How to use this Page

Funny how some of us miss the obvious.

Or not so funny. Thanks for the tip.

Damn. "If you build it, they will come" worked so well for Kevin Costner in "Field of Dreams"...

@rjdaley101071

WORD VERIFICATION: himonter. A greeting intended for a monter.

Wow, I'm so busy getting "connected" via the social networks, I don't have time to write. (At least, that's my excuse). But as you say, it does no good if no one knows you're there. The link in a signature line seems so obvious...but I missed it.
Thanks for the reminder.

One of my friends (who does PR professionally) suggested not just putting a link to your blog in your e-mail signature line, but put a picture, funny quote, etc. once a week that contains the link, so even longtime friends will click it more often.

I may even try that someday.

(Techno-challenged but crawling into the 21st century.)

@ Beverly, now that's a new idea-loved it and thank you. latinapen.blogspot.com

Great point, Jessica! Networking, of any kind, requires an honest effort. We have to build meaningful relationships with people before they'll believe in our "brand."

----------------
Keeping with the spirit of this post, if any of you would like to follow me on Twitter:

@CarrieAButler

I'll be more than happy to follow you back. :)

While publicizing myself is going to be THE hardest part of the publication process for me, these just seem too obvious and simple to miss. Once I have a website and all that, I will definitely cross-reference.

I also just like to use the Name/URL option for identifying myself when possible, so it goes straight to my blog if people click on my name. It eliminates a click.

Word verification: "retro". Funny since we're discussing that newfangled social media thing. ;-)

For people who are uncomfortable plugging their work, social media seems to be a good way to start. In terms of building a writing career, social media is a tool at the writer's disposal. I won't apologize for promoting my brand. This is about more than one book for me. You don't see Emily Giffin or Anita Shreve apologizing for promoting their work. No writer should.

Http://rebeccakielpages.blogspot.com

i just joined facebook about a week ago and it totally confuses me. I don't get it.

"i just joined facebook about a week ago and it totally confuses me. I don't get it."

Hang in there. And have fun with it. I started six years ago and didn't get it either...until I started having fun with it. I've made good friendships with people all over the world. The key word is "social," as in enjoy the other people you "friend."

i agree with Laura that you have to put the writing first, even when it’s tempting to spend time growing your blog following. I’m so glad I blog because like you, I’ve been able to interact with fellow writers and it makes writing less of a solitary experience.

I have a facebook account that I use to keep in touch with people I know in real life, but I don’t spend too much time on it. Same for Twitter. You have to find that balance because they are fun to use but real time sucks! When I’m away from social networking while on vacation, etc. I never miss it.

Honestly, I don’t take enough social timeouts. I need to commit to doing that more often! Unplugging can be a great thing. I just miss you peeps so much when I do!

Laura: I try to do my blog reading at lunch or before I leave work to get me de-stressed. I try to concentrate on writing during the night.

Anne: Yes, you’ve taken a break. Good for you. And you’re right about Twitter. It’s really never “done.”

Ghenet: I don’t know if I’ll ever get a personal Facebook account. And vacation? Don’t miss social networking either! :)

Heather: One thing I do miss is the Twitter chats. They can be addictive. It’s the time I get to talk with my writer friends — so I totally understand. :)

Yes! I do take social time outs! and I have found that the world does not miss me and continues to go round! :D But yes, I think some times that disconnect actually reconnects us to the natural world of relationships. Not to mention, I get so much work done when I do go on my time outs!

I do get kind of wrapped up in it all. But for me things seem to come in waves. So I try to go with it. I am pretty addicted though. Especially to Twitter!

I totally agree with the precautions employers and colleges are taking....although they can go overboard (ex. the teacher fired for her facebook photo)I totally believe that what you put out there should be held against you. The internet is now the perfect place for bullies and people to go wild, sometimes we forget others can see that.

I do think you need to be careful what you post, but I also agree with freedom of speech. It's a very gray area.

Yeah, working in a school there's obvious no-nos.. do not talk about your students, don't even mention what happened at school.. don't post any pictures of drinking, etc. I've known of teachers who have gotten fired or written up because of something silly they have said on facebook. And now with twitter, that is dually so.

It's a little creepy the way once you put it on the web it is there forever. Makes me rethink the whole facebook thing some days.

well, this is definitely a minefield. No matter what or where you say something, I think you should be accountable for it--although I'm not sure I would say they it should be held "against" us (sorry, that's probably just semantics).

I kind of try to follow the rule, "what would my mother think if she saw it."--but I do have a fairly understanding mother...

There are definitely people that I will not friend, because I wouldn't want it to affect me in a professional capacity--and also the reason that I keep my profile private--friends and family only.

But now, people are being encouraged to use social networking in their job searches and job capacity--so who's really blurring the lines, here?

as for that teacher--what's to say that she's even drinking anything alcoholic?--couldn't it just as easily be nonalcoholic? apple juice?--maybe everyone else was drinking and she abstained?

or, ok, let's say she is a legal adult and was drinking--what if someone else took the picture and posted it on their page?--something that she would have absolutely no control over.

I definitely don't think that this should have been a fire-able offense, but the fact is that we now live in an age without privacy. Or perhaps censorship is the new privacy???

I enjoyed following your ramble about this! And agree totally, but particularly with this "Venting and criticizing something on a blog or Twitter or Facebook shouldn't be different from doing so in person."

Very well-said!

Manners are manners - in person, or online. If you wouldn't say it to someone's face, why would you say it on a public forum?

Thanks for your thoughtful and honest post. Still, I wish you'd post a video demonstrating the secret handshake. (Yes, JOKING. Well, about that last part. I wish I didn't have to add the clarification, but, it's true that some things just don't translate on the internets...) Have a good one.

This was a very sensibly written post. Thanks for sharing your viewpoint as an editor. It's a relief actually to hear that so many people seem to be realizing and articulating the same feelings and observations about social media. It has certainly forced me to recalibrate how I socialize/interact online. Twitter and facebook has always seemed like such a public forum, I find it rather surprising that people forget that. But I have already found cases of that, of people tweeting indiscreetly as if they didn't know their tweets were being read by everyone. Or maybe they didn't care.

I think today's social media calls upon us for to show better responsibility and yes...manners!

I think people really need to see this as a business and authors as fellow co-workers or potential fellow co-workers. As an author, I don't publicly review or critique books because it's not really my place to do that. Imagine if, in my advertising day job, I posted a bunch of critiques of my colleagues' work - especially critiques that were scathing or snarky. People would look askance at that. For one, I never know who I might end up working with in the future. For another, I wouldn't want one of my colleagues publicly railing against my work. We are a community and, for the most part, should support one another. That has nothing to do with whether people should be allowed to write negative reviews. I don't mind getting them and certainly am not going to go tattle to my agent or editor about them. Because honestly, if a blogger happened to write a book so freaking kick-butt that it put Hunger Games, Twilight and Harry Potter to shame in its marketability, NO ONE WILL CARE if I didn't like what that person said about my book. I do think, however, that if someone aspires to be part of the YA author community, then they need to start looking at themselves as a colleague and co-worker, which may mean toning down the negative reviews.I guarantee that once a blogger gets a contract and starts working toward seeing his/her book on the shelves, he/she will naturally feel that urge to be more forgiving and tactful toward fellow authors' work. It's just different at that point. I could go into all of the reasons why, but I've already taken up too much space here...

Very sensible! Thanks for posting. Publishing is a business. Authors are paid. We can't forget that no matter how chatty they seem online. And hey, I shout out for friends and colleagues. We all do.

Yes, sensible is the word. And I absolutely agree that it's called MANNERS.

One other thing: I don't mind negative reviews so much as super-egotistical reviewers more concerned with sounding clever and making points than trying to understand what the author was saying. Or trying to say!

Great post -

and great comment:

"And I absolutely agree that it's called MANNERS.

I've mulled over this issue. I used my picture until my publisher's web guru advised me to change it to my book cover. That was a while ago, so I'll revisit the question with them.

Oooh, tricky. I can only speak for myself, but while I don't mind seeing a book cover, I follow an author's posts in the social media because I'm interested in the person, not just his/her books (although I am, of course, also interested in those; just not solely). So, I do prefer seeing an actual picture of a "friend" or "follower". It's more personal for me that way, and I feel like I get a more complete picture of a person.

How about a photo of you with your book? Or your author photo, which is presumably on your book and website? I've found that to be fairly "harmless" (as in, doesn't make me feel like the author is trying to sell anything to me) and yet professional, and also a tie-in to the book/brand/platform.

But I agree with you: covers-as-photos sometimes make me feel like I'm just a consumer. I get that an author would be super excited about her cover, but as a reader who has taken the time to find an author on FB or Twitter, I'm excited about getting to know HER.

So yes, like Pia said: covers don't *bother* me, per se, but I *prefer* a more personal connection.

I have also grappled with this issue...but because there are hundreds of Julie Kramers on facebook,I use my book cover so fans can tell which one is me. Close friends and relatives can recognize me from my photo or where I live....but if a reader wants to friend me,I want to make it easy for them to know which Julie Kramer I am.

I agree with you entirely (although I realise that the picture in the corner of this comment would suggest otherwise).

I think that you are trying to forge a connection between readers and you as an author, not you as a product (ie, a single book). If there are any barriers to conveying your personality and humanity to potential readers then I think you aren't using social networking to its fullest.

Yes, you may get your cover splashed at a few more faces, but I would much prefer more people saw my face, recognised me, and then discovered my latest book as a result of being interested in me, the author.

Here’s a question.
Suppose your photo image is counter to your book’s content.
For instance, Wally Lamb, She’s Come Undone.
A middle aged man writing as a teenage girl. In Wally’s case, well Oprah didn’t care and the rest is history. He IS an amazing writer and human being. But if I write a novel as a young male, won’t my fans be turned off by my matronly appearance?
Oh God, I’m a matron, shoot me now.

Taking it a step further, on Twitter I don't even use my official author photo. I use a more casual snapshot. Twitter's a conversation, and I think the picture of me grinning toward the camera adds to the conversational feel.

I do use my book cover for the Kitchen Daughter page on Facebook. Sometimes my identity is book-first, sometimes it's person-first, it just depends on the situation. Not all online interactions are created equal, and it's good to be thoughtful about every aspect of your online presence, even down to something as seemingly simple as a picture.

Thanks for addressing this, Jessica!

I agree--you want your friends on FB to know something about you, beyond the relentless promoter. That means you have to post about something other than "buy my book!" at least now and then.

There's also a practical problem with putting up your book cover. If it is very detailed, the thumbnail isn't big enough to convey it effectively.

I use my picture for a number of reasons, first and foremost to say that comments made in this blog post or tweet are from a real person, this person right here in the picture (isn't he handsome?).

You also establish a stronger connection with a face than you do an icon or a book cover.

More importantly, I plan on having multiple book covers. I want to make sure that my online presence is identifiable across multiple publications. In the deluge of tweets we receive in a day, I want to make sure I am consistent and recognizable over the long term, not just this or that book account pimping itself.

Since my picture adequately reflects my love of chocolate and coffee, then I'm on the right track. *grin*

Excellent point. It drives me crazy when folks I think I know change their icon or photo - I often hesitate. Is this who I think it is?? Book covers, in my humble opinion, are less personal and more "buy me." I think a friendly or fun photo of the author is best.

Jonathan Beer has it right - social media is good for making connections and having your readers (or viewers) feel like they can communicate with you. Individual books are just individual books, and everyone gets cranky when all you do is post "buy mine" or "look what I'm doing."

I think this raises an interesting question about marketing. Personally, I use my own photo as a web presence on appropriate sites, the book cover on others where appropriate. One thing I have noticed is that many writers do not take the time to get a really good picture. I went to a professional photographer, explained what the photo was for and what I wanted to convey. I think it was worth the time, effort and money because I did get what I wanted. A little quirky and cheeky. I also think avoiding full face shot staring at the camera is not the best look. Using or considering other poses such as three-quarter or even profile head shot can be more effective.
Elle Druskin

I hear you. My question is this: can you recommend any author pages who you think are doing this right? I'd like to see 'what to do' as well as understanding what 'not' to do.

I would also have to add that a photo taken with your phone, by yourself certainly doesn't get across a professional image. Remember that for readers, this might be the first impression of you, and as they say "you never get a second chance to make a first impression."

My web designers advised me to use my photo on my landing page, as a way to make the site warmer and more personal.

Let's hope I get a book cover to go with it!

I have never even considered using anything but a picture of me, sometimes a photoshoped one of me in a dramatic photo, like on Gerard Butler's body in 300 or Muhammad Ali. To me the whole point of social networking is to get to know people, and once I am published, I will talk more about them, but I won't spam buy me with every tweet or FB status or change my profile pics to my book cover. I will create links to my website for the book. But I want the reader to know I'm a real person, not some mysterious thing subbing in for me to promote my work.

You're making me rethink things here! I use my photo on my regular Facebook page and all my posts, but use my current book cover on my "Fan" page on Facebook, and with a new book every three months it's constantly changing. Now I'm wondering if I should use my mugshot on both pages.

Don't DO this to me so early!

I recently separated out my writerly Facebook from my personal Facebook. I created a page for myself as a writer. I try to update it at least once or twice a day, but I try not to bombard people with a constant stream of information. I do have my own picture as the profile image on that account.

The primary reason for the separation is that I want to be able to use my Facebook account for two aspects- connecting to readers and keeping in touch with friends and events that I care about.

I may be a little paranoid, but I don't want random strangers able to see every photograph that I'm tagged in or every event that I RSVP to. Nor do I want them to see photographs of my nephews.

As for the profile picture, I update it when needed to keep things looking fresh. My website could use some freshening by way of photographs, but that's for this weekend. I don't think changing a profile picture once in a while is an issue. Authors change their headshots on their books from time to time. But if there's a new photo every time you check in to their site, it can maybe be an issue.

Ha! This has been bothering me lately.

Recently I went to a book event and there was a particular author I wanted to stalk--I mean meet. I kept picturing her twitter profile pic in my head, but I never found her. Then, when she was introduced on her panel--it hit me. She's not the 20-something model on the cover of her book!

If social media is supposed to make authors feel more real to their readers, then maybe having young, headless models as their profile pic isn't the way to go.

Timing. I was just pondering this last night and had some of the same thoughts, but I decided that my covers work best for pointing out which "Paige" I am.

However, now I'm rethinking too.

Hmmm. Looking forward to more comments.

Thanks,
Paige

So many authors use 20-25 year old glamour shots, you would never recognize them if you saw them in person anyway.

I agree with you. The more I social network, the more difficult it is for me to keep track of people. When an author I'm not very familiar with uses her photograph, as opposed to a book cover, across all of her sites, it helps me identify her better. And that in turn helps me connect her book to her name, which spurs me to actually read her books.

I typically connect with writers in one medium (maybe through their blog or website) and immediately look them up on my other sites (Facebook and Twitter). When I see the same face on all the sites, it makes the process quicker and, as I mentioned, solidifies the author in my memory.

There are so many people who use books as their avatar that they all run together.

I agree 100%
If I am friending an author, I want to see them, not the book. Personally, I am even more apt to rave about the book and recommend it to others if I fee like the author and I are "friends." Pathetic? Meh, oh well.

Great post!

In general, with only one exception EVER, when a book cover requests to be my friend, they have zero interest in being my friend and will never interact with me; they just want to spam my news feed about their book, which generally isn't even in a genre I read.

Some of us who write erotica need to maintain a level of anonymity. So posting our own photos is out of the question. I've been using my cat's picture as an avatar, but honestly, I think a picture of a book cover would be better (if/when I get published).

I think I'd go Kristan's route. Take a silly photo with the cover of my novel and use it as my profile picture. I like me as my profile picture and it's how I relate with others... book covers are fun but they don't draw me to their sites. For me the more fun profile picture the better, then again I like people like me (as most of us do) so it makes sense since my picture is different!

Hmm...I think one important thing to remember is that many followers of an author's blog or Facebook page feel somewhat invested in the author's success. They have read the blog posts and followed along silently cheering each success. I agree that the main picture profile should stay the same, but I admit to experiencing a little flutter of excitement when I see the profile picture change to a book cover and usually rush to congratulate them on a new release or publishing deal. Sometimes a change in profile picture is a great way to signal new events.

Well, I'm considering your post from the perspective of someone who likes to read and browse through books.

I do like covers, specially if there's a hunky guy on them. It's probably the first thing that will attract me to a book and make me pick it up.

However, when I'm ready to purchase a book, I will flip to the back cover and take a look at the author's picture. Why? I want to see who poured their hearts and soul into the book I'm holding. If I check out their sites, which I do often, I seek out the author's picture. It makes them human, more than just their words.

Thanks.

I never really put my picture out there..since I wanted to wait for the "perfect" shot ;) which as everyone probably knows, will never occur :-D

My DH drew a picture(on a magnetic fun board) for fun and said - This is you ;) and asked me to sign it for him...This was when I started writing seriously, with an aim to get published... And this is the picture that I've used in my blog and other social media till date. Moreover I'm still debating on my pen name...but then I'll leave it to the point when I actually sign a contract...

Not like I have a book published yet to use its cover, but I might keep this advise in mind when I take the perfect shot soon ;)

Great post..and nice to see all the opinions...

An important side note is consistency in images across social media outlets and boards/sites etc. Sometimes people use different names, or variations of names across sites, and a consistent photo makes me realize "oh, that's so and so."

I'll sign in with Blogger so you can see my avatar. I actually had someone friend me on Facebook the other day after a number of years of no contact -- because she saw the S, knew it was me, and wanted to see how I was.

This is why the S is also on my business cards. People recognize it and West of Mars.

I'm not about to change that up. It works. People know me.

I think there is an element of branding to an image you always use. People may not remember your name, but they will remember an image. So if you do change it, I wouldn't change it often.

I've also seen people at conventions tuck a copy of their blogger/facebook/etc image into their name tag, which I thought was pretty clever.

I'm a bit face blind and recognize avatars far more readily than faces. That said, I'm also a big proponent of a consistent brand across similar communication platforms, no matter what form that brand takes.

A real name is nice, as well. If I never learn your name (for example: Wry Writer), I'm less likely to be able to buy your books.

I totally agree. I feel as though someone is hiding behind a curtain when I see a book cover, or other cutsey image, as their avatar. Social networking is all about connecting with people. You wouldn't go to a job interview, or on a first date, wearing a mask, right? Therefore, I feel one should be confident enough to show their face to the world, and leave it at that.

I mainly use a Chia head (and I am REALLY hoping the Chia shows up here now and not some random picture I selected a year ago)

I like to use my face on anything that has to do with my writing or fan base. That way it feels more personal, like we are connecting face to face.

There are times though where I can see using an avatar or book cover. Blogs that speak from a personal POV of the writer seem to fit better for me when the image is of their face. While blogs that are about the novel only, or movie, have an image from the book or a still shot from the film, and all the writing is coming from the perspective of the characters.

Both are interesting for me to read, so maybe the way in which we present ourselves should fit what the topic of our blog is.

Thanks for sparking this highly informative conversation! :-)

At a workshop I attended a month ago on social networking, the presenter stated that one of the things we needed to do was to breed consistency with our photos (i.e. keep them the same). Been trying that ever since.

Unless you specifically have a Facebook page for your book, I agree. (And some writers seem to, and create a new page whenever they have a new book--but they often have an author profile as well.) The points you brought up are valid, but I also think fans like being able to see what an author looks like. Sure, there have always been author photos in books, but I think fans do feel more connected if they can see some picture that doesn't feel "staged", like they're gaining some secret insight into someone they admire. Authors can become celebrities now, and so people like being able to recognize them.

Plus, what happens when your book is released with a different cover, say if it comes out in paperback after an initial hardcover run, or it's released in a different country? Will it alienate readers to see the "wrong" cover, or cause some lack of recognition in them? Plus, if you have an author page instead of a page just for the book, then you're working to promote ALL your books, and yourself as a brand--so why not have the picture be of you, say at a signing or conference or in your writing room or somewhere awesome?

I always felt Neil Gaiman handled that well. He changes his main Facebook photo, shares photos of his awesome dogs and talks about different facets of his writing, his life, everything.
Book covers are great, but in truth, I could care less. Sometimes a little insight into the author is more fun then the average cover.
If I ever got published, I think I would have an artist friend render some avatars of my main character then let the fans choose a winner. Would be interesting to see if readers see the characters as I do.

I think the best solution is to alternate.

As a pre-published author and more of a reader so far...I would say the picture of yourself makes the reader feel like they know you a little bit personally. However, the book cover helps them recognize your work and go, "Oooo, I've been thinking about buying this book."

However, since you are alternating every so often, they won't get too much of a good thing.

Plus, if you alternate the same 3-5 photos over and over, maybe even through a pet in there, you will be branding yourself and have many brands to work with.

Stephanie Carroll

I think the most rewarding networking happens in the actual connection between people. People know when they are trying to be sold on something. We are bombarded daily with advertisements, requests for donations, etc. If it is possible to put the burning desire to sell aside, then there is room for more. I am not likely to buy a book from someone knocking on my door every day at 9 am. Why would Facebook be any different? Give me something human, and you've got my attention.

Interesting article, Jessica. It's all about keeping a balance but it can be tricky. Will RT this on Twitter.

I don't think I want to live in a world where I have to worry about "failing to brand ourselves". I don't know what most of my favorite authors look like, and it has never occurred to me that I ought to care about it. Kids these days think otherwise, I suppose?

I totally agree with you! Ideally one should use the pix as a brand or logo, which means it SHOULD NOT be changed. And a personal pix is one more link with your readers whereas a book cover will (hopefully) change as you produce more books...

And we all know that to make a success of it on Internet you need more than one book...Amanda Hocking used a trilogy to get started and Konrath Locke et al are all there with MANY books!

I only wish I had this problem. But with no published book....
Actually I agree that a personal portrait is better. I like to see the writer whose book I'm buying/thinking about buying. No harm in displaying the book cover on the landing page, or in a blog, but the profile picture should be real - no avatars, please.

I'm not sure about this one. I agree that changing your photo often might be distracting, but I know of at least one instance where I found a new author (and her books) because I clicked on her book cover icon. I didn't know her at all, but it was such a beautiful cover that I was immediately drawn in.

And while it's interesting to learn more about the lives of my favorite authors, what I still care about most is their writing, not their personal stuff. Sometimes knowing too much about them pulls me out of the worlds they've created on paper.

Interesting reasoning, but as a reader/buyer of books, I disagree. It's nice to know what an author looks like, but what does 1000 times more for me as far as marketing is knowing what the book cover looks like. Icons are really powerful. (Have you ever seen that internet test of the first letters of various restaurants? It's amazing what you can identify by font even if you've never eaten there.) If I've seen your cover on line somewhere and then I see it in the bookstore, I will almost 100% of the time pick up your book and check it out. To me that's a pretty strong reason for putting up your cover on line.

I agree with you, Jessica. At RT11 last week, it was nice to see and recognize people's faces whom I'd only met online through Twitter or Facebook. I felt more connected to the faces than I did the bookcover people. I'm not a member of the Blogger community so my pic won't post here, but it's now my "brand" to the point where it's on my marketing media as well. At some point, it'll be the picture on my book covers, lol...

Wow, I never thought about this question that deeply. Whenever I see someone with their book as their photo I think "Hey, they have a book."

I agree with your point that eventually people will forget that they haven't actually read the book, and the picture will make them feel like they already own it, but I'm not so sure it's going to be a big turn-off to people or make them feel like they're not connecting with the author.

What if the book cover is a lot more pleasing to the eye than the author photo. Not everyone's photogenic and in that case maybe a book cover is a better choice over a bad photo? Or maybe we just need quirky images that represent our personality. One of my friends uses a flowering cactus.

As a writer I want to be approachable. I want someone to want to talk to me. I think this goes a long way with selling books. Would you rather buy a book from someone with no presence or someone who makes you feel good about yourself? I'll take the latter. I think a snapshot of yourself smiling is the best way to be approachable. As far as the book cover...why not use a photo and then also include an image of the cover somewhere else on your blog, FB page or website? Then you get the best of both worlds. I think a good example of this is on Nathan Bransford's blog or FB page. He has a pic up of himself but there is also a photo of his upcoming book on the right side of the page. Works for me. :)

Such an interesting post, Jessica. As an author, I've often wondered if I've been doing the right thing by having my picture, not my cover, as my profile.

I follow a debut author on twitter who, until she got her cover, used to use her picture. She had a lot of followers and rarely commented back to me, but that was okay, because I felt sort of connected to her. But when she started using her new book cover instead, I found that I skimmed over her tweets and never noticed them. I think it's because she felt more like a product, than a person. (I ended up unfollowing her.)

After I analyzed how this situation made me feel as a potential reader, I decided that using my picture is much better.

I completely agree. I am not my book.

I use the same photo for everything, Twitter, Facebook and my blog, because that way, people see it and remember me it. My novel isn't published yet, so no book cover to use, but I wouldn't really use it as my photograph, as I think it helps people connect more to an author when they can see who wrote something.
Alannah

Oh, this is a tough one! Have spent most of today (and some pennies!) choosing a new book cover for my novel (which has just reached the first draft stage - I know, jumping the gun, a bit). But now you've made me wonder about profile pics as I have the new book cover as my FB Page pic. My personal FB profile has a picture of myself, as does Twitter. Goodness, and I thought actually writing a novel was the hardest part of being a writer(!)

Dear Jessica:

What if a fellow's picture is so damned ugly he dare not show it? What's a fellow to do?

Thanks,
Slugs Nineteen

To answer those who have concerns about their appearance I don't think it has to be the perfect picture of you. If you follow me on Twitter you'll see that I use a b&w profile shot. I'm wearing sunglasses and you can hardly see my face. But you do start to see it over and over enough to know it's me. And I think that's the point I'm trying to make. A logo, an avatar (like the shark Janet Reid uses) anything that defines you can make a difference in brand building. A changing cover is hard to do that with. That's my point really

--jhf

I use my covers so people know that I'm a writer and that I have a new book out. Honestly, I'm "friends" with and follow a lot of writers and if their face is there, I have no idea if they have a book out or not. Or what, in fact, they may write, even if they're famous.

Maybe, yes, this is an issue for an established romance author who puts out a book every three months. But for a yearly schedule, I don't think readers will be confused about whether or not they've read the book.

All this stuff is so subjective, but people take it so seriously. I think it's more important to do what you're comfortable with. I really don't think posting the covers of your books is going to cause disconnect with readers.

Everything in life is about forming relationships. When you impart information that people can identify with, rather than simply proving more and more photo of yourself, you are helping others and creating a bond that will not only lead to sales, but an improved human experience!

I am so, so with you there. And do I really need Idol and Dancing with eh Star updates on Twitter, too? I don't want to be with you as you're watching TV. Oy!

-S.

Was JUST reflecting on this. Follow Jacqueline Carey (on FB, not twitter) and she often links to articles or says something amusing (just the other day, "Oh, the stories my search history could tell!"). I'd say only about forty percent of her posts are book-related in any way.

This is so true! I've followed people briefly before I realized that all they ever used Twitter for was self-promotion. Never any conversations, just 'here's my new book, buy it'.

I quickly hit the unfollow button.

Melanie
melaniemccullough.blogspot.com

Communicating on Twitter is like anything else--if we hear the same thing over and over, pretty soon nobody is paying attention anymore.

A book release, whether pub'd traditionally, e-pub'd, or even self-pub'd, should be a big deal. But somehow it loses its magic if I read about it multiple times a day by the same person.

Twitter is a great outlet for good news like this, but how can we use it most effectively?

Twitter can also be a lot of fun, but it's a killer for your concentration. After a day of Work & Twittering, I can only write by 140 characters drops before I get bored. To use with caution

this is exactly why I haven't tried twitter yet. it's like a flea market - too much crap to sift through to find that treasure!

(you can quote me, ha ha)

You're so right! Great post!

But I wonder how Amanda Hocking did it. It seems she uses Twitter more than her blog, but I haven't followed her during those crucial months when she first self-published last year.

So I have no idea how she did it. Does anyone know?

I have a really hard time with Twitter. I want to keep it professional, but doing so would mean unfollowing my friends, so there's a lot of unprofessional stuff happening on Twitter. I don't know how far or not far to go with things.

I do tend to use Twitter to announce blogs, but only because I always offer prizes (free books) to someone who comments, so I figure I'm at least dangling cheese for my mice. (or should that be breadcrumbs for the birds?)

HOWEVER, that said, I truly hate Twitter. It's a horrible time suck while at the same time addictive. And it's REALLY hard to say what I want in 140 characters or less!

I see the importance of social networking, but I prefer the connection I get with Facebook or email over the quick little blurbs on Twitter. At least on FB I often get to see photos of the people I'm interacting with. Not so common on Twitter.

So many authors are spending so much time on Twitter and Facebook, and let's not forget the blogosphere, they couldn't possibly be writing books. Someone must be doing it for them. Maybe that's why the overall quality has gone down the toilet?

The constant promo is a waste of time and turns me off. If you have a new book coming out, post an announcement on all your social networks and then knock it off.

I'm amazed at how some of these people (authors) think we want a play-by-play of their daily lives. Too. Much. Information. I now have a bad opinion of some authors and stopped following them because of the intimate glimpses into their personal lives.

If someone is going to be interesting, I hope at least they have the decency to be consistently interesting. ;)

I use two hashtags, and only respond to those who post something about how their writing is going or if they have a problem, etc. I LOVE talking shop with people, but I don't push anything on anyone. I mention it a few times, then move on. That might not sound helpful, but I do get retweets, and that helps.

@FakeAPStylebook, the now-defunct @mayoremanuel, and @FeministHulk are great comic feeds to follow.

Dan Sinker's @mayoremanuel, in particular, kind of authored a new kind of fiction. Plus he's getting a book deal out of it.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/02/revealing-the-man-behind-mayoremanuel/71802/

I'm so glad to hear this coming from more sources. I'm an author and it irritates the crap out of me to have someone constantly doing promo. I really despise people on Facebook who friend me then send me a "like" suggestion or post their advert garbage on my wall without permission. It's rude. Don't even get me started on the "groups" function. Some people just have no home training.

Yeah, we have to promo, but yeesh.

Nothing turns me off faster than someone who only tweets about the book they've just published. Lately I find myself in three-way Twitter conversations with a couple fellow authors. We talk stories, shop, whatever's on our minds. Most importantly we offer encouragement, advice, and a listening ear. The connections I've made through blogging and twitter are invaluable to me. I tweet as I write, as I'm not writing but brainstorming, etc.

And sometimes I use twitter to vent in the most obtuse way. But those bouts are short-lived and I move on to what Twitter should be about, connecting.

As a wanna-be author, I joined Twitter to learn about the writing. The journey is interesting and how people use and/or sometimes abuse Twitter is a journey itself. Good advice here. Thank you.

This post was great! I'm a newbie "tweeter"...and I definitely have seen what you're referring to. This post also helps me make sure _I_ don't do it either!

Thanks.

Definitely agree about continual self-promotion as a GIANT turnoff. Unfollow. If you want to build connections, it can't be all about you.

I loved fake mayor emanuel. I was so sorry when he got sucked into the *&@*%#! vortex (or whatever it was).

The key word is 'social'. To use social media to simply put one's name in front of people five times a day is transparent. Readers and consumers are savvy enough to know when they are getting a sales pitch. My writing is above that and so is yours. Social, genuine and honest - this is the way to go!

What makes a person interesting?

I am just starting to twitter because I thought it would be interesting. I also wanted to figure out how to join an online chat that was being done on twitter.

I started blogging today because sometimes my thoughts are more than 140 characters. Is it bad to use twitter to point to blog posts? For example, I can't give a book review of someone else's book in under 140 characters.

I like it when interesting people use twitter to tell me they have a new blog post, but I am new to twitter. I'm curious if someone could give me examples of what they find interesting.

Andrea

I think it varies, and depends on the writer. I know for me, a lot of my experiences w/gaining contacts have been happenstance b/c I try to be interactive and myself.

I follow people who have interesting things to say about themselves in addition to suggesting links. It's a great tool for passing information, but like with most things it depends on how you use it.

I very much agree. I don't use Twitter much for my networking because of that fact.

Andrea:

Well I don't think there is any one thing that makes people interesting. The interesting people in my life are interesting for different reasons. I can tell you though that what makes a person dull is repetition and sameness. If you only Tweet about the same things, the same time each day no one is going to stop following you.

I have 7000+ followers and let's face it, most of them follow me for the advice I give on publishing. But, the most feedback I receive tends to be on the random things like the kind of cookies I just made, or the arrival of my new Nook, or the fact that I'm debating between two books to read or which restaurant to eat at.

--jhf

I think on any social networking site, you should have something more to say than "go read my blog/book/whatever". Or if you are going to just link to your blog post, at least do something interesting with your 140 characters so I'll have some idea what your post is about and want to go read it. Repeating the same things is boring and will get you ignored, if not unfollowed.

Hahaha.

I mean no offense to anyone, but where is it written that Twitter is supposed to be interesting?

Oh social media, how you make me giggle.

Who on Twitter is interesting? HOW does one make their TWEETS interesting? Give me an example of an interesting TWEET...

Thanks for sharing, this was an interesting read!

Very interesting read! Is there an author you think really uses Twitter well?

I remember this article. I think I read it a couple of weeks ago and came away feeling self-conscious. In general, I think following back on Twitter is the polite thing to do and I feel like people who don't are being kind of snobby. That said, I agree that authors are much more likely to have people pay attention to their tweets if they aren't giving updates on their bodily functions every five minutes.

Twitter seems to be fairly forgiving in that nobody pays attention to messages for more than a few hours (usually). Experiment until your people find you and keep going with what's interesting to them. Also, yes, fun is crucial.

Very good article! Thanks for sharing!

Thanks for this article. I just (finally) signed up for a Twitter account last week and am already feeling uneasy about it. I haven't committed any of those particular sins but I still feel a little out of place. But I'm trying to give it a shot!

Thanks for sharing. I absolutely love Twitter. I'm including a link to a column I wrote (published Sunday in the York Daily Record/Sunday News) on 10 Things I've Learned From Social Media so far. I'm the newspaper's social media coordinator. Your blog readers might find it useful. http://www.yorkblog.com/buffy/2011/04/10-things-ive-learned-from-social-media.html

These are good tips to keep in mind. Thanks for sharing.

Twitter should be IGNORED.

That's a good article. Now I just need to bring myself to update my profile and post someting without feeling like I'm in limbo.

I just find it such a timesink... and trying to figure it out!!!! I had just figured out how to do #FF, and then *new* Twitter seems to have changed it... now I can't do #FF with just 'reply'. I'm lost now... can't figure it out.

I worry about spending so much time on FB/Twitter/Goodreads/BookBlogs etc, that I won't spend enough actually writing!

My biggest problem with Twitter is the giant time-suck it becomes when a conversation gets interesting. It's impossible to follow along and reply while doing anything else.

I've avoided it since I started my new account, but I know I should probably jump back in.

I was nervous about posting to twitter for awhile; I signed up 4 years ago and tweeted maybe 12 times. I started following more people, going beyond friends to lit agents, publishing companies and funny people like Stephen Colbert. I lurked for a long time. I agree, it's a time suck, but I think it's a relevant communication tool. My twitter post updates my facebook, meaning I don't have to chck fb as often either.

What is "Twitter?" And can I get it on my Walkman?

Interesting tips. Thanks for sharing.

I'll also add that the tweeters who ONLY do #ww and #ff but never speak otherwise...bore me to tears. Thank you for the shout out, but are you really there??

I really enjoyed this, as well as one of the links below it about 5 ways to be successful on Twitter. and then the 5 free Twitter tools...(yep I was link-leaping) I learned about some managing tools I hadn't heard of.

Great post. Twitter even came up on last night's #yalitchat, and the sales-y problem came front & center. It's a fine line between promotion & annoyance. :)

Thanks for the link!

RE: Twitter, I went kicking and screaming into heaven. There was no way, no how I was EVER going to "join" Twitter. (Hah! Like there's anything to join!) Now I love it to pieces. The support within the writing community (including agents, pubs, and editors) is priceless.

Yes, yes and yes!

Fantastic tips! Thanks for sharing the article. These are all things I've been working on myself to get a few followers on Twitter, so it's good to see those ideas reinforced.

Thanks! I just tweeted this article. Muhahahahahaha!

I think the seamless linking of all these is what makes the difference, not one over the other.

In relation to hand selling a book in retail:
1. smile and eye contact
2. present the product
3. put it in the customers hands.

Twitter definitely presents the possibility for gathering more followers quickly, but I think Facebook still provides some benefits that Twitter doesn't.

On Facebook you can have a debate/discussion on topics between more than one person. You really can't get that in 140 characters with hundreds of new tweets posted every minute. Your posts are also visible for longer on Facebook, allowing more people to join in before the sea of new updates diverts their attention.

Facebook gives the option of displaying a picture (e.g. a book cover) as part of the post--no clicking required the way it is with TwitPics.

And for people new to Twitter, earning a following is as difficult as it is with finding new friends on Facebook. Even when you find the "right" people to follow, they don't always follow back (giving them no chance to read your potentially interesting tweets).

I'm on Twitter. I like Twitter. But I'm not yet convinced it's as powerful as Facebook. And I just broke my rule about playing devil's advocate on someone else's post . . .

A caveat: the content between your different sites should be as original as possible.

People on Facebook may not be interested in your Tweets. That's why they are on Facebook. There are crossovers of course, but for certain, people who visit a website or a Facebook page only to see a long Twitter feed (and nothing else) get turned off. In a way it's like spam and feels more impersonal (that you can't be bothered to get on Facebook to talk).

So just be aware and try to differentiate the content of each source and to change up what is being posted. An example of a way to do this is to use a main website that pulls in a Twitter feed to compliment its long-form posts. Or a Facebook page that pulls posts from the main website and from Twitter to keep things visually and mentally stimulating.

Finally, Twitter has a quicker viral uptake than Facebook merely because of the stripped down content and the ease of use. Use this knowledge as a way to differentiate the content you post and where to post it.

I agree! Although there are a lot of fun things you can do with Facebook (post videos, trailers, photos and have them in one place, etc), I find Twitter more convenient for my writing life and it definitely generates more buzz. I've used Facebook for years, but I use is as a personal thing to connect with my friends and family and I prefer Twitter as a business tool.

My first novel came out in January, and as far as book promotion goes, Twitter rocks! That said, I published an essay recently that was both retweeted and reposted on FB and it was through FB that I was able to read comments and comment back, which was very, very nice.

I'm a new tweeter (and joined Twitter for writing connections and information). It's revolutionized my writing world in a way FB never would have. And while I write that, I have no business-building agenda on Twitter (or FB for that matter) so my outlook may be different from what you are speaking of.

Thanks for the advice. I do consider myself more of a "Twitter Person."

I came to this blog post from a tweet. 'Nuff said. :)

I agree. Statistically, my website sees more visitors from Twitter than Facebook by a wide margin. Twitter followers are also more likely to respond to writer-related stuff; whereas, my Facebook friends are people I know in real life. They are chemists, students, construction managers, and everything in between, except writers. I have very few writer friends, and thus, very few of my Facebook friends are interested in what's on my site. I thought it would be the opposite, but Twitter is proving to be the best way for me to spread the news right now. Not saying it won't change, but that's how it is as of now.

Noelle, I can't get the lists to work now... all it keeps saying is... darn, I just went there to try to quote what it says when I try to add people to a list, and it won't even let me load *anything* right now... it says "Loading seems to be taking a while. Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information."

Anyway, I was just saying that whenever I try to add people to my list called 'authors' it says something like 'List edit failed, try later' - that's not exactly it, but it is something like that. I spent two hours the other day trying to get it to work, and nothing!

Frustration level is off the charts, and I would rather spend the time writing. I never have trouble with FB!

There, just tried it again, and it says 'There was an error updating the list', and it won't add anyone. Just like the other day. Sigh.

Couldn't agree more! Which is why I've started targeting my Twitter feed more than Facebook (though I do frequently update FB through Twitter--both my personal and professional pages). In the couple of weeks I've been spending more time at building that Twitter foundation, I've noticed a major (for me) upswing in followers. And, I'm not really spending that much time doing it!

It has to be a deliberate effort. I've been trying to find ways to increase followers, and I think I've hit on one of them: sending out links helpful to mystery writers (which is my genre of choice.) I even started my own hashtag: #mysteryresource and some of my links have been picked up by bigger Tweeters, so that always makes me excited.

I've tried and tried to figure out Twitter but I never can find all this wonderful writing info I read about on blogs (for example how would you even find #1k1hr and know about it in enough time to be there to do it? Ah the mystery). Plus, I always feel like i'm in the middle of a conversation (which I am lol).

To be fair, I haven't found Facebook helpful on the writing front either, but it is a nice way to see what friends out of state are doing.

Maybe one day I'll figure all this out.

This is likely true. Twitter is better for mass marketing and quickly getting the word out about something. It's about building buzz. Facebook (and I never thought I'd say this!) is better for nurturing those existing relationships. Obviously anyone with a lot of popularity isn't going to interact with each of their fans individually, but Facebook can be used to offer more information, longer updates, debate and discussion, photos, etc.--basically to build up on what you have such a short space on Twitter to say.

Also, I find it's a little harder for information to be lost on Facebook. If I went to your Facebook page, I'd see the most recent information for longer than I would on Twitter, because Twitter buries things faster, especially because it's so simple to send a vast quantity of messages. Using both in conjunction is probably best. I really like those apps that let you import your tweets into Facebook as well. You get both sites in one.

I don't use Twitter so I actually make an effort to find new people on Facebook. I've actually met some great people through facebook which resulted in me following their blog and getting to know them better. I really think it depends on the person and how they want to utilize the network themself.

Absolutely agree! I use facebook more to interact with people I already know (and who know me) whereas I'm all about finding new people on Twitter. I'm sure I'll use Facebook more for marketing after I get a book deal, but for now it's just for socializing with friends and family.

Twitter's so much faster. I love it. Facebook always seemed like such a time-suck, whereas Twitter is something you can do in between other things.

Damn, I've got to stop being a scaredy-cat and get myself on twitter!

Twitter is much more casual -- your tweet is more likely to get lost in the rush. The key, I think, is to build up enough dedicated fans so that they will share you stuff on their own facebook networks.

I love Twitter for the conversations, but if you don't visit at the peak hours, your likely to miss interesting conversations and your tweets are likely to get lost in the shuffle.

I've been tweeting for three years, and I suggest that new Twitter users focus on following interesting people rather than the big names with hundreds or even thousands of followers. I've also noticed that if you're new on Twitter you're likely to gain followers more quickly--and have the longtime Twitter users follow you back--if you have a blog or website. A web presence makes you feel less like a "talking head."

Facebook feels like a community, where the author can write status updates about their life, their latest books, their writing, etc, and ask and answers questions. I've noticed a number of big name authors in the romance genre using their FB page exclusively, most likely for these reasons.

On that note, I wish all authors set up pages on FB. Not only does "liking" feel less intrusive than "friendship" with strangers (and is likely the reason FB friends lag behind Twitter followers), but it bugs me when authors use their FB account for their personal and professional lives. I'm not interested in personal photos, personal friend/family comments, politics, and whatnot--I'm here for the books.

I tend to follow people on both services if I really like them and they are on both. I also read pretty much every post on Facebook, but I only occasionally read Tweets because I follow lots more people there and there's just too much to keep up with. Plus, I'm always on FB and it's easier to comment and see a conversation develop. Sometimes, it's hard to know what those figures mean. Do you really have more followers or as many as you think on one, or are there a lot of duplicates. And how much are they really reading or interacting with on each service.

I'm gonna have to learn how to do that. It seems so full of junk, I am intimidated. But, my grand daughter received an iPod in the mail and then realized it was from a twitter contest and all she did was retweet. Gosh, I wish I knew what that was. There is some website in Russia that loves my blog for some reason so Twitter might be fun.

Great post! I haven't heard a Twitter/Facebook comparison framed this way, but it makes complete sense. Since joining Twitter a few months ago, I've been amazed at how quickly my network has broadened.

I like both twitter and facebook for different reasons. And hashtags on twitter really do work.

There's also a new social network called quora, that I've been finding interesting.

But you really do have to be authentic and love social networking...it's like finding the right balance.

This is interesting. I've never heard it put that way. It makes sense to me. There is something about Twitter that sounds distracting for me, as though it would take up too much time. But since this is about building a career, and not just writing a book, I will go now and educate myself on Twitter. Thanks.

I wrote a post on this very subject a few weeks back and I had Facebook and Twitter at a level pegging. I have two FB pages; one a private one and the other is my fan page. I enjoy both for the same reason as I enjoy twitter - I like to talk :D

Twitter, however, has the drawback of only being able to use just over 100 characters....but, I also find this a blessing. It makes you think of how to tighten your writing.

I marked them both as 8/10.

I wanted to add for anyone interested that I receive the most views on my blog from goodreads.com. I honestly have no idea how I managed to link my blog up to goodreads, but it's there and I get tons of hits from it.

I agree with your conclusions, Jessica. I have been doing social media marketing for my book review and writing blog, my handmade jewelry business, and either other companies for about 4 years now. One of the biggest mistakes that I find in people of many industries is that they try to treat every social media network, be it Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, Digg, etc, as one and the same. This leads to annoying, spam-like posts and ineffective marketing.

I try to give Twitter and Facebook equal face time, but it's hard. I struggle to connect with people on Twitter. I follow 68 people, but only 38 of those people follow back.

I admit the hash tag is strange and unknown to me. i see people using it on Twitter. I just can't seem to completely understand how to use it correctly. I've read the Help section on Twitter and your post. I'm a bit slow when it comes to technology sometimes. A "See Jane Run" explanation would work best for me. One of these days...

I'm nervous of it too. I try to get to hashtag convos, but end up losing track of them. I suppose what would be wise is to experiment a bit by creating one. I think I'll try that.

Learning anything is difficult at first, but I have to say Twitter is not as user-friendly as FaceBook, if much more so than MySpace.

I used it for the first time yesterday. However, like Laura, I don't completely understand how to use it correctly.

One thing I did figure out is that if you want to follow a hashtag conversation, you can just click on the tagged word (at least in "TweetDeck" -- the viewing format I use) and all the comments w/that tag will show up in a separate column.

But like you, Laura, the learning curve appears to be beyond me. I do try and go on daily and at least check and see what's being said, but I've decided my problem is that I really DON'T CARE about most of the drivel I see. I've barely got enough hours in the day as it is.

I've been curious about the hash tag but didn't know how to keep up with it. Thanks for bringing it up Jessica -- good way to follow a thread.

Kate-do you think TweetDeck makes the whole Twitter deal easier?
I'm try to keep in touch, current, but little time.

All these tips are great. I have to sit down and douse myself in Twitter one of these days. I glanced at it once. That was enough to put me off a bit, but I'll catch on when I set my mind to it. It seems like there are too many steps to take to get a point accross. Blogs are so simple, so is FB.

I will admit this is something I've never even thought about. I've been using Twitter for a long while now. Hashtags are among the best features, especially for authors. Thanks for the new idea!

Marian, a third-party client for Twitter is definitely a good idea. The great part about Tweetdeck (and I think HootSuite has similar functionality) is that you can sort it into columns, based on anything from core features such as direct messages to any hashtag you want.

Great way to keep up on the conversations important to you, such as #YAlitchat or #askagent

I use hashtags quite a bit, for productive reasons and for fun. I use TD too and I like using them for search columns...but I've never done what you just mentioned. And I'm a little befuddled by it. I do the basic usage but there are probably many more productive uses for hashtags I don't know about! LOL

That would be a good post...in depth use of hashtags and their redeeming qualities!!

A while back, Nathan Bransford had a good post on his blog about social media. The main idea was to use what you like, or do well. I've branched out and created a facebook page, and I just tweet from there. Mostly because I can't figure out how to say anything in 140 characters. Which is to say, I don't really know what I'm doing! But I'm enjoying connecting with so many different people, which is the real purpose.

Thanks for the input, Stephanie! I'm going to check out TweetDeck. Learning more about the hash tags sounds worthwhile.

To give yourself a quick and easy tutorial on hashtags, click on some of the hashtags from the "Trends" on the right sidebar. You'll see pretty quickly how other people are using them.

I just joined Twitter and have to admit that I am still in a fog. Of course, I am renowned within my own family for asking what a "Wii" was a few years ago. Sigh.

The help link at the bottom of the main page was, indeed, helpful. But I still find myself just watching what others are doing. A real internet wallflower.

Need to get in gear, but Twitter sometimes seems another way to sap time. I understand its importance, though.

Now I just need a few extra hours a week. Anyone know where I can find some?

@ Bryce Daniels

"Now I just need a few extra hours a week. Anyone know where I can find some?"

Stop sleeping. That's what I do.

I need to get used to hashtags...and everything else about Twitter! hehe

It's a great idea ... provided you can remember to post the hash before you share.

Your post made me smile. Some days I DO feel like I have multiple personalities. (Laughs) I juggle multiple Twitter accounts (many for work, a personal one and one for a fictional character from one of my books), multiple Facebook accounts, a work-related blog, a writing blog, several websites and the list goes on. So, yeah, it's a bit of a dance. Some days I tweet from one account, RT from another account, link from this to that and, ugh!, it can be challenging. Oh, and I also manage a newspaper and magazine staff. So, yeah, it's a challenge. Using Hootsuite helps, though, because I can manage all of the Twitter and Facebook accounts from this one interface. Peeps who are also managing multiple accounts can check out cotweet, too. I just started playing around with this tool. Anyway.... Have a super day.

In my circle of friends, the authors with books in more than genre use different names for each, but then use their main name as the umbrella for all the others. As a reader, I'm able to keep them all straight, but it bothers me. I'm not sure why. I don't have to worry about this yet, but I always envision myself keeping my identities completely separate. I don't know how this will work in a practical sense. I know I won't be able to keep up with two Facebook accounts.

Trying to find time to go and be my pen name is driving me a bit batty, I admit. My pen name is very much a different person and sometimes I just can't connect with her. It's maddening.

Perhaps all writers should have a Kilgore Trout. My own version is Mitis Green and, even though he gets more fan mail than I do (damn him), he's a very useful tool to 'talk' to or have around to express rather dodgy opinions. I gave him his own twitter, facebook and blog but found them impossible to keep up.

I don't have different names, but different projects with different audiences. And yes, some days I feel a bit schizophrenic!

When I read the headline I thought you were talking about the normal multiple personalities of a writer...how scary is it that I think that's 'normal'?

I can barely keep track of the Real Me on my multi-tech-accounts. I can't imagine dealing with this.

'Remus Shepherd' is my psuedonym. I've published (non-professionally so far) under both my names. I'm not that plugged into social media, but I have a Twitter, Facebook, and Livejournal account, some of which are under my real name.

In general, I don't double-up on social media. I get an account either with my real name or my pseudonym, not both.

The media exist for different purposes. Twitter is for short creative thoughts. Livejournal is for longer essays and links. Facebook is better for keeping in touch with family than fans, at least for me.

I don't have to advertise my fiction over every media I use. Some of them are just for me and my friends or family. Maybe I'm missing out by not hawking my wares everywhere, but I like having some corners of the net to myself.

I feel kind of uncomfortable with the idea of multiple pen names for authors having multiple social networking sites and...maybe it's just me, but I'm kind of ok with my authors jumping genres and keeping their own name. I'm more interested in THEM if I follow their twitter or facebook or blog, I don't want to read a fake person's life and opinions.

When an author's other pen name is open knowledge, is there really a point to having one?

I guess I am uncomfortable with the idea of reading about a fictitious personality's fictitious life.

Frankly, I don't care. Wait, I do care. A lot. And a little. None at all, actually. Is that two status reports? I don't care. Yes, I do. Nope.

I just don't understand how they can dedicate all that time to having the multiple networking sites. Seems like a lot of work to me.

It seems an excessive amount of work to have multiple sites for each pen name. To avoid that, maybe the writer could set up one site that can be found by searching for any one pen name? Lynn Viehl writes under five or so pen names, but has one blog and is transparent about having all those different pseudonyms.

I can see writing under different names if writing for different age groups, as mature as much YA often is.

I can also see setting up a couple of different websites or separate twitter accounts or FB pages, but I can't imagine trying to manage multiple social media fleets. At least, not without an assistant.

I have three names I write under - my own, and two pen names that I mainly use to keep the genres separate. I have 1 facebook profile, but 4 pages - one for each name, plus my business name. I have 4 twitter accounts that I manage using Tweetdeck (where I can see and interact with all groups at the same time). I have blogs for each as well - the blogs deal with genre-specific writing under each name. Or fans of all three can just follow my business blog to get info on all my projects.

It's really not as complex as it sounds, but I like the delineation, personally. It is more work some days than others, but I devote specific days to specific genres/pen names, so not too bad.

I post separate status updates for my two writing names. On Facebook, sometimes they comment back and forth to each other, particularly when we're fighting over who gets to work that week. It's fun.

I use HootSuite for Twitter, which actually makes it easy to update different pen names across different social networks. However, usually I post as myself. I'm more to apt to post as my pen name if I'm working on one of her projects.

Good grief. It's hard enough for most people to condense their book into a coherent 300-word query letter. I'd hate to see what your average writer would throw together for a book trailer type presentation.

Could you imagine 200 multi-media queries about angels or mer-critters, one after the other, all done with the same or similar clip art and the same or similar music?

That's a recipe for a nervous breakdown.

For me the query letter is the first piece of writing an author uses to prove he/she can write at all. If I ran a video store, I'd want videos. Since I edit a literary magazine, prove to me that you can write! Not only would I not embrace the idea of a YouTube video query, I'd ignore it.

Perhaps if this were a writer trying to sell a screenplay this would work. But, for goodness' sake, what an agent wants to see (if I understand correctly) is what your story is and how well you can write it. A digital media query might show the former, but not the latter. Sheesh!

So that singing query-gram I sent you was probably not a good idea either?

A YouTube video doesn't show me you can, write, either.

I don't even want to watch a news video, much less a query video. I'd much rather read the news story or the query letter. It's quicker, I don't need to put on headphones or make sure my speakers are on. I don't have to go to another website.

No from me. I'd ignore it as well.

It also doesn't tell you whether she can WRITE! (But kudos to that writer for thinking outside the box.)

Does showing up at your house and acting it out work? Hmm... ;)

As we focus more on a visual life, this is probably the result. But, we are writers and our visual life is ultimately in the imagination.

Most of the book trailers I've seen show not much at all of the story. It would be hard for an agent or editor to glean anything from one, other than tone.

They seem to be about the music, and the tone, and the beautiful faces, demons, fangs, naked bodies, and if you're lucky they flash a few times to the cover artwork and the author's name.

They're an advertisement, that's all. Another marketing tool. One you can easily tune out. I have a hard time imagining trailers even help sell books to readers. Except maybe to the young crowd. ; )

"For one reason, it takes way too long. Watching a video, or just getting to the part of a video that actually tells you anything, takes far longer than reading a query."

And that's a darn good reason.

Hi Jessica,
Speaking of digital media, I'm curious at what sales threshold you would consider a query from an epublished novel.

I rarely watch book trailers for books that have been published. Few hold my attention or seem to tell me anything substantial about the book. I may get a sense of the story, but not whether the writing is any good. If I were trying to pitch my book to an agent, I'd want to show that both my story and writing are good. Thus, the format seems limited to me. (That and there's also the fact that it would take agents even longer to review queries if they had to watch a couple minutes of video for each one.)

I can't imagine many agents or editors would consider this a viable option.

Keeping an agent's attention for more the first few sentences can be difficult enough, and I can't imagine any graphics/pictures/or persons (although if you can get Gerard Butler to pitch you might stand a chance of them watching) that would WOW an agent enough to keep them listening. No matter how well put together it is.

Now video/media pitches might have a future - someday and in the right venue. There are some agent's who have participated in the fun of video pitching or online conferences, however those are usually in a learning/practice capacity.

Nope, I have to agree that as evil as those darn queries are, a good one is the gold we need to refine.

Video query, probably not. But a book trailer has possibilities, especially when you consider how e-books are on the rise and they are being downloaded to all kinds of devices. I wouldn't dismiss a well produced short video as a great marketing tool in the near future. As a matter of fact, I might just do it with my book. A lot about publishing has been turned upside down in the last two years. Stand pat at your peril.

I agree. So many advantages to social networking.

Thing I like the most about it: The ability to connect with people I probably would have lost track of if it weren't for email, Twitter and Facebook.

I'm thinking about using Time Machine backup. I just need a better external hard-drive.

It really is a great way of keeping in touch...and sometimes without the hassles of e-mails.

I'm always terrified of e-mail crashes. I've heard about them but never experienced it. This is why I copy and send everything to my two other e-mail accounts. I figure with three accounts I can't lose much...other than missing incoming mail for a short time.

LOL...you're not kidding, Jessica. It's my birthday today and I've just responded to hundreds of greetings on Facebook. If I didn't feel old before, I definitely do now!

Obviously, I'm teasing--if not for Facebook and, I hate to admit, Twitter, I would have very little contact with anyone other than my imaginary friends in my stories. I spend most of my days sequestered in my office working. Social networking gives me a life away from writing, and I'm very grateful for the ability it provides those of us who really DON'T get out much, to connect with others.

I agree. In so many ways, it just makes life easier. Now, if I could just get off the computer.

Tivi--Time Machine greatest thing ever. I was using Entourage though and it was messed up for some reason. I hate Microsoft. Have since dumped Entourage. Continuing to use Time Machine. it's fab.

"I'm very grateful for the ability it provides those of us who really DON'T get out much, to connect with others."

Thank you for stating this. I went from owning an art gallery for ten years and being in constant contact with the public daily, and writing part time, to selling the business and working at home writing full time. It's a shock, not being with people all the time. And can get frustrating, too. Thanks to social networks at least there's some communication.

I love social networking because it has allowed me to meet other authors and learn of many opportunities. I live in Montana, and there aren't that many fantasy fiction authors here for some reason. It makes me feel less isolated.

On a side note, I did know of two other locals that wrote fantasy fiction. Last weekend, I learned that his definition of fantasy involved a dominatrix. Worse yet, that's the kind of stuff he thought I was writing, too! Awkward!

Nothing feeds my opposing needs to be a hermit and to be friendly like social networking.

And yes! Sometimes it has practical uses, too.

This is a very timely post for me. I live in Brisbane in the state of Queensland in Australia. We've just had a major flood and social networking provided valuable updates, both from ordinary people and authorities such as the police. We were asked to stay off the phone network so it could be used for people who really needed it, so I sat on Facebook to check on family and friends, and used Twitter to see what was going on in other parts of the city and state.

While TV and online news sites provided valuable updates, I found social networking was usually ahead with breaking news.

I love networking too! I don't always keep up on Twitter but I've been trying :)

This is just great. Love the droll humor. And it's so true. More than once, someone has pulled me up short for my own good.

Internet communication is tricky. I'm still sorting out how as a writer to share from my life, but not over-do it.

I'd love to see a post on that!

Good reminder. When I first started my blog, I was terrified of these people. I've relaxed quite a bit, but not completely. For awhile I had guy writing what I can only describe as anger manifestos on my site. I'm glad he's gone.

They're out there, but don't forget how many truly wonderful people there are as well. Even trolls aren't enough to ruin the good folks you come across, either online or in life.

I can't go a day without comment moderation on my blog. Trolls are always lurking and trying to comment. And sometimes on blog posts I wrote a year, or more, ago.

LOL on the trolls, aka Anonymous. Funny how the trash talkers are reluctant to reveal their true identities. It's hard to take those types seriously.

I read this title and literally sprayed pepsi out of my mouth. Trolls are downright annoying at times but funny at others. Why? Because some of the things they rant about are so stupid you end up laughing at them. I mean, it's not saying you are the better person or whatever but you kind of are since some people know when to keep their mouths closed. Got to love the trolls though. =)

You've just gotta love trolls!

And your droll sense of humour.

Sometimes they make you laugh. Other times want to pull your hair out. They come in all walks of life,not just on the internet.

But cyberspace seems to let them release their inhibitions. They can rant and rave and come out of their holes and be most annoyingly... annonie-mouse.

Quite apt that!

So here's my initial thoughts here "Crap am I a troll?" Did i say something in my dry sarcastic sense of humor that is sometimes misread on fb? Then I tried to mentally check everything that I might have said to you. But instead had to go through all the stuff I said to others first and I just realized I am a smarty pants. I don't like the trolls this much thought gives me a headache.

All creatures - great and small - have their purposes . .

I get reminded of this same thing upon occasion.

Good blogs are wonderful. Someone is taking their time to share their opinions about the world in a meaningful way. And many times those opinions are received by over 90% of followers as "This is so true," or "Of course, why didn't I say that!"

And since there is truth in most everything, there are people out there who may see the world differently, who might not have the same sensibilities. What does it mean to crap on a blog? Not sure. But good blogs should spark discussion or profound thought. Blogs that have nothing but followers don't seem as successful to me.

So when do counter opinions go too far? And what is the difference between a mean spirited troll and a troll who has something to say? After all, we are all equal, and the owner of the author of a blog is not necessarily the unequivocal word on a subject.

It's hard to stand up against the masses. Especially when the masses have the comfort of others who say the exact same thing. But this doesn't make them right.

So...'trollish' enough? I hope not. Instead, perhaps, we could label this post 'respectful disagreement?'

You suck... just kidding...

Most of the trolls I get are simply comment spam. Very few are real trolls.

And I moderate everything (volume is pretty low), so it's not a difficulty to ban them before they even post.