How NOT to Take a Rejection from Us

While stumbling around the internet today, I came across this. In essence, it was an author bemoaning a rejection letter he received from us. He was having a bad day and chose to rant on his blog about it. I've copied the pertinent part below, but you can click on that link to read the whole thing and verify that I'm not misquoting him.

My magnum opus received a rejection today, not for publication, but rather, that it was not qualified for a review by any “reviewers” on the website “The New Podler Review of Books: Small Press and self-published books worth reading”. Now I don’t remember ever submitting a review request to this site, although it’s possible. I don’t normally ask for reviews except when I am just putting a book out there and need a few ARC reviews posted so that the almighty ad sites will consider my money worth spending (and then I normally impose shamelessly on fellow authors).

Now the facts that the aforementioned review site is built on the most hideous of the free backdrops on the free “blogspot.com” and that my rejection came from a (free) Gmail address notwithstanding, their subtitle would suggest that my self-published book is “[not] worth reading”. Now had the site just said “Podler Reviews” I probably wouldn’t have given it a second glance. Okay, that AND if the current book under review didn’t have a cover (and writing) quality equivalent to that of a sixth-grader (no, that’s not true—not true at all. Such a commentary insults the sixth-grader).

I know, we’re supposed to have thick skin. And I usually do. Or pretend I do. But just as each time a reader enjoys my work it makes my day, not matter how many books I ever sell or have reviewed, it also stings when someone takes time out of their day to reject you. Doesn’t it? Or am I alone here, wandering in the literary desert of criticism with eyes gouged out and a bloody wrap around my head? It’s a bummer when people that consider dog poop as literature reject you as unreadable. I know, I know, it actually defies logic, but what can I say?

Now while this post was made three years ago, I couldn't help but reply. Things posted to the internet live forever or, at least, until they're taken down. As I write this, my comment is awaiting moderation. So here it is just in case it's rejected:

Ha! This is wonderful. I’ve only just now stumbled upon this post, so I shall respond on behalf of the New Podler Review of Books.

Your scathing criticism of our usage of free stuff is spot on and accepted. But we’re hardly alone in this.

We have changed the motto since you visited us. It was there from the beginning and was established by the site’s founder, who is no longer with us. I never thought that it was intended to alienate authors whose work was rejected by us. More like, “Here are some indie books that we came across that are good. Obviously, there are more, but [insert lame reason here].” We didn’t get to read The Martian or Wool when they were indies. Doesn’t mean they sucked.

I won’t apologize for the lame covers of some of the books on the site. Indie publishing has been plagued with that from the start. Instead, we’ve had a page dedicated to sites where indie authors can find affordable book cover designers.

Yeah, Blood Land was submitted to us via MailChimp, that mass mailing service. I don’t know if you used them or someone did it on your behalf. Regardless, it means that someone didn’t read our submission guidelines. Mystery/Thrillers really aren’t our thing. Maybe one of the available reviewers at the time was into it, but he/she took a pass for whatever reason.

If you had read our submissions page, at the bottom you would’ve seen this:

“We reject over 95% of the submissions we receive, and that includes the very good along with the not so good. If you’re rejected, you’re in good company. One author we reviewed posted that he only received five reviews out of 144 submissions to book bloggers. Keep trying!”

We send out form rejections because it consumes less time, and when managing a slush pile, I like to take the easy route. Kind of like using MailChimp to send out a bunch of submissions to prospective reviewers.

I’m sorry if the rejection letter that was sent to you hurt your feelings. It wasn’t meant to do that. It was sent to provide closure. Some authors like to have that. Also, I’m sorry that you felt that rejecting your work meant that we thought it was crap. That was not the case. Yeah, the book cover on the site at the time was amateurish, but the writing was not. Judging books by covers…yeah, I know.

Anyway, I’m sure that you’ve moved on. I hope that this reply clears things up for you. I also hope that when you get rejected, you shrug and move on.

It just goes to show that you can't please everyone. Oh, and the book currently reviewed at the time was Embustero. I guess sci-fi isn't his thing.

\_/
DED

Separating the Wheat from the Spam

Our email address has been snatched up by an email marketing company. No real surprise there. This is the Internet Age after all.

We don't mind having our site listed on indie book reviewer lists. Most of them are courteous to both author and reviewer. They list the reviewer's likes and dislikes and other submission guidelines, and even provide a link to the reviewer's site. This is the right way to go about it. They save the author time in their hunt for reviews and the reviewers from having to deal with books they're not interested in.

But that's not how this marketing company operates. Authors pay a fee to generate an email marketing campaign. Judging by the format of these emails, they fill out a form listing pertinent info about themselves and their book. Upon completion, it gets shot out to every book reviewer in their database, regardless of the reviewer's book preferences.

We're tired of this.

There's a reason why we have submission guidelines. There's a list of what we're not interested in and who's available and what they like to read. It's a waste of our time to have to go through these blind submissions, telling Joe Schmoe that his 101 Ways to Serve Lima Beans cookbook isn't what we want to read.

The other interesting trend to these spam submissions is the quality. There's a definitive lower level of quality to this group. As a sweeping generalization, I'm going to accuse the mass mailers of trying to do things on the cheap. Many (not all) don't utilize an editor or spend the extra time proofreading their own work. Acceptances are far lower for this group than for those who follow procedure. We still have to read the submission, track down some sample chapters on the Web, and, after confirming the material is third rate, send out a rejection letter. More time lost.

As a whole, authors who take the time to check us out and follow our submission guidelines have invested more time in their work. And it shows. Even if we reject them (we have to; there's just too many), 80% of the time quality is not an issue.

We could just ignore everyone who lacks "submission" in their subject line, but that would be rude, right?

Instead, filters are in place to weed out spam-like marketing campaigns. Submissions from people who blindly submit to us via these mass mailers are deleted unread. We're not completely heartless though. An auto-responder lets them know that their submission is "improperly formatted" and provides a link to our submission guidelines page.

I'm hoping that the lazy authors will see what they have to do and either improve the quality of their work or just go away.

I don't know if this post comes across as a rant, whining, or rational. Frankly, I don't care. We're up to 30 submissions a month again. There's only time to review a fraction of those books. The less time spent sifting through the slush to find something of quality we want to read, the better.

If you have the time and the desire, why not join us? Take on some of the load. It doesn't matter if it's just one book review per year (though the more the better). Help us shine a light on those indie authors who deserve some time in the spotlight.

Submissions Update

A month ago, we closed our submissions window and yes, we're still closed.

The good news is that we've finished with the February submissions. The bad news is that there were a lot of submissions in March. And the pace continued into April.

One of our blog's readers stated that he felt the onrush of submissions was due to a surge in our popularity. Perhaps. I suspect it's due to our appearance in Christy Pinheiro's Indie Book Reviewer Yellow Pages. Now that indie writers can turn to a singular source to obtain dozens of names of indie book review blogs, it's easier for them to find us. Sure, there was Google, but scrolling through a list of hundreds of links isn't as user friendly as a nicely formatted guide full of blog names, what genres they like/dislike, where to submit, and so on. Christy did all the work for them.

I can tell that people are finding us in there (rather than here), because we've received a few submissions after we closed. If these authors had checked us out for themselves at any point, they would've seen that we were closed and threatening to delete all who disturbed us while we got caught up.

We hope to open soon, but the way things are going, I'm thinking that it's going to be at least another month.

Submissions Are Closed

We're sorry to announce that we are closed to submissions. We have too great a backlog of stories to go through and we feel that it is imperative that we catch up before we accept any more.

Any submissions received from this moment forward will be deleted unread. Sorry, but closed means closed.

Keep watch on the Submission Guidelines page. When reviewers names appear there again, then you'll know it's safe to start submitting again.

Reviews will continue.

Thank you for your patience.

\_/
DED

Submissions Update

Hi all,

We've received a lot of genre submissions of late so we're going to close the door to anything in the horror, fantasy, alternate history, thriller and science fiction categories. Rob, S.B. and I have enough to keep us busy for a while. Our two trainee reviewers are wading through the slush trying to get something together.

Fortunately, Libby, our literary reviewer, is still available to read your submissions. Just make sure that what you're submitting suits her tastes. If you're unsure, check her past reviews to get an idea.

Genre authors should check back sometime in January before submitting. Checking the "caught up through" date will give you an indication of our progress, though rejections will come sooner.

Reviews will continue. Rob Steiner will be posting one shortly. Libby, the trainees and I are reading submitted stories and will post our reviews when time permits. The holidays tend to get in the way. :)

\_/
DED

You Can Be the Next John Grisham

Well, no, not really.

My name is Liz, and I’m a dog in the manager.

If you don’t know what that means, look it up. A wide knowledge base is an absolute must for a writer, even if it’s focused on a niche. Part of my job here will be to focus on some of the misinformation circulating about—and from—the subsidy presses.

Let’s start with that. They will tell you that if you sign up with them, you’re self-publishing. Unless you’ve purchased your own ISBN and done all the pre-press work yourself or (preferably, unless you’re a professional graphic artist) hired someone to do it for you, you aren’t self-published. You’re subsidy published, and the industry pejorative for that is “vanity published.” This is a fact, and arguing about it till the 2012 apocalypse won’t make it not true.

One of the biggest scams the subsidy presses have going is this: let us print your book and you can then use it to attract the attention of a traditional publisher. They then take your money and provide you with a trade paperback.

They’ll mention the names of famous authors who started their lucrative career by having their self-published book picked up by a publisher. What they leave out is that 1 in 100,000 are lousy odds--and that those authors worked their butts off hand-selling those books out of the trunks of their cars for months and even years before the miracle happened.

I know this because as Zumaya’s acquisitions editor (along with every other editorial function), I receive these books as submissions in place of the electronic files our guidelines specifically call for.The most recent one is, as are most such efforts, poorly designed and barely edited. Oh, it’s essentially clean as far as typos and punctuation and such, but had this book been presented to a professional editor he or she would have guided the author so what is probably a very compelling personal story actually comes through as such.

But...but...but...

The cover letter accompanying this volume tells me the book is “unpublished.” Except it’s not. It has an ISBN--an international standard book number--which means it can be added into bookseller databases. It has a Library of Congress Control Number, which means the title is registered with the U.S. Library of Congress. I didn’t check, but it’s also probably listed in Books in Print.

There is no way I or any other publisher is going to offer a contract for this book, because we know from bitter past experience that reprints, unless the author is Stephen King or Nora Roberts, don’t sell. And given the majority of books sell fewer than 100 copies as a general rule, we are certainly not going to consider a niche book by an unknown author that’s probably already either been purchased by all the author’s friends and relatives who are going to buy it or given out as a freebie to everyone likely to be interested.

Because, see, that’s what the subsidy presses tell you to do. Let them print your book, then you buy X copies and send them out to people who might give you a good review and to publishers, who will be so impressed by the book they’ll jump at the chance to take it on.

Not gonna happen, folks. And the subsidy press has made their pile from the fee you paid to get the book printed and all those copies you bought to send out, so they couldn’t care less.

If your goal is to have your book picked up by a regular publisher, do not fall for this nonsense. The only way to get on the good side of a regular publisher is to learn how to write a good, concise query letter, have a professional-caliber manuscript ready to send if requested and read their guidelines. As we speak, there are 700 queries in my submissions queue, and new ones arrive at the rate of 1-5 a day. That number increases exponentially with the size of the publisher. I have no time to mess with people who can’t do me the courtesy of reading our guidelines and following the procedure contained there.

And I’m not going to read the subsidy published book you’ve sent me instead of the query and synopsis I ask for. Neither will any other publisher. And the press that talked you into this has already made their pile, so they're good. Only one left out in the cold is...you.