There have been a few discussions around the web about the mislabeling of erotica as erotic romance to increase sales. Readers are upset by being sold one thing, but ending up with another.
Thing is, this isn’t just an erotic romance problem.
I’ve had several discussions recently with a wide variety of authors all upset at the marketing of their books by the publisher. Such as selling paranormals with no hint of paranormal in the cover image or blurb. Or traditional romances covered in highly sexual images, and romantic comedy-looking covers on books that aren’t funny. How about back cover blurbs that make a HUGE point about a tiny, almost non-existent sub-plot?
Jane Dystel of Dystel & Goderick Literary Management asks, “Where has all the planning gone?” She goes on to say:
“…when the publishing date approaches, publishers scramble to put some kind of plan together for the book’s launch and way too often, I find that plan is insufficient and not at all thought through. And shockingly, the publisher almost never consults with the author as to what they think might work.”
This is so true! I can’t tell you how many of my author friends have said that when they offered suggestions for how to reach their core readers or targeted demographic they were brushed aside with, “We’ve been doing this a long time.”
It breaks my heart to see authors miserable over poor sales of a book that might have done better if the public knew what they were buying. Why market a paranormal as having no paranormal elements? The paranormal readers won’t buy it, and the straight contemp/historical readers will be upset at having spent money on a genre they don’t enjoy. Those looking for something to make them laugh will not be happy to find a somber tale. I don’t understand the reasoning that all that matters is getting the book to the register and into your home. Why isn’t the goal to connect readers with a book they’ll enjoy and rave about, rather than complain that they were duped out of their hard-earned money?
Ms. Dystel goes on to say:
“Not only did the books suffer; the publishers, I fear, lost significant money and the relationship between the publisher and the author went south.”
This is a no-win situation for everyone involved. The readers, author, and publisher walk away disappointed and the book itself is the biggest loser of all, because it was never able to reach the consumers who would have loved it.
This is not an isolated issue, and it seems to be happening more and more often. Book sales are down. I understand that. But the solution is not to concentrate on the money exchange at the register. The solution is to have more happy readers, and selling them chocolate ice cream in a strawberry box isn’t the answer. At least, in MHO.
No related posts.
I definitely agree that it isn’t just an erotic romance issue. One of the major reasons that erotic romance is getting so much attention is that that there are certain publishers who have outright stated they are printing material that does not have a HEA and labelling it “erotic romance” to reach a wider market.
As for covers, I remember reading a blog post from an author whose book I had no intention of buying. It had a cartoon cover and the blurb sounded like it was a comedy. In reality, at least according to the author, it was a dark vampire romance. I still haven’t bought it–mainly because when I go to the store, I can never remember which cartoon-comedy-vampire novel it is.
I know Tawny Taylor had some issues with her cover for Sex and the Single Ghost throwing off readers/reviewers. They were expecting something light and fluffy, not erotic romance with some kink.
Problem is, books are often judged by their cover, at least by readers browsing at bookstores. It unfortunately isn’t uncommon at this point for me to look at a cover and wonder WTF the marketing department was on that day.
Some section within publishing houses is definitely NOT looking at the big picture.
But…(devils advocate here).
The publishers HAVE been doing things a long time. And what’s the problem with them promoing the book however they see fit. Is there a reason the author can’t promote it a different way?
I’d say this would be a bigger problem for first time authors, who don’t already have a core readership, but if an author already has one – promote your way and let the publisher promote their way.
If everything works out – double the readers, if not, you still have your core group!
I agree, and misleading covers don’t seem to be limited to romance. I was complaining about misleading covers in historical military fiction a few months ago (http://carlanayland.blogspot.com/2006/04/cover-art-part-2.html). I hate buying something and then finding out that it isn’t what I was expecting. It always makes me feel cheated or manipulated. Similarly, there are several authors whose books I’ve avoided because of misleading covers, and only discovered when friends recommended them to me with, “Ignore the cover, it’s not that kind of book at all.”.
Because publishers sell to booksellers, authors sell to readers. If the booksellers don’t buy the book and have it out on shelves, whatever the author does to get readers in the store doesn’t help, because the book won’t be there.
Take, for instance, the paranormal books marketed as non-paranormal. Borders Group has said that they buy double if the book is paranormal, because they sell so well. That could make the difference between the book being sold in all Borders stores, or just a select number of them.
I’m totally the reader you mention who’s angry when they buy a book that’s supposed to be a straight historical and then find out that it’s really a paranormal. I’ve never taken a book back to the store and demanded my $ back, but I’ve thought about it, and I never pick up that author again, cause how will I ever be able to trust that their books are being accurately described? The trust is gone. I feel like I’ve been cheated. Like the publisher KNEW I wouldn’t pick up a book about a the time-traveling ghost of a Saxon vampire, so they just didn’t mention it (note, there is no such book as far as I know, I’m just saying . . .).
And there’s even cover problems with straight historicals. A while back a book by a friend of a friend just wasn’t selling. It had front of store coop and everything, but it wasn’t moving. A call went out on the RWA loops: Had we seen this book? Was it really up front like it was supposed to be? What was wrong?
I’ll tell you what was wrong: The cover. It was a disaster. I would never have picked the book up to even read the blurb (mullet-prince head in the foreground, teepees in the background). It looks like a western or an “Indian” romance. Turns out it’s about escaped Scottish Jacobites in Canada (!). So those of us who WANT to read about Scottish Jacobites weren’t picking the book up because of the heavy “western” feel of it, and the people who did pick it up (cause they wanted a western) read the blurb about Jacobites and put it right back on the shelf.
Whose fault is this? Oh, it’s the publisher’s fault. Who will get blamed for it? The author.
The publishers HAVE been doing things a long time. And what’s the problem with them promoing the book however they see fit. Is there a reason the author can’t promote it a different way?
The way a publisher chooses to promote a book is the way that sticks. Their the ones who decide on the packaging. So if they stick a non-paranormal cover on a book that’s paranormal, and as a result, the booksellers buy half the amount, it doesn’t matter how much the author proclaims on her website that her book is paranormal. Most people in the bookstore have NOT been to the author’s website. They don’t know. I think this happened to Monica Jackson. Her vampire book had a cutesy cartoon cover of a girl and a… phone? Is that right?
I have seen books that were definitely NOT about vampires marketed as vampire books — in this case, it worked for the author. But what if it were the other way around? What if being pushed as a vamp book would hurt its sales? What if the very elements of the story the author was trying to de-emphasize the most were the ones the publisher chose to play up? Would that not keep people who’d want to buy a book like the author has written away from it and people who want to buy the book that it LOOKS like the author has written disappointed when they discover they’ve been tricked?
The publisher is the one with the marketing machine and the packaging capabilities. An author reaches a much smaller group of people. the people browsing the shelves looking for the men with fangs are the ones that are going to skip over the book that doesn’t have fangs or a stake or a moon on it.
Great post, Sylvia. There seems to be such a disconnect between the publishers and the authors. With the market such as it is, you’d think publishers would want to cull their authors for as much input on the books as possible – which isn’t to say the publishers don’t know what they’re doing, just that they’re out of touch with readers.
Aha! So there are some advantages to small press.:smile: An author has input into covers, and more control over the marketing blurbs on the back of a book. I’ve been lucky to have good covers for my last two books. I’ve also been the one who’s written most of the blurb, which the publisher has tweaked.
Question for authors who have had their book covers and/or blurbs completely disconnected from the actual book…exactly what type of input have you had with regard to the marketing piece. Do you turn in a detailed synopsis or character analysis sheet that the marketing department uses for creating their marketing plan?
That is why so many readers are reluctant to try new authors, the fear of getting cheated.
Great topic, Sylvia! Something I’ve noticed at my local BAM is that they’ve got a special shelf for trade sized books within their romance section. In this section you will find a Brava right next to a Steeple Hill. Both trade sized, both with tasteful covers. Because I’m familiar with these lines I know the difference but I wonder how many readers have been burned by this juxtapositioning.
Also regarding misleading cover images, I am always surprised at that the degree of sexiness/old school clinchiness of Avon covers seems inversely proportional to the explicitness of the text inside.
Another mis-cover I’ve noticed is Kristina Cook’s Unlaced series. I had no idea those were regency historicals until I saw her post on Romance by the Blog. The cover reads chick lit/contemporary romp.
“Another mis-cover I’ve noticed is Kristina Cook’s Unlaced series. I had no idea those were regency historicals until I saw her post on Romance by the Blog. The cover reads chick lit/contemporary romp.”
Yep. I would have skipped over them too, if I didn’t know Kristina from the Beau Monde chapter. My eye is simply trained to skip right over cartoon covers. I’m so glad that the trend for cartoon historicals seems to be waining.
This is something inexcusable to me. In any other industry it would not be tolerated. If you sold a product as chocolate only to find potatoes inside, there’d be a lawsuit. Why is this kind of sloppiness acceptable in publishing? Cover art you can skirt a bit if you label the contents well, but promoting something historical as contemporary is outright false advertising and sloppiness. And it IS sloppiness, it’s not because they’ve been doing it a long time. If they have, then they should KNOW you don’t deceive the consumer or you lose them. Period.
Why do authors tolerate it? Agents? Booksellers? Editors? Authors & editors spend untold amounts of time creating and editing a product … could the “professional” marketing department not spend 5 minutes to read a damned synopsis to be sure the marketing campaign is accurate and on track for a successful sale? Isn’t that their freakin’ job?
grrrrr
You are assuming that they’re making marketing plans without forethought. Thing is, the publisher works very hard to come up with the packaging for a book.
Historical romance sales are down. So they think, “Why put a historical cover image on the book and doom it to bad sales? We should put a contemporary/chick lit cover on it and attract a bunch of readers who would not have otherwise bought the book.”
So, yes, the marketing dept. knew what the book was about and they planned their sales pitch accordingly. Thing is, the sales pitch they decide on may turn out to be the exact opposite of what the story is. That’s not a random error. It’s planned.
Sylvia … which makes it worse to me, deliberate dishonesty MAY sell a few books, but in the long run it can’t be good, certainly not for the author. I wonder if they have any concrete numbers that a mislabeled book brings in new readers.
I know a few authors who were hurt by this sales-wise (plus emotionally distressed and disappointed). Very sad.
One should not yak about one’s pubs publicly if one is at all smart. But the covers, blurbs AND marketing of my last three paranormals compared to the content say it all.
What keeels me is that they have so FEW black paranormal romance authors! Why cripple one at the marketing gate?
Sh-oot. Let me shut up.
I have to admit I’m torn. Black Lace Books (an imprint of Virgin Books UK) have been around for a good 10 years as quality women’s erotica. However, they’re hard to find in stores. Why? Well, let’s use Barnes & Noble as an example. B&N shelved them like this:
Nonfiction –> Psychology –> Sexuality –> Erotica.
That’s right. Erotica was being shelved under NONFICTION.
Although my coauthor and I wrote our first book as erotica, with multiple povs and multiple partnerings, the core of our story was romantic. We couldn’t help it–we’re romantics at heart.
Our was one of the first Black Laces to read “Erotic Romance” on the US cover and thus be shelved in Fiction –> Romance.
I don’t have a clue if anyone’s bought our book and been unhappy that it’s not a traditional romance. Again, the core couple’s arc is romantic, and there’s the hope of an HEA at the end. (Too soon for them to know, but they want to see where the relationship will go.) All I do know is, more readers are finding my book because of Virgin’s decision to market it as a romance and ensure it’s being shelved in fiction.
Yes, yes, yes. Just in the past couple of weeks, I’ve read books with several of the problems you mentioned: paranormal without a hint of it on the cover, minor plot points made to sound like they’re the whole story, cartoons on a serious story, etc.
The thing is, I love all sorts of genres, and even I ended up disappointed and liking these books less than I would have with more appropriate covers. Even though, for example, I love paranormal, when I’m expecting romantic suspense, it throws me off. Not unlike taking a big swig of iced tea when you’re expecting Coke, even if you like them both.
Expectations make a huge difference in how much I enjoy something, and I’m sure I’m not alone there. Publishers cripple a book’s chances when they don’t market it to the people who would most appreciate it, as opposed to the people most likely to buy whatever it is they’ve put on the cover.
I suspect it’s the pervasive short-term outlook of the business world. As long as the cover, misleading though it may be, gets the book to the registers, that’s all that matters. The next book, heck, the next week, aren’t a big concern.
Oh, yes. I once bought a debut book described on the cover as “hilarious”. I didn’t get the joke and abandoned the book. But it was well-written and I went back to it — ignored everything but the premise and enjoyed the book. But there are a lot of books out there that claim my attention. I might not have bothered.
When you consider the cost of publishing a book, you’d think the publishers would make the effort to target the right audience.
Of course, publishers have been doing this for years in the SF & F genre, hence the fan filk, “There’s a Bimbo on the Cover of my Book” (Definitive lyrics of which I cannot find) And Hollywood usually does the same treatment when they know they have a stinker on their hands, but this is an alarming trend when it includes cover blurbs and synopses.
The question I have is, what can an author do about it?
I’ve been struggling with the mislabeling for a while now as a reader. The one that bugs me most is when I’m trying to find Romantic Suspense, and have to go into the mainstream isle to find it.
Alice