Hello, Goodbye

By Allison Brennan

I couldn't leave Murderati without one last post, and Pari graciously gave me the first "Expect the Unexpected" Tuesday in the new configuration of this great blog.

I enjoy blogging, but as all of you know, and all the writers out there know, blogging takes time away from writing and family. I had to make a choice, and blogging weekly (twice a month here, twice a month at Murder She Writes) in addition to guest blogs here and there and all the other social media things on my author to-do list was kind of stressing me out. Everything was taking away from my writing time and my kids. Something had to give, and unfortunately, it was this blog.

But I'm sure I'll pop up on occasion, if the gang will have me as a visitor. :)

I've thought a lot about social media over the past year or two, and what is expected from authors. To be accessible, to share our thoughts, to answer questions.

Blogging is only part of it. (And, to be honest, when I founded Murder She Writes with four other authors six years ago, we did it partly because we thought it would be good promotion, and partly because we liked each other and enjoyed chatting with others through the blog about family, writing, entertainment.) But there's also Twitter, and Facebook, and LinkedIn, and Google+, and a dozen other social media avenues that "they" say you have to be part of in order to survive in this New World of publishing.

There are many, many authors who aren't part of the on-line community. And many, many authors who are. The only way it truly works is if the author builds a rapport, which means talking about things OTHER than their books. And that means, they should enjoy the community they're in. Otherwise, it's a chore, a hated chore, like cleaning grout. And people pick up on that.

Social media works primarily if the author can create a following of readers who will sincerely talk up their books and spread the word of mouth that is essential to the success of any book. In fact, if you ask most publicists and marketing folks, they'll tell you that word of mouth is the single most effective tool to create a bestseller--but there's no one way and no guaranteed way to generate it.

Let's pretend there are ten equally "good" books out on a given day. A lot of things factor into making a potential bestseller -- cover, co-op, reviews, author (if it's a known author), endorsements, cover copy, placement -- and some work for some readers, some for others. But the way to make a title move higher is for people to recommend the book (or the author) to others. To talk about the book on blogs. And Twitter. And Facebook. But no one knows how to create that world of mouth--on the Internet or face-to-face--each and every time. They try everything, but what works for one book or author might not work for another equally good book or author.

But we sometimes forget because we spend so much time at our computers writing (and participating on blogs and twitter and facebook) that more than half the readers are still not reading electronic books (22% of my books are sold as e-books) and many readers still rely on the recommendation from their colleague or sister or best friend.

What this practically means for authors is that we have more to do with less time and resources. We can't neglect the online communities, nor can we forget that there are "offline" communities who read just as much.

So my advice to writers: participate in the communities that you enjoy, don't self-market all the time, and focus on the writing first. Because none of the social media matters if you don't have a book to sell.

My advice to readers: share your books with others. Recommend authors you like, either face-to-face or on the Internet. Email the author of a book you enjoyed and tell her.

And a caveat to all: give both, writers and readers, then benefit of the doubt when you hear rumors in cyberspace. Misunderstandings spread instantly in the virtual world, and can damage careers and reputations. People seem to think that they can say anything they want because it's "anonymous," but I'd argue that character is judged by what you do when no one is looking--or when no one knows who you are.

I can be found in cyberspace at my website, of course, as well as Facebook, Twitter, and Murder She Writes.

FYI: The third Lucy Kincaid book, IF I SHOULD DIE, will be out two weeks from today, on November 22. So far, the reviews have been positive. Fresh Fiction said, "“Non-stop action, spine-tingling suspense … a wonderful addition to a great series.” And Joyfully Reviewed made DIE a Recommended Read for December. “If I Should Die is a spine-tingling chiller that will wrap you up in its mystery and take you on a heart-pounding race to the breathtaking finale!”

In addition, the novella LOVE IS MURDER is printed in the book as bonus material. You get a full-length book plus a full novella for a single book, mass market price. Cool, eh?

And a sneak peak at the fourth Lucy Kincaid book, SILENCED, and the first with my new publisher, St. Martin's/Minotaur. They're taking the series in an exciting new direction, don't you think? And that's what I'm doing now -- revising this book. I have two weeks. Any wonder why I needed to free up some time?

I've very much enjoyed my three-plus years here at Murderati. We had a great little community amongst ourselves, and within our regulars who comment or lurk. Pari and J.T. have really created a fantastic, enduring blog, and I'm glad it's continuing to exist. Thank you, Murderati gang, for having me back for the day, even if it was just to say good-bye.

The Social Network

by Alexandra Sokoloff

This is being touted as “the film that defines a generation”.

Well, SPOILER, but I don’t think so.  On the other hand, I think we could have a great conversation about it – what is is, what it could have been, what really does define Facebook and all these other – whatever they are.   

And I really would like to have that conversation.  At conferences I have seen the most godawfully insipid presentations on Twitter, Facebook, blogging, RSS feeds, etc.   I think we can do better.

The movie is pretty brilliant for the first hour.  It’s fascinating to see what Facebook started off as.  As presented by the movie I read it as a nerd’s revenge on “social clubs”, which I gather is Harvard’s version of frats and sororities.  

Okay, look, I went to Berkeley.  Frats and sororities were the low end of the totem pole.   Being in a frat meant you were suspected of fucking sheep, and at least at the time, that was not completely without reason.  And doing sorority rush was cause for massive group intervention every bit as dire as would be learning that a friend’s boyfriend was battering her.

But for someone as misogynistic and socially pathetic as the movie portrays the character of Zuckerberg…. I can see that frats – I mean social clubs -  that got hot girls bused into the frat – I mean social club – as entertainment – would incite a nerd’s jealousy and revenge. 

On the other hand, there was also the homoerotic undercurrent of Jesse Eisenberg (who I thought was brilliant, btw, wonderful performance)  having his first look at the classic erotica fantasy of the Winklevoss twins, in all their 6’5” preppie cutness.   Talk about visual imagery:  after that I didn’t ever really buy that anyone female had anything to do with anything, motivation-wise. 

(By the way, did EVERYONE in college have hot prep jock twins?   Serious question, because for all these years I thought that was just me, only to find now that it’s just a college cliché.   And yes, the movie did inspire me to Facebook them, and no further will I go on THAT train of thought.)

Anyway, in the movie, Zuckerberg, the ultimate social outcast, creates (the formerly known as) The Facebook as sort of an online social status meter.   And the app is complete when a random conversation makes Zuckerberg realize the missing element:  the relationship status button.  Because the only thing you really care about in college is if someone is single.   Or for some people - taken and looking anyway is fine, too.

That was probably the high point of the movie for me because it made me understand what made Facebook – at least originally – a killer app.

From there the movie declined, for me, rapidly, because I thought the filmmakers, and I mean by that Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher (although I can definitely see the fingerprints of producer Mike DeLuca here), who have done such brilliant and emotionally unnerving work elsewhere,  never took the trouble to define and portray what the Facebook experience actually IS, at its core.

Okay, well, it’s a biopic.   Biopics by nature are unsatisfying - I think because no one can ever fully define a human being.  Except in fiction, of course – you CAN define a character.    Even the biopics I really love, like Walk The Line, tend to dissolve into soap opera melodrama in the end.  I’m always left with an unsatisfied feeling, and  this was absolutely true of TSN.

And I guess the filmmakers were most interested in the corporate and legal aspects of the story.   But what I wanted was a movie about Facebook. 

Why is it Facebook that has taken over the online world?   What makes it more addicting than – MySpace, I guess, for example, or the Ning networks or online bulletin boards?   Has Facebook become its own Internet within the Internet?    Or is Twitter really where it’s at, but not enough people have figured Twitter out to tip it over into critical mass?

Personally I was a little ahead of the curve on the online addiction thing – I burned  out all my obsession on an online message board before FB even existed, and of course then the obligatory blogging thing that we all do, and by the time Facebook came along I was politely interested but not rabid the way newbies to internet addiction are.  

But I do get some basic things about why Facebook.

First, it’s brilliant that it’s so plain, visually.  You don’t have to spend any time setting up a look for your page – in fact, you can’t – so there’s no competition or feelings of inadequacy, there, and no reason to put it off.  You can just be up and running.

There may be feelings of inadequacy about numbers of friends, I don’t know.  I bet that was a big deal when FB was just on the campuses.   But as authors, we have “friends” come to us.   We have thousands of them (in fact I am now in the not fun process of having to convert my “friends” over to a fan page – you would think by now FB would have designed an automatic way to do that).

The other obvious thing about FB is that it became the place to be, therefore you can find almost anyone you want from your entire life on it, no matter how long ago you fell out of touch, and message them without having  to explain why you are – because everyone else is doing it.   (You do get a sense from the movie of how in a business sense that kind of coverage happened, even though the movie only deals with the college phase of FB). 

I have not done much on FB to track down people from my past, but I've seen in other people what an addiction that is.   And for me, the connectivity is great.   I like keeping up with real friends – I like getting random updates about what they’re doing.  Of course the dark side of that is – that’s no substitute for a relationship.   There’s a song about social networking that says something like “and we’ll get together one of these days”, with the clear implication that people just never do anymore, now that there’s FB.

I love the update feature of FB because it’s like having a mini-blog without any of the things that make blogging such an exhausting time suck. Promotionally, it’s great for authors because it requires so much less energy than a blog.  You can get a fun thread of conversation going with just a random off-the-wall comment.    I have to cop to being extremely judgmental about what people end up posting – the level of inanity is truly off the charts.   If a writer can’t come up with something halfway interesting or witty or amusing… But when you have time, if you have time, you can punish those inane time-wasters in your own head by quietly removing them from your news feed. 

Anyway, I have no idea of the figures on this but I would venture to guess that you can reach more people in far less time by doing your blogging on FB.  But I can’t really say because Murderati has a large audience compared to most blogs, and so does my own blog.   I could never use FB as a substitute for my blog, but I have a specific niche – my blog is more a product than a journal.   For other people who are not getting the same kind of blog traffic and who hate blogging anyway, I would think FB is a great and maybe sanity-preserving alternative. 

And then obviously, FB is “dating” heaven – I think it must have completely replaced singles sites by now.  And that is the point I guess the movie was trying to make  - that what made FB a killer app is that it allowed people to hook up on line from within a network of friends, which makes it seem less skeevy.   Not that skeeviness isn’t happening left and right, it’s just the perception.

(It’s always sex and war that drives entrepreneurial innovation, right?)

So those are the basics that I see driving the phenomenon, but what I really want is to hear what everyone else thinks.

The 64 million dollar essay question is:

- Define the Facebook experience - for you and/or for the world.  (Come on, it’s Saturday, you’re only going to spend it on FB anyway.)

But if that's too overwhelming - here are some softer ones:

- Give us your review of The Social Network.

- Tell us some great biopics and prove me wrong on this genre.

Hope everyone had a good week!

- Alex



a poll and a teaser

by Toni McGee Causey

I would really love it if you all would help resolve a bit of a mystery for a lot of us freaks/writers/authors/scribblers...

Lately, I've seen a tremendous amount of discussion on a couple of writers loops I'm on, and elsewhere on various blogs, about how important social media is to a writer's career. We all pretty much agree that it's important to have a website (she said, the person who has not updated her own in a long time, yikes)... but there is the assumption / pressure / voodoo guesswork that it's critical for an author to also be present on Facebook and Twitter and other social media sites.

The assumption is that social media helps authors sell books. And the corollary is that a lack of presence means lost sales (bad author, bad author).

I think these are incorrect assumptions, but I could be wrong.

My theory is that most people who "follow" an author on Facebook or Twitter do so after they've already learned about the author--usually by buying their books or visiting them on blogs. I'm not sure that the exposure to the author on Facebook or Twitter actually compels a follower who hadn't already been interested in buying the author's books to then do so. 

Does that make sense to you all? 

Now, don't get me wrong--I enjoy Facebook and Twitter and I think that it's funt to build a relationship with readers, and I know in my case, many readers have become real friends, so that's a lot of lagniappe, there. Subsequently, there have been times that these friends have talked about someone else's books and I've gone to check that book out and then I bought it. But I bought it on word-of-mouth, not on the author having posted information. (In each case where this happened, the person had bought and read the book; they had not re-posted anything from the original author.)

I also know that there have been a few times when I've seen an author be so... repugnant... on their social media interactions, that I am no longer interested in their books, so the social media thing can definitely backfire.

So I'd like to know if the mandate to "get a FB and Twitter account" to "help sell books" is a fallacy... or if it helps... or if sales are just an occasional side benefit. 

Would you mind telling me which of the following is true for you? Please feel free to pick more than one if you do some of one, some of the other. I'm looking more for overall trends here, so feel free to elaborate.

Now, this is not just aimed at readers, but I really hope you all will come out of lurkdom and post. To make it fun, one lucky commenter will receive a $25 gift certificate to the online bookstore of their choice.

POLL

a) I follow authors on FB/Twitter after I've read their books, not before.

b) I follow authors on FB/Twitter after I've heard about them from their blogs -- this does not mean I have bought or will buy their books.

c) I follow authors on FB/Twitter after someone else has mentioned them / tweeted about them / shared a link, but that's more out of curiosity, and does not mean I will be buying their books.

d)I follow authors on FB/Twitter, and in some cases (or all cases), have then subsequently bought their books.

e) I follow authors on FB/Twitter after I heard about them from their blogs, and I have then subsequently bought their books.

f) I follow authors on FB/Twitter after someone has mentioned them/tweeted, etc., and I often then buy their books.

g) I follow authors on FB/Twitter and ended up buying something they recommended. (Doesn't mean I bought that author's books, though.)

h) What the hell? Who the hell follows authors on FB/Twitter? I don't "follow" authors online, and I still buy books.

i) WRITE IN YOUR TAKE ON THE USE / ABUSE / FALSE ASSUMPTIONS about Facebook and/or Twitter.

And now, for the teaser part of the post...

For the next two weeks, you will see all of our workspaces and hear about our writing processes. Well, everyone except moi... mine was posted a couple of weeks back here. I think this is a first for us--a concentrated two week look into the same aspect of each of our lives, and how similar--and different--we all are.

On my Sunday, two weeks from now, we have a round-up of photos from a bunch of cool writers friends, and we're adding more through this week. (Seriously, you will love glimpses into these writer's workspaces -- Lee Child, David Morrell, Laura Lippman, MJ Rose, Anne Stuart, Lani Diane Rich, Karin Slaughter, Lisa Gardner, Cindy Gerard, Erica Spindler, T. Jefferson Parker, CJ Lyons, Jeff Abbott, James Born, Gayle Lynds, Jonathan Maberry... and YOU.)

I want YOU, yes, YOU to send me your photos of your workspaces, because you're a part of us. So many of you have visited with us every day, and we'd love to include you in our pictorial. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A WRITER. We LOVE READERS. There are a bunch of writer friends who post here for whom I do not have an email address, and yes, I want you on board. All of you. What a cool round-up that would be.

Here's what you do -- take a photo of your workspace. I don't care if it's a barn, a desk in a cubicle, an assembly line, a backhoe... take a photo of your workspace and email it to toni [at] tonimcgeecausey [dot] com. Any photo will do, and don't worry if it's dark or whatever--I have Lightroom, I can deal with it. Email it and tell me in a sentence or two something about your workspace and what you do there.

C'mon. Join the fun. I've got photos right now of everything from a Starbucks to a highrise apartment to a bed. (Yes. A bed. Which is so perfect.) So send me yours, dear 'Rati. You belong here. 

Now, on to your answers! And thank you.

What is a writer?

by Pari

Is the mere act of “calling” oneself a writer enough? Does someone who journals occasionally merit the appellation? Is publication a requirement?  Is a person who composes haiku as worthy of the name as a novelist who can’t manage to tell a story in less than 900 printed pages?

I’ve wondered about this for a long time. It bothers me most during dry periods when the computer screen and a blank piece of paper seem as terrifying as abject poverty.

During the assured and comfortable years when I was writing, editing and concepting my Sasha Solomon mysteries, the issue didn't unsettle me. I was writing. I was getting publishing. I was valid.

Even when I had days or weeks with no more productivity than penning a grocery list, I still called myself a writer because I was living the life, living the dream . . . and I had street cred because of my three novels and two award nominations.

Then came the decision to discontinue my NM mystery series (at least for now), the life-changing Master Class, the need to start making a predictable income by going back to my PR consulting roots . . .

And, suddenly, I didn’t feel like a writer anymore. I hadn’t published much fiction in a few years. Writing had lost its joy for me. I felt like I had to force every word. Was I a sham? Could I legitimately call myself a writer when I wasn't telling stories from my heart anymore?

My self identity plummeted. I felt like an imposter whenever I thought about writing and what I was doing with my life. Let me tell you, the world turned gray there for awhile.

In July, I decided to try something different. I promised myself to write fiction every single day. No exceptions. The quality didn’t matter – crap or brilliance – it was all the same. The amount didn’t matter – a sentence or 20 pages – the act was the important thing. In order to feel like a writer, I had to nourish my creativity daily. Period. I had to commit. I had to be consistent.

The first few weeks of the month were difficult. Who knew I could come up with so many excuses to avoid my computer?  "Well, then you'll just have to use pen and paper," I'd tell myself.

"I only wrote 100 words and they're all shit," I complained.
"Cool. Think of them as literary compost for whatever you'll write next," I responded.

Slowly I started feeling better, more honest.

This month, I decided to push myself further. I’m noting my daily fiction word count on my FB “fan” page. Without trying, I find myself writing more, getting lost in the story with greater ease and pleasure. I'm having fun.

I feel like a writer again . . .

So what do you think?
What is a writer? Is just calling yourself one enough?
Does consistency matter, writing daily/weekly/monthy?
Is publication a requirement? Once published are you forever a writer -- whether you're writing anymore or not?
Does length matter?

in which I make up a point just to get to post this twitter feed

(a Twitter / Facebook / social media how-to)

by Toni McGee Causey

Okay, look, there are lots of discussions going on (one at Thrillerfest this weekend, moderated by our own Allison Brennan), wherein Social Networking is dissected and analyzed and pondered and ground to a pulp. Since I sadly was not at Thrillerfest (whimper) and missed their terrific panel, I have no clue what was discussed there... but I'm willing to bet that there was at least some reference to using social networking sites for "branding" and "getting your name out there" for the public and "keeping a presence" on the interwebs and promoting your book.

But, mostly, social networking is really just supposed to be social. You know. Fun. 

[I will tell you one thing--I have had people follow me in order to be able to DM me about their latest release. It's not a personal DM (direct message)... it's a canned message. Spam. I hate it. I will not buy a book if I'm spammed like that. If you have a review that you're proud of, that's great. Or a blurb? Terrific. If someone is excited about someone else's book and mentions it--wonderful--in fact, I'll tend to pay more attention if someone is mentioning you than if you're doing it yourself. I will follow links to reviews and I have bought books like this. But a direct spam in my private in-box? No. No no no no no. And really? No. Don't do it. You don't want to look smarmy and socially inept. You wouldn't show up at my door in a shiny leisure suit when I was having a casual party for friends and barge in and announce that your book was out today and you had this great offer and by the way, what was my name again? Well, maybe some people would, and those people get deleted and ignored.][I don't care *how* famous you are.]

So, back to social networking. I think it's okay to mention what you're working on, talking about the process of what you're going through. It's okay to mention when your book is coming out, because that's an event in your life. But if all of your posts to Facebook and Twitter (etc.) are promotional, people are going to tune you out. You will become the equivalent of the DVR'd commercial: zip, on to the next interesting thing, instead of hanging around and getting to know you.

Instead, social media should be used for fun. Networking and promotional stuff is just a side benefit, a little lagniappe, if you will. Take, for example, this exchange Friday night, wherein we pick up this story with Colleen crouched on her sofa, wielding a spatula:

colleenlindsay 

I'm not afraid to eat fried worms but I am afraid of this monster flying roach thingie that's aiming for my head. #whyineedashotgun

ToniMcGeeCausey 

@colleenlindsay A fast remedy for the flying roach and you'll think I'm crazy, but it works--hair spray. If you don't have bug spray.

colleenlindsay

@ToniMcGeeCausey Er, um, I have a buzz cut. Thus, I do not own hair spray.

ToniMcGeeCausey

@colleenlindsay oven cleaner? windex? really anything spray-able. Also, I now know what to tell your clients to get you for Christmas. ;)

Jinxie_G 

@colleenlindsay Got any Raid? And a lighter? Instant flame thrower!

colleenlindsay

@Jinxie_G The way my luck has been going the past three weeks, I'm just as likely to set the whole house ablaze. Good suggestion, though!

Jinxie_G

@colleenlindsay Yeah, I thought of that after the fact. LOL Seriously thought, what Toni suggests should work with the sticky wings.

colleenlindsay 

Damn it, SIGOURNEY WEAVER would know how to kill this giant roach!

ToniMcGeeCausey 

@colleenlindsay uh, Sigourney didn't fare so well by the third movie. She was having alien baby, killed self. Do not go down that path.

colleenlindsay 

I swear to God Stinkyboy just offered that roach a martini.

[note to reader: Stinkyboy is Colleen's cat.]

colleenlindsay

This roach needs to die. #whatwouldBrianBoitanodo? #hedmakeaplanandseeitthrough #withaflamethrowerprobably

literaticat

@colleenlindsay Honestly, Colleen, put on your big girl panties & deal with it. I know actual babies who're tougher than you. #sissylindsay

colleenlindsay

@literaticat I am not denying my inherent sissy nature. I AM NOT ASHAMED TO BE A WUSS.

JM_Kelley

@colleenlindsay Scrubbing Bubbles Foam will kill any multi-legged beastie & make your surfaces gleam while it's choking the life out of 'em.

colleenlindsay

@JM_Kelley I HAVE SCRUBBING BUBBLES! I will BUBBLE it to death!

colleenlindsay 

ACK! Just dive-bombed my head again.

colleenlindsay

Sneak attack! Have disabled Mothra with Scrubbling Bubbles. It fell behind stove. Not waiting around to see if it crawls back out, dammit!

Meanwhile, in a related conversation, after HC mentioned she had firebombed a spider once…

HC_Palmquist

@ToniMcGeeCausey He pissed me off, trapping me in the house like that. I finally got so mad, I made SURE my revenge was not served cold.

ToniMcGeeCausey 

@HC_Palmquist LOL... damn, girl, you're hard core. I've Raided 'em and WD 40'd em and Lysol'd em, but I have never firebombed one.

ToniMcGeeCausey 

@HC_Palmquist of course, given that it's *me*... me+firebomb would be a very sad thing. I once tried to shoot a rat with a gun, tho.

ToniMcGeeCausey 

@HC_Palmquist missed it.

ToniMcGeeCausey  

@HC_Palmquist managed to kill a really nice piece of molding and a desk leg.

Then a few minutes later… after we hadn't heard from Colleen in a while...

Stinkyboy

Waiting for Fat Biped to fall asleep. We will then offer her up as a prearranged sacrifice to the Great Flying Roach God. Shhhh! Don't tell!

There were signs the next night that Colleen lived. Stinkyboy will lounge to doublecross another day.

We had fun, goofing off, all of us. I don't know Colleen, other than she's a literary agent at FinePrint Literary Management. I did not start following her because she's an agent -- I am extremely happy with my agent, Stephanie Kip Rostan of Levine/Greenberg. (Exceptionally happy.) I started following Colleen because someone retweeted a funny comment she'd written.

Here's the thing... Colleen accomplished something pretty smart with her playfulness -- she demonstrated that she's got a great sense of humor, she's self-deprecating, she's easy to interact with, and she's human--not at all stuffy and scary, the way so many agents are perceived. She does a Q&A every so often (I haven't kept track of when--perhaps she'll mention it in the comments), and if I were ever asked by anyone if I knew anything about her, I'd say that I thought she was a lot of fun, and clever and approachable and yet, I've also seen her answer questions very professionally. Now really, she wouldn't have accomplished that if she were telling me she was fun and clever and yet, professional. She simply showed it.

Show, don't tell.

Treat your social media as fun; be a friend, interact as friends. Ask people about their day, see how they're doing. Respond to what's going on in their lives. Don't try so hard to be anything important and for heaven's sake, don't just interact to promote yourself. Do pass along links of interest and contests you're sponsoring--those are often appreciated, but don't get so aggressive that you pass along every freaking contest you've ever seen on the internet. Most of all, relax. Twitter and Facebook are the equivalent of gathering for a break at the water cooler. If you were standing there, you wouldn't want to hear someone evangelize or detail their latest colonoscopy or try to sell you some Amway. You'd just want to hang out, have some fun, maybe talk about something interesting in the news and then go back to work. You'll remember the people who made you laugh and you'll avoid the ones who were hounding you for something. Social media works pretty much the same way.

Plus, you learn that Raid + lighter = flamethrower, and you just never know when that might come in handy.

So tell me, 'Rati, what odd / fun / interesting thing have you learned lately from a social media site?