Publishers expect authors to promote their book

[Hibush]

We have had discussion on The Fora regarding how much an author should participate in promoting their academic book. Questions like, How much should authors expect of the publisher? How much should and could an author help? Is it unseemly to tell anyone that you have published a book?

Here is one established publisher's perspective, presented an article intended for authors with any academic publishing house.

https://blog.degruyter.com/how-to-promote-your-academic-book/

For one thing, they recommend building a big audience on the three big social media platforms (not TikTok, whew!) and issuing a regular string of engaging missives that make people want to look at your book and to request that their library order a copy.

Another is (online) readings and discussions that you organize yourself and promote on social media. No need to be so demure as to wait for someone to invite you to a conference panel or department seminar!

Why do they rely on authors to do he bulk of the promotion? "Your peers will trust you more than any advertisement. So, use your network, translate your research into other formats, and trust the quality of your work."

This expectations strikes me as being quite different from what may authors in book fields are comfortable with. What is the likelihood that author and publisher expectations will converge?

[downer]

Quite often authors also have to hustle to get any book reviews. A significant proportion of academic books get zero reviews.

I have one friend who dreams of making a bunch of money through publishing books but also has zero interest in using social media to promote their work. They are quite aware that this means their dreams will probably never be realized, but this has no effect on their motivation. It also seems to have no effect on the power of the dream, which they often bring up. I find it a little odd.

[Hibush]

Quite often authors also have to hustle to get any book reviews. A significant proportion of academic books get zero reviews.

I have one friend who dreams of making a bunch of money through publishing books but also has zero interest in using social media to promote their work. They are quite aware that this means their dreams will probably never be realized, but this has no effect on their motivation. It also seems to have no effect on the power of the dream, which they often bring up. I find it a little odd.

One is fortunate when one's dreams and one's motivations converge.

[Ruralguy]

I know someone who is almost completely supported by book royalties and low paying speaking engagements. He's not an academic. I'd say he has written about 30 books, and he says the ones that sell for 25 years at 1000 copies a year are the bread and butter, and most only sell about that much total and die off after a few years. "Making Lots of Money " has probably. only been achieved by a handful of academics trying to sell to the public at large.

As for publishers pushing books or not....expecting authors to do the heavy lifting Is common.

[Caracal]

As for publishers pushing books or not....expecting authors to do the heavy lifting Is common.

For a decent number of academics in book fields, they need to have a book published to get tenure, but that's it. It doesn't matter how much attention it gets or where it is reviewed. I know people who had zero interest in spending any time promoting their book because they just didn't see any real advantage in doing so. People in their subfield would know about it anyway, and realistically people outside of their subfield wouldn't be particularly likely to read it.

[jerseyjay]

I just published a book. It is an academic book (in history) that speaks to a small subfield, but also several other subfields. In a certain sense, it doesn't matter to me if the book is publicized or not. I don't think I will make any money from the book, except for the book will (I hope) contribute to my getting tenure.

However, I wrote the book because I thought that there was a gap in the literature, and I thought that I had something to add to "the conversation" about the topics I am addressing.

On a more pragmatic level, if the book is well known and well respected, it would probably help my career.

My publisher (a good university press) had done good work, but most of it is amplifying my own publicity efforts. I maintain a list of people who work on subjects or in fields that overlap with my research. When I publish something, I usually send an email to them. This has contributed to forging professional contacts, collaboration at conferences, co-edited volumes, letters of recommendation, job leads, and even friendships. So when I published my recent book, I emailed everybody on the list.

I also emailed the relevant editors of publications that might be interested in reviewing the book. Some have already done so.

I don't really see how my publisher could substitute for my contacts, forged over 20 years of research.

In terms of "social media": I set up a Twitter account and I tweet information for upcoming talks, tweet reviews, and links to new articles. I do not really tweet about other things. (Although I have found that I have learnt about conferences and job openings by following professional associations, libraries, and professors who do similar work.) I try to spend 20 minutes or less on Twitter.

I posted a flyer on my Academia account, if that counts as social media. On my LinkedIn profile, I posted a link to the publisher's catalog. None of this will make the book a best seller, but it is part of putting the word out there.

[Caracal]

I just published a book. It is an academic book (in history) that speaks to a small subfield, but also several other subfields. In a certain sense, it doesn't matter to me if the book is publicized or not. I don't think I will make any money from the book, except for the book will (I hope) contribute to my getting tenure.

However, I wrote the book because I thought that there was a gap in the literature, and I thought that I had something to add to "the conversation" about the topics I am addressing.

On a more pragmatic level, if the book is well known and well respected, it would probably help my career.

My publisher (a good university press) had done good work, but most of it is amplifying my own publicity efforts. I maintain a list of people who work on subjects or in fields that overlap with my research. When I publish something, I usually send an email to them. This has contributed to forging professional contacts, collaboration at conferences, co-edited volumes, letters of recommendation, job leads, and even friendships. So when I published my recent book, I emailed everybody on the list.

I also emailed the relevant editors of publications that might be interested in reviewing the book. Some have already done so.

I don't really see how my publisher could substitute for my contacts, forged over 20 years of research.

Right. It probably only really makes sense for a publisher to do more than amplify the efforts of the author if the book has the potential to break out of academic circles.

[Hibush]

@jerseyjay, that is a really helpful perspective.

I especially like that the purpose is clear. You want the book to be part of the conversation. A completely appropriate goal for an academic book! To be part of the conversation, knowledgable people have to read it and react to it.

The idea of writing a book simply to check a box for T&P sounds sad. Sure, the editor and reviewers provide some sort of  third-party validation of the scholarly quality, which has some value to the institution. But the lack of associated conversation seems like a critical shortcoming.

The teamwork between the press and the well-connected author is also a nice example. Most academics have a better idea of who might be interested in a specialized book than the publisher. The publisher can pitch the book better than the author. It does not sound like the emails and tweets go into any sort of unseemly behavior, and can even be a significant part of the conversation themselves.