla ~ 6 Comments

If you read this blog, then you probably also follow me on Twitter. I’m a huge fan of Twitter. I encourage every writer, editor, agent, and wannabe intern I meet to join and embrace it. It’s where the publishing community hangs out – our collective water cooler – so obviously if you want to be part of that world, that’s where you need to be. (Note: This is not the first time I’ve had thoughts about social media on this blog.)

As much as I advocate for Twitter, I’ve noticed a growing trend that goes against everything I love about social media for writers. New writers, particularly the ones who joined Twitter specifically to meet people and learn about the industry, are accidentally falling in with a bad crowd. This “bad crowd” often has good intentions, but they’re who I refer to as The Cool Kids.

Transition.

When I was in high school, my BFF-at-the-time and I used to call the popular kids “Air Quotes” because every time we’d mock their “cool” status, we’d put air quotes around the word “cool.”

The “Cool” Kids in the online book world are a little different, but can still be just as misguided and destructive. These Cool Kids, as stated above, usually mean well, but sometimes end up doing more harm than good to new writers who become convinced they need to be a Cool Kid too. (Ironically, the Cool Kid syndrome is most prevalent in YA writers, who often try to defy social hierarchies.)

Hint: You don’t need to know a secret handshake or be part of “in” crowd in order to succeed in publishing. Watch out for these “Cool” people who may lead you to believe otherwise:

Cool Kid: The Blogger
Why They’re Dangerous: No credentials are needed to start a blog.

Not all bloggers write reviews, and not all blogger-reviewers write smart reviews. The danger of The Blogger comes from those who simply call themselves bloggers without putting in the work or building an audience. Yet, to writers just starting out, it’s hard to tell the difference, and can get outdated or incorrect information. The Blogger ends up being in a position of power for writers who want to learn about the industry from people they assume are experts.

I have a blog (obviously), as do many agents and writers, but I do not consider myself a blogger. The type of blogger I’m talking about isn’t just someone who writes blog posts. I’m talking about the ones who spell their title with a capital B. The Blogger who holds pitch contests every two months just to get hits, and posts query advice despite not being agented or published. These are also the Bloggers who feel slighted when they get rejected from NetGalley.

At BEA a few years ago I was in line for the bathroom with a few of these Bloggers. They complained loudly about how they were rejected by the publisher for a coveted galley and couldn’t believe they had to wait in line with a bunch of commoners. One turned to me even though she didn’t know who I was or that I worked in publishing. “My blog has 500 followers. It’s not like I’m just some random person!” she told me. I shrugged and left to find a different bathroom.

Here’s the truth of modern society: Everyone is online. Being a blogger in the publishing/writing world may have been impressive 10 years ago, but today it’s practically expected. Being online doesn’t entitle anyone to anything anymore, and it doesn’t necessarily mean The Blogger has industry knowledge or connections.

What does entitle bloggers to things now? Having a good blog. Having a large, loyal, and consistent readership, and being well-known among the literary community. Publicists know that bloggers aren’t going to have the same reach as the New York Times, and they take that into account, but they still need to believe the blog is a respected voice in the industry.

Here are some non-agent/editor, capital-B Bloggers and blog-like sites I particularly enjoy:

Jane Friedman
The Rumpus
The Millions
Bookslut
Smart Bitches, Trashy Books
Stacked
Book Riot
YA Interrobang
YA Highway
The Daily Dahlia

Cool Kid: The Twitter Darling
Why They’re Dangerous: They’re your best friend… until they’re not.

Raise your hand if you have ever been personally victimized by The Twitter Darling.

The Twitter Darling knows everything and everyone. They may not be bestselling authors, or even well-known outside of the Twitter and blogging community, but they have made themselves Very Important People To Know. The Twitter Darling tweets approximately 100 times a day and will RT and promote the shit out of you because that’s what supportive BFFs do.

Twitter Darlings keep up with industry news and trends. They are Bloggers-with-a-capital-B who never get rejected from NetGalley. They are close friends with a few industry folks and get invited to publishing parties. They have the power to invite you to sit at the “Cool” Table, and if you’re already cool, they will convince themselves it’s because of their influence and acceptance of you.

If you’re friends with the Twitter Darling, congratulations, but remember to stay true to yourself. Because the thing about Twitter Darlings? They have the power to kick you out of the “Cool” Table. Reasons might include: Not being agented, not having a book deal, not being published by what they consider the “right” house, not acknowledging the Twitter Darling’s greatness, and not wearing pink on Wednesdays.

They can be wonderful allies and friends, but they can also create unnecessary pressure to be just as “Cool” as they are.

An important thing to keep in mind about being “Cool” is that agents and editors Do. Not. Care. We want to work with good writers and people who act like professionals online and offline. If you’re “in with the in-crowd,” that’s fine too, and it may even be beneficial to your career. Just remember there is no standard of “Cool,” and you should never, ever let yourself feel “less than” for not measuring up to a false deal.

Cool Kid: The Fanboy/Fangirl
Why They’re Dangerous: Their contagious enthusiasm may end up being your downfall. 

The Fanboy/Fangirl is usually on the periphery of the book world – aspiring authors, recent grads working as booksellers or interns, bloggers, etc. We like them and support them. Until they cross boundaries.

A “fanbase” is not something I expected to have working in publishing, and it’s also something that makes me super uncomfortable. My authors are the one who deserve fans. My job title is “literary agent” the way others are “teacher” or “accountant.” Yet, an increasingly disturbing thing I’ve noticed is that some writers equate my job title with being a celebrity. This is not healthy or helpful.

I’m happy so many people seem to find my tweets and blog posts amusing, helpful, or interesting, but the Fanboy/Fangirl takes this appreciation to a whole other level. I’ve had “fans” come up to me at book events and conferences to say they love me. Not “I like your Twitter account” or “I really loved your client’s book,” but rather “OMG I love you!” Um.

Think, for a minute, how you would react if a stranger came up to you and declared their devotion. Police might get involved. Or at least a very cautious, slowly backing away. I’ve seen agent-friends ambushed in similar fashions.

I don’t respond to everyone who tweets at me. I do, however, recognize names and have developed friendly relationships with writers who have reached out to me online. Most times it’s because our personalities mesh or we have the same sense of humor, and that comes in handy if they also happen to write in a genre I represent. What never works, though, is pretending you already know me, being argumentative for the sake of attention, or responding to Every. Single. Tweet.

What’s dangerous is that otherwise sane writers have asked me if they should care more about “agent gossip” or be more familiar with editors online even if they’ve never spoken to them before. They somehow get convinced that the super enthusiastic Fanboy/Fangirl is the one doing it right simply because they’re doing it the loudest.

(An aspiring author and blogger who respects industry folk without Fangirling over them is Charlee Vale, who wrote this necessary post expanding on this concept.)

Cool Kid: The Debut Author 
Why They’re Dangerous: Their “inspiring” Twitter feed could make other writers have nervous breakdowns.

This is a tricky one because the real “danger” of The Debut Author lies in how you handle them. I love debut authors. I buy their books, support them, and have quite literally devoted my career to creating more of them. The Debut Author doesn’t always know the damage they do, and I’d wager that 99.9% of them don’t mean to cause any damage at all.

Twitter is a great community for writers as long as everything shared is taken with a grain of salt. Comparisons are inevitably made, and in the age of social media, broadcasting why your news is the best news can cause other writers to question their own accomplishments, or lack thereof. You should be 100% proud of your achievements, which is why I’m not telling The Debut Author to stop tweeting their Agent Success Stories, Deal Announcements, Film Options, or anything else positive and amazing.

What I am asking is for other writers to stop drawing comparisons. Celebrate your friends’ good news without secretly resenting them. Step away from social media and clear your head and remember that the only thing you need to focus on is what’s right for you and your career. Your agent loves you just as much as The Debut Author’s agent loves them. Your “dream editor” is out there too.

No one’s timeline is going to be the same, and success doesn’t come in one size. Your modest debut may not compare to The Debut Author’s 6-figure multi-book deal, but you have more than one book in you, and a writer’s “breakout” novel is rarely their debut. So, relax, be happy, and get offline if you need to.

(By the way, agent Carly Watters had an excellent post on this topic. Bookmark it for your own sanity!)

All of these Cool Kids have one thing in common, and that’s their ability to make writers feel less than what they are. Don’t let them convince you there’s one way to do things, and be aware that most of these Cool Kids aren’t intentionally causing harm. Embrace social media, but remember to be yourself, stay sane, and be open to new online friends who are supportive and understanding. If they start to make you feel like you should sit at a different table, then go sit somewhere else and leave them behind.

Socialized Media

~ SarahLaPolla ~ 9 Comments

One of the most common questions I get from non-publishing friends is “Why do you have so many Twitter followers?” I get this from publishing friends too, I guess. The answer is, I don’t know. I try to be informative without being bland, and sometimes I take a break from publishing and tweet about my commute or TV shows. I have no idea which side of my Twitter personality people have responded to most, but I hope it’s a combination of the two.

I can’t really offer a guide on how to gain Twitter followers because:
1) Who am I?
2) Everyone uses Twitter differently, and I won’t assume you want to use it identically to the way I do.

Knowing how you want to use social media is probably a good first step in gaining followers. But other than that, I have no idea how to make people follow you. (Don’t be boring? Give them cookies?) What I can provide, however, is a list of things I see people do on Twitter that make me want to unfollow them, or even block them.

Tweeting too much.
If you have less than 1,000 followers but have tweeted over 80,000 times, I am suspicious of you. It’s not that what you’re saying is “bad” necessarily, but it means one of two things:
1) What you are saying is not effectively building an audience.
2) You have no interest in building an audience, and are treating Twitter as a sounding board for whatever pops into your brain.

Not having a Twitter avatar/not tweeting enough.
People like following humans on Twitter! Make friends by eliminating the Lifeless Twitter Egg and tweet at least once once a week. Also make sure your tweets say more than “I don’t know how to use Twitter” or “I don’t tweet enough.” Because… why are you even there? No one forced you to join. No one should join a social media site if they have no intention of using it.

Only promoting your book.
I’m cheating with this one a bit because I, personally, instantly mark these people as spam. So, I never really see this on my feed. If a writer pitches me their book via Twitter (when it’s not for a pitch contest) or sends me a link to their Amazon page, I click on their profile and 99% of the time, they’ve sent almost every other agent on Twitter that exact same message. THIS IS NOT MARKETING. It’s spam. Similarly, writers who don’t have books of their own will spam Twitter feeds another way – by only talking about their friends’ books. Like all book promotion, this, too, should be limited.

Not having a clue what you’re talking about.
This is obvious, but sometimes I see industry folk (usually newbies who are eager to impress) and authors discuss “publishing” and realize they don’t actually understand the business. I’ve been an agent for 3 years and worked in the industry for a little over 6 years. I’m no longer a “newbie” but I certainly have a lot left to learn. I’d like to believe I’m smart and capable of being the “rock star” I’m sometimes referred to online, but I’m not… yet. So, when I don’t understand something, I do not tweet about it. And if I do this by accident, and am called on my bullshit, I curl up into a ball and die; I do not keep tweeting and being all indignant about my lack-of-knowledge.

Streams of consciousness that turn into floods. 
Similar to tweeting too much, tweeting too often and not staying consistent is also something that makes me click Unfollow. For example, using Twitter to talk to about an article you read, and quickly realizing it’s going to take about 5 or 6 tweets in a row to get your point across. THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. Nor is taking time to respond to others who add to the conversation. What does look unprofessional is when someone turns my feed into this:

“This topic merits discussion. Here’s a link _______” [2:22pm]
“Here is Opinion #1 why this topic matters” [2:24pm]
“And Opinion #2” [2:25pm]
“@follower1 I agree because of reasons!” [2:28pm]
“I have to bring my cats to the vet today. Sooooo sad.” [2:29pm]
“@follower2 Oh, I disagree. Did you not see that link?” [2:30pm]
“My book has a pub date!!!! Please pre-order it from Amazon!” [2:31pm]
::SEVERAL RETWEETS ON VARIOUS TOPICS IN A ROW::
“I’m so excited for fall to start. Pumpkin spice latte season, y’all!” [2:32pm]
“@follower2 Let’s keep arguing about that other thing for a while. Does anyone even remember what I posted before?” [2:33pm]
“Here’s an adorable kitten GIF. Because Mondays, right?” [2:35pm]
“Did you all watch Breaking Bad last night? OMG!” [2:36pm]

I see this often, not just from writers, but from agents and other industry folk. There’s nothing wrong with any of the above-mentioned tweets individually, but spewed out in a 15-minute chunk is a problem. Yes, you should have variety in what you tweet about and engage in conversation and let your followers know about any new developments with your book. But, basically, chill out. Space out your tweets and understand that not every thought you have needs to be shared. The information you really, really want your followers to know will end up getting buried. Usually when I scroll through my feed, and I see the same person appear 10 times in a row, I’ll just read whatever their most recent tweet was. Because… ain’t no one got time for that.

Too. Much. Information.
Revealing how much of your personal life you share online is, of course, up to you. If you’re using Twitter as a tool in your professional life, however, be smart about what you say. Do we need a live-tweet of the birth of your child or a Vine of your colonoscopy? NOPE. If we learn your children’s names, do we necessarily need to know them as well as our own family?

Granted, I’m skeptical of how “social” every single website has become, and given the actual physical attacks on literary agents that have made the news, I’m about one step away from living in a bunker. I’m also just as much of an introvert online as I am in person, and for me that means needing my privacy. I understand not everyone is like that. But, if you do share, remember not to over-share and make things uncomfortable. Don’t be that guy at the party who brings a pleasant conversation about books to screeching halt because all he wants to do is publish a book to prove he is good enough, mom, and why doesn’t anyone love him, I mean, really. Twitter shouldn’t count as your weekly trip to church, therapy, or be a substitute for coffee with your real-life best friend.

I’ve said before (on Twitter) that social media is like a cocktail party – fun and casual and not as buttoned-up as the office – but some networking and shop talk will occur, so don’t get too drunk. Any actual business (e.g., pitching your book, information about submissions, following up on queries, etc.) should be saved for the office, aka “email.” Now, go forth and make smart social media choices!

In Virtual Reality, What Can’t We Do?

~ SarahLaPolla ~ 7 Comments

Social networking continues to prove just how powerful it is, more so now in the past few months than ever. When people aren’t using it to oust dictators or organize movements, they are using it simply to connect. I have said before that people who scoff at Twitter, or think online-only friends can’t have real value, clearly have no idea what social media is, and should therefore not talk about it.

Since I just can’t stop talking about Joss Whedon lately, I thought I’d use the latest utilization of the Internet to segue into my topic today. God-among-nerds, Nathan Fillion, recently said in an interview that if won $300 million from the California lottery, then he’d buy the rights to Firefly and distribute it online. Well, the geek world went nuts and a few devoted Browncoats launched this website to “Help Nathan Buy Firefly.” Firefly‘s cancellation is hardly akin to Middle Eastern oppression, but hey, some of us need to create our own problems.

This bit of nerd news does have a point. Cult favorite TV shows like Firefly and Arrested Development have been off the air for over five years, but these shows in particular never seem to have died. This is arguably because of the Internet. Getting canceled these days is not what it used to be. Fans have voices now, and they can mobilize. These are the people who got Family Guy back on the air. Even though I don’t watch Family Guy, the impact that had is not lost on me. A network listened and maybe it’ll happen again with other cult shows…

… But what about cult books?

Have you ever wondered what would happen if your favorite book goes out of print? Probably not – we live in the age of Espresso Book Machines and ebooks, after all. But what about those pulpy noir paperbacks with the awesome covers that, try as they might, just can’t get reprinted. Or what if (heaven forbid!) an agent can’t seem to give away those darn ebook rights? There are so many titles that have fallen by the wayside for either being too old, not frontlist-worthy, or the estates are holding them back. What’s a reader to do?

What would happen if the social media savvy decided to save books the same way they do for canceled beloved TV shows? Do you think they’d stand a chance? If Margaret Atwood or David Foster Wallace were suddenly pulled from the shelves, would publishers notice a public outcry?

Have Social Networking Sites Made Us Dumb?

~ SarahLaPolla ~ 13 Comments

Clarification: Not dumb, as in stupid. Rather, dumb, as in mute – or, wordless.

I am a big fan of the writer’s message board and reference site, Absolute Write. It’s an incredibly useful site; it builds writers’ communities, provides support, and I would in no way ever make fun of and say anything negative about it. Something amusing I noticed when glancing through the forum topics in my Google Reader, however, is the subject titles of each new conversation. Examples from this weekend:

“i poop rainbows”
“so, is it possible without broken bones?”
“grandchild for sale, 30K. supplies limited”
“Lindsay Graham advocates mass murder”
“we don’t need another hero?”
“no rest for the wicked”
I’m assuming these threads have to do with writing in some way, but maybe not. It got me thinking “what do writers really talk about in open forums?” (My alternate title for this blog post was “What We Talk About When We Don’t Talk About Writing.”) Most likely, these topics are intended for research purposes. (Who amongst us hasn’t Googled “centaur mating rituals” in the name of “authenticity?”) But, I’m sure many forum discussions have less to do with someone’s work-in-progress, and more to do with starting a conversation with someone about something on his or her mind. I find this neither negative nor positive, as far as productivity is concerned; I simply find it curious.
Ironically, one of the forum discussions on Absolute Write this weekend was titled “Social Networks Destroy Your Privacy.” I have my issues with Mark Zuckerberg as much as the next social networker, but I’m not one of those people who think social media sites are out to get us. They’re guilty of taking a mile when we give them an inch, but that’s about it. They wouldn’t be able to exploit us if we didn’t give them just enough to use. 
This is where using social media sites for their intended purposes comes into play. If we’re using Facebook for reasons other than connecting with friends (and stalking), and using Twitter as a source of talking about what we made for dinner, rather than when our book is coming out, and, finally, using literary blogs and message boards as a means to discuss anything other than writing or books, then why wouldn’t these sites take advantage of us? We’re giving them way more than is necessary for them to survive, so why not take the excess and find a way to monetize it?
There is, of course, an alternative side to “saying too much.” A more positive side. If any of you follow me on Twitter, you know that I don’t always tweet about books… or writing… or publishing… OK, sometimes I just tweet about TV or what I did that day. Am I giving the Twitter gods authority to spam me with stuff I later have to block? Sure. But I also have developed relationships with writers, editors, and other agents whom I’ve never met in real life. I’ve even set up a couple meetings with editors as a result of discovering common interests. As someone who is still relatively new to the world of agenting, I’ve found it incredibly useful and fun to let other sides of me show via social media. 
The benefits of sharing recipes, discussing current events, and talking about your families via social media sites are obvious when you look to publishing and writers’ blogs and see the same people comment on every post. These people know each other, and their comments turn into conversations, which lead to friendships, bonds, and critique groups. To me, people who say e-friendships aren’t real are clearly not using social media to its full advantage. (That said, I’m a big believer in boundaries. Hence, I will not be your friend on Facebook.)
What do you all think? Have we been given so many literary outlets that we’ve now run out of things to say? Or is the “nothing” just another part of being social?