From the moment the contract is signed between author and publisher, they share one all-important goal:
To reach readers.
Specifically, those readers looking for the kind of story the author has written.
At least, I think that’s how it’s supposed to work. But after hearing both authors’ and readers’ frequent complaints about misleading covers or cover copy, I gotta wonder. Heaven knows I’ve had more than one uber-moody cover that didn’t reflect the humor-laden story inside, or skinny cover models when the heroine was zaftig, or a book billed as a romantic comedy when the story I’d written had a lot more substance than the frothier image that subgenre description brings to mind. And the final straw? My entire backlist written under an about-to-be-renamed Silhouette line has been retroactively attributed to the new imprint, even though none of those stories even remotely reflect the revamped line’s tone. Which means those readers looking for “my” kind of stories probably won’t think to check out most of my backlist, and readers looking for “that” kind of story who do pick up one of my old books are going to be left shaking their heads.
So how does that serve anybody – author, readers or publisher?
Now, I do, and always have, understand that hooks sell. In fact, as a category romance writer, I deliberately tailor my stories in order to maximize their appeal to the readers who like those particular hooks. However, I do not, never have, and never will get the reasoning behind this borderline bait-and-switch marketing “technique.” It pisses readers off, frustrates authors, and in the end achieves exactly the opposite effect as intended.
Oh, perhaps luring readers in by using the cover and copy to tout a book as the flavor du jour when it’s not, or shying away from depicting a character as anything other than “perfect,” results in a few more sales in the short run. Maybe. Frankly, I have my doubts. Because instead of matching the story about, say, the zaftig heroine to readers eager to read about full-figured gals, you’ve not only totally missed that market but potentially put the story in the hands of readers who might not want to read about zaftig heroines. Or if you indicate in the back cover copy of a sexually tame book that there’s a sizzling story inside (because sizzle sells), then readers looking for sizzle are going to feel cheated.
And cheated and/or duped readers ain’t happy readers. And unhappy readers are less likely to trust either the author or the publisher (but more often the author, which is why we get so snarly about such things) the next time around.
Now, maybe I’m way off base here, but I’m guessing no editor offers a contract for a book she doesn’t feel readers will love, that has the potential to make money for everybody concerned. That means she must have seen plenty of appealing, saleable elements in the book she bought. So why not play up those elements, instead of going all chicken and suddenly (or not so suddenly) worrying that, you know, this or that might turn off some readers, and God knows we don’t want that?
Please.
Every book is going to turn off some readers, because there’s no such thing as one-size-fits-all. But I guarantee you more readers are going to be turned off when they find out what they got isn’t what they thought they were getting.
Because it simply stands to reason that if you’re hankering for chocolate ice cream, you’re not going to be amused to open the carton and find strawberry, simply because somebody decided, hey – since chocolate sells better than strawberry, why not package all our ice cream as chocolate? Well, I’ll tell you why — because the customer who wanted chocolate vows to never buy from that company again, and the customer who wanted strawberry – who might even hate chocolate, wouldn’t buy it if it was the only flavor left on earth – not only has no clue that’s what was inside the carton, but she goes online to her favorite ice cream lovers’ website and proclaims that all she sees in the freezer case is chocolate, chocolate, chocolate! In fact, it’s gotten so bad she’s ready to give up ice cream altogether!
So, Marketing? Are you listening? All we ask, after the product of our sleepless nights and muttered curses and grateful sighs is delivered into your hands, is that you help readers find our books.
Our readers. Not readers craving another flavor entirely.
No related posts.
I don’t have that problem too often because I stick with authors who I know I love or people who I know and I buy their book because I’ve met them. I don’t go out and just buy a book off the shelf because I like the cover. And they reason why I don’t do that – I’ve been burned and at one point gave up reading romance. I’m reading again, purchasing mostly ebooks and the list of authors I love is growing. I plan my purchases, make sure I’m never without a book so I don’t have to hop into a store to buy one last minute and end up with a dud.
Seems to me the marketing goal is to snag new readers, because the veteran readers stick with their favorite authors. Do they realize it’s because these veterans have been burned?
If the marketing departments are not going to listen, what are we to do? Seems to me the best we can do is just what this blog and many others are doing, get the word out ourselves. I’ll always buy Jana Deleon’s books now, which I learned of through word-of-mouth and never would have bought in the first place because it was labelled a mystery.
*applause*
Wonderful post. I hate having to research as if I were writing a doctoral dissertation just to find a book I’d like.
Great points. Marketing the book that wasn’t written is a waste of money and time because the fact is…if someone doesn’t like a certain type of book, its rare that they will convert.
One thing that I think IS somewhat helpful included in a lot of books now, is when the first page on the inside of the book is a snippet from that book. That often hooks me. Unless I’m going on a recommendation, I read back flap copy, that snippet if it’s there, and the first page. I never go by just back flap alone because I know someone else writes it.
If the first page doesn’t grab me, I usually go on to the next thing.
Yikes, I’m so glad I read this post.
Here’s another reason why this is objectionable. At least IMHO.
I’m targeting the new Har Rom line, and since it’s a new line it’s a challenge to discover the exact feel the editors are looking for. Since it launched in September, I’m trying to read as many of them as I can. After all, this is what we’re urged to do!
If I understand you correctly, and your Sil Rom books are being re-released as the new Har Rom, every writer that picks up one of your books in an attempt to familiarize themselves with the line will be thrown off track.
Oh well, at least I’m forewarned!
LOL – I read the series you did for SIM. Now that the line is Romantic Suspense (did they change the guidelines?) should I expect to see your books pop up there?
Elle, nope, not writing for the SIM/SRS line anymore. They did indeed change the guidelines. But that’s okay, because my stories fit much, much better in Special Edition (and I no longer have to worry about “dark” covers that don’t match the stories!).
But the thing of it is, although I was one of the last non-suspense authors writing for Intimate Moments, the line wasn’t originally a romantic suspense line — it was imagined as a place for bigger, more mainstream books, including, but not limited to, RS. Think of Kathleen Korbel’s A ROSE FOR MAGGIE or JAKE’S WAY, for instance, or Judith Duncan’s MURPHY’S CHILD. To retroactively rename the line makes no sense to me — it’s as if Intimate Moments never existed, which I find very sad.
As for the Sil/Har Romance (neither of which I wrote for, BTW) — category books are always new; they don’t ever re-release a title in the regular category line-up. Category reprints — very rare, these days — will show as some sort of special release, or, in the case of big authors like Jennifer Crusie or Suz Brockmann, as Miras. So not to worry — whatever you’re reading now IS what they’re looking for!
On a more general note, however — it just seems to me that, at a time when readers are crying out for more variety, publishers should be sensitive to that, perhaps expending a bit more effort to hawk what makes the book unique. Play up the popular aspects, sure — if X element is selling, it only makes sense to alert readers to that fact — just don’t mislead. A balancing act to be sure, at times, but not impossible.
Karen, thanks for the clarification! When I saw “My entire backlist written under an about-to-be-renamed Silhouette line has been retroactively attributed to the new imprint,” my brain jumped right to the soon to be done away with Sil Rom. It’s now under a new imprint.
I guess that shows what my head is wrapped around these days.
I loved your SIM books, which may give weight to the other side of the issue. I’ve always read the SIM line, and never read SE. So, I only discovered your books becuase of blurry marketing.
Hmm…
So the old adage “You can’t judge a book by it’s cover” is true!
Seriously, though… I’ve been burned by the misleading cover hook on a few occasions and I resented the author!! Of course, this is before I became one myself and learned about publishers & their evil marketing schemes (bwahaha)
We really must demand some level of input on our covers. We work our butts off for months, sometimes years, and have no say in the package it’s put in. It’s so unfair! How can we initiate change?
Elle, bless you.
But for every reader who accidentally found me, I don’t even want to think about how many DIDN’T find me because they assumed SIM was all RS and they don’t read it. And I can’t tell you how many reviewers have marked my books down because they “weren’t really SIMs.” 
All good now, of course. At least, much better than they were even a few years ago, when Sil not only wouldn’t show my Chinese-American couple on the cover, they wouldn’t even use their last names in the blurb!
LOL, Kimber An — they do seem to have moved on from those days (way back in 1999, can you believe it?) I mean, they actually show black folks on the covers now (as opposed to the washed-out, you-have-to-look-real-close-to-tell stand-ins I remember from one of the first AA authored SSEs from around the same time). And there’ve been a couple of interracial (black/white) Har/Sil category stories in the past year or so that depicted the couple as they were on the cover. And my Hispanic couple on my Feb. book really do look like the majority of the New Mexican Latinos I see every day. So progress is being made.
But amply-figured heroines? No. Quirkily-dressed heroines? No. Heroes with facial hair? Uh-uh. Gray-haired heroes? Nope.
They could make them green or purple or orange (harking back to one truly sad period in SIM’s cover history), but as the author actually wrote them? Much trickier, for some reason.
Mind you, Har probably has one of the most extensive cover-input systems in publishing. Page after page of character description, scene description, questions on theme and story and setting. And I’ve actually been more fortunate than most — I can point to probably a half dozen books where they actually took my suggestions to heart. But many authors wonder why they bother, when characters end up with different color hair, in the wrong clothing, or in a setting that has nothing to do with the story.
And don’t even get me started on some of the foreign editions! I happened to run across covers for two of my early books, both of which were set in Atlanta. One cover clearly depicted Venice, the other. . .a jungle setting. I can imagine what THOSE readers must have thought. But then, heaven knows how the translation read!
[...] Redefining romance isn’t necessary because the romance genre isn’t confining to authors. Authors are free to write whatever they want. They may not get their books in front of the millions of romance readers, but if they aren’t going to write romance, why should they? Don’t call it romance if it is not a romance because all it does is piss off readers and make them take LESS chances. Which means that new authors lose out. As commenter, Kimber An, noted at Romancing the Blog, Seems to me the marketing goal is to snag new readers, because the veteran readers stick with their favorite authors. Do they realize it’s because these veterans have been burned? [...]
KareN….. AMEN!!
Yep — I just recently purchased a silouette intrique line book. The title didn’t have much to do with the book and what’s worse, the cover art didn’t accurately reflect the story either. Ugh! I don’t blame the author, but I do wish the art/marketing depts would at least skim the books!
To be honest, production doesn’t have time to read the books. That’s what they rely on editorial and author input for (if the publisher gives the author any input). BUT there is always some input from somewhere — the art department doesn’t make these decisions in a vacuum. And, with H/S, I’m frankly amazed they do as well as they do with more than a thousand books published each year. Mistakes happen. Sometimes, however, when you know it’s not just a goof. . .
As I said, I’m definitely on board with packaging my stories to maximize their sales potential (since I want to not only keep writing, but keep getting paid for it!). So my editor and I work together to suggest possible cover images and titles that make everybody happy. Still, it’s pretty obvious, when I’ve deliberately mentioned, several times and in caps, that the heroine is a BIG GIRL!!!!!!, and I get a waif, that they’ve deliberately ignored me.
Because, you know, Queen Latifah is so unappealing, right?