I'll start with the happy stuff: lots of good things happening around the Blogosphere today! Elana and Jen have great contests to win awesome books; the talented Crystal Cook is doing an art giveaway and Melissa is holding Harry Potter Giveaway!So. Why am I annoyed, when there's so much coolness going on? Let me begin by professing that I hold The Guardian in high esteem. Even before I moved to London, it seemed the very pinnacle of leftist idealism -- all shiny happy socialism and such.
But it has angered me now in its very attempt to be alternative.
You might have heard of a little thing in the literary world called The Man Booker Prize. The Guardian Books Blog launched its own prize cleverly entitled The Not The Man Booker Prizer, encourging readers to vote for its long-list. I was thrilled to see a few books on the long-list that I'd read and enjoyed and promptly scooted over to vote. Only to be told the next day... sorry! My vote didn't count, because authors on the long-list had used social media to encourage people to vote and it wasn't 'fair'. But hey, don't worry, the editors here have chosen their own short-list as well!
Gah?
Hello Guardian Books BLOG! Did you think authors wouldn't use social media to get votes? We're encouraged time and again to use our social connections to leverage our books. Why should we then be penalised for doing just that? Democracy, in this day and age, is just as much about motivating people to go out and vote as it is about the vote itself -- look at how Obama got voters out in the last election. Why shouldn't authors employ those same tactics?
OK! Rant over.
What do you think? Are prizes like these ones just becoming popularity contests? Should authors use social media to get votes?
(Thanks to the most recent sign-ups to my Blogsplash: Sarah Wedgbrow; Caroline Smailes; Trashionista; Samantha Verant; Gardner West; and Mina Joshi.)
It's because the print media is running scared of social media, which is taking away their godly power. No longer can the print media tell us what to do or think, because there's a grass level movement here among bloggers & such that threatens their power.
ReplyDeleteI'm not quite sure how I feel about this- see I have it 50/50 I do think there is popularity involved, and at the same time I think there should be a way to use all avenues possible, so I'm at a loss as to which way to go. :)
ReplyDeleteI think you should use all available resources. If you've put time & effort into your blog, facebook, or twitter account and you ask for votes than you've worked hard to make a great name for yourself to even have voters. I don't think it's popularity at that point, it's not like they new you just from a friend, no, you took time to know them, and they took time to know you.
ReplyDeleteIsn't that what networking is all about?
Yeah, I can see annoyance there. Seems pretty silly in this day and age. I mean for STARTERS, you can hardly keep OTHER people from urging friends to vote for their favorite author--so then you hit the slippery slope of... okay, whatabout writers with blogs under different names, or is that fair to people with no friends...
ReplyDeleteI don't LIKE that everything is a popularity contest, but any voting system IS a popularity contest. Dressing it up as somethign different, doesn not make that less so. You want independence... choose a panel and don't CALL it a vote.
karen hit the nail on the head.
ReplyDeleteand it applies to so much more than just social media. it's even affected the major publishing houses as lots of established authors are leaving to self-publish and produce e-books. authors claim that producing the books themselves gets them nearly 70% - as opposed to 8-10% and they get more say in production.
the internet has changed soooo much in our world.
One problem with these sorts of lists anyway is that most people haven't read everything on them so how can they fairly vote? All a vote will show is that some books have been read by a lot of people and enjoyed, not that a particular book is better than ten others that didn't get read.
ReplyDeleteI know that agent Nathan Branford says not to hustle votes when people enter his online contests. Of course, the entries are short and it's possible to read them all and place a vote.
Anyway, the Guardian should have made the rules clear. Maybe it should be done with check boxes: Have you read and liked? Have you read and not liked? Have you not read? That way one could follow a pattern.
Hi Talli!
ReplyDeleteI think it's okay if friends and fans vote for an author they love. That's the whole point of these things, but I don't think it's okay if they vote multiple times under different names or logins. Then it becomes unfair, which is why you're breaking the law if you do that in most elections. There is just no way to monitor things like that on the web. Then you'd have the whole "big brother" and privacy issue and that would open up another can of worms! I think on-line voting and polls have to be taken with a grain of salt. I try never take it too seriously.
Great post idea & LOVE the kitty pic!
xoxo -- Hilary
Loving these comments. Thank you for raising such interesting points!
ReplyDeleteI agree; a lot of print media is threatened. Still, this was a blog, so you'd think they'd be more in tune with the social media world? Guess not!
I don't like when authors do shameless vote hustling but I don't think there's anything wrong with authors letting people know their book is on the long-list.
And as far as trusting people have read the book, well... we trust that people know the policies of the parties they vote for in politics and I'd bet that many who vote don't!
I'm really angry about this, too. I feel as if they don't see my vote as valid. I am one of those social networking pariahs who had never previously registered on the Guardian site. I heard about the Not the Booker on Twitter - it is my primary source of news and interesting info, after all. So I went to the site, read the list of books, registered and voted. The book I voted for didn't come up in the final list - either the one that was picked by those commenting or that chosen as its replacement by the team at the Guardian when they didn't get the result they hoped for - but I'm nevertheless being told that, as a first time registrant, my vote doesn't hold any intrinsic value.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don't see the problem of using social networking to draw people's attention to any online polls. That's very different to telling them to vote for you or forcing them to do so. I voted for a book I had read and love, not because I wanted to keep in with its author.
Now that I'm registered, I don't know if I will ever vote in anything on the Guardian site again because they've annoyed me so much with their apparent dismay that social media might have been used in this way. Like book prizes, or book polls like the BBC Big Read a few years ago, aren't ever popularity contests anyway - or, at least, the result of whoever can galvanise their supporters most efficiently!
If they're stroppy at the public's choice and prefer their own, they really shouldn't have run the contest in the first place.
Kath - HEAR HEAR! Glad you're annoyed too. Well, I'm not glad you're annoyed... you know what I mean!
ReplyDeleteI'm with the Tart - decide what it is going to be, people! If it is based on the works alone then a panel of worthy types is what you want. If it is anyone voting - read the book or not - then let er rip.
ReplyDeleteJan Morrison
Those guys at The Guardian sure had a DUH moment. No wonder you're annoyed.
ReplyDeleteA Harry Potter giveaway? I'm checking it out!
@ Jan yeah they should have just had judges who have read the book and not waste everyone's precious time, afterall social media is how they got everyone's attention in the 1st place, no one would have heard abt it if it wasn't on twitter and other whatnots
ReplyDeleteI don't like that everything has become a popularity contest rather than winning based on merit. But, most everything HAS become a popularity contest, or at least the best hustler wins. And social media is a main force behind it.
ReplyDeleteSo a writer's gotta do what a writer's gotta do:)
The Guardian should have set some rules.
Great post! Got my little gray cells going and they've been slow this morning.
I think a lot of it is a popularity contest. I never win those, though, so I guess I don't have a great answer here:/
ReplyDeleteI'm with you on this one. It might be a popularity contest - by hey - what else is selling books all about? Popualar books/authors sell. End of story. If the newspaper didn't want popularity to influence the contest, then they shouldn't have made it subject to popular vote...
ReplyDeleteFrankly, it sounds to me like there is someone on that longlist (and now shortlist) who was "supposed" to win, according to the Guardian [/paranoid]
They just want to find a "door" they can control. sad but true. you can't have "just anybody" having the power! Thats why I like social media - it has the power to subvert - what about a
ReplyDelete"The Not, The Not The Man Booker Prizer"?
They just want to find a "door" they can control. sad but true. you can't have "just anybody" having the power! Thats why I like social media - it has the power to subvert - what about a
ReplyDelete"The Not, The Not The Man Booker Prizer"?
Talli, I read that whole debate.
ReplyDeleteThere has to be some halfway point that is a reasonable combination of educated and reasoned votes and the orgainised voting that turns things into a kind of X factor.
It is interesting the whole social vs traditional media debate, it should heat up a bit more I'd say.
But then we have the celebrity writer thing going on as well so it is a wonder any author gets a book out there at the moment.
I think authors can do whatever they hell they like to promote themselves! :o)
ReplyDeleteI have one word for you. Sassy. You are that and it's fun to read. Good luck with your novel. It sounds great.
ReplyDeleteThat's a tough one. Getting votes is kind of all about social media but I'm not sure how I feel about it. Bravo to you for speaking out on it!
ReplyDeleteOh my heck that picture!!! ROFL!!
ReplyDeleteAnd thanks Talli, for that lovely shout out :)
I think your rant is very well deserved. WHat did they expect? Really? I think you should use whatever resources you have available. It all is basically word of mouth anyway. Some of my favorite books I never would have even heard of if it hadn't been for book bloggers pushing.
I'm not surprised you're cross, I couldn't believe it when I read this. After all, it's not as if the entries for the Booker Prize don't have bods doing PR for their books is it?
ReplyDeleteTalli,
ReplyDeleteI do think prizes like this are about popularity over merit. It's sad too, especially when they ask for readers votes. Not cool.
I'm not a huge fan of polls like these anyway, i mean who even decides on the shortlisted books? Who are the judges? What makes them qualified to tell me which books i should be enjoying? And if i don't enjoy them, does that mean i don't know a good book from a jam sandwich?
ReplyDeleteI'd much rather hear about books from like minded friends, which is part of why I read blogs :)
First, I LOVE the picture. Hilarious.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm with you. Do they want no one to know about the poll?
If it's a People's Choice Award, what difference where you vote. Evidently their choices (where their money is invested)did do very well with "the People" so they had to load the ballot box.
ReplyDeleteThis goes beyond annoying.
Ditto Jen. I think if you spend the time to develop your fan base, these votes should not be excluded. As for shameless hustling, that isn't fair. I've seen quite a bit of it lately. Like fake "good reads" reviews, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think Kath summed up what I wanted to say: If they're stroppy at the public's choice and prefer their own, they really shouldn't have run the contest in the first place.
ReplyDeleteUm yeah. I went and voted for your husband's cool video because you suggested to online. I buy people's books all the time because I'm in an online community with them. So, yeah.
ReplyDeleteCD
If you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin' - okay, I know that's a totally tacky thing to say, but OF COURSE we should use our media connections, isn't so much of what we have to about social networking and getting our name out there?
ReplyDeleteYES!
It is a popularity contest, and the most popular author will win.
ReplyDeleteBut they threw it on the Internet and I'd expect authors to do whatever it takes to get votes.
Are you freakin kidding me? That's crazy Talli. Totally understand why you're annoyed.
ReplyDeleteThanks for all the links. =D
Oh, and ps: Love the cat in the hat!!! LOL
ReplyDeleteOkay, that just seems crazy! Social media is just as important for getting the word spread on books as printed media.
ReplyDeleteI now have the face like the cat with the melon on it's head. :)
I was cross with their attitude too. Why ask for votes and then ignore them?
ReplyDeleteSince a newspaper BLOG launched the one-off 'prize' they shouldn't have been surprised authors used social media.
ReplyDeleteLove the photo!
Hm.. to be honest, I am not big on voting stuff, unless it's for an election of course. ;) The way I see it, I write what I write and if others like it, awesome. I hope I don't get tangled up in popularity contests, that sounds exhausting. Not to sound snobby. Any kind of "award" ceremonies are a bit turn-off to me and I don't participate. As far as penalizing the authors, seems silly to me!!
ReplyDeletepshaa - if that had an issue with self promotion, then they should have made that clear up front
ReplyDeleteYes, you can argue the popularity contest aspect. But, like you said--we are told to reach out to everyone via social everything--so we do! 'Nuff said ;-)
ReplyDelete~JD
KarenG hit the nail on the head. The print media is terrified of the social media - especially as more and more job losses are announced at the traditional presses.
ReplyDeleteAnd it is a popularity contest, but then what is wrong with that?
What? That's riduculous!
ReplyDeleteHart Johnson put it perfectly: voting will be a popularity contest until the end of time, and pretending it is not will not change that fact.
grrrrrrrr at the guardianx
ReplyDeleteI suppose anything can turn into a popularity contest, even so, getting the word out means getting the word, and that means using any means possible.
ReplyDeleteOh my goodness, that kitty picture is SO cute!
ReplyDeleteThis is one of those things where I can argue either side and convince myself that I'm right, which leads me into this very scary chasing my tail sort of place. :-P
It's okay to promote oneself so you shouldn't ever feel bad about it. How else can anyone know about your writing doll? xo :)
ReplyDeleteOh no!!! You're all annoyed!!! :-(
ReplyDeleteOh silly Guardian!! What did they expect opening the vote out to all and sunder?!?! LOL!! They're so silly!!!
Ignore them and get voting again is what I say!!
Take care
x
Just joined your blogsplash! Good luck with the hating game. I am sooo excited for it to come out.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the shout out today! I really appreciate it.
I think we should be allowed to use ALL of our available resources.
Well, if it's a blog, what did they expect? Guess they weren't that serious about handing over a new award.
ReplyDeleteWhat a great post! I hate that something made you annoyed, but I love that it caused you to produce a post like this!
ReplyDeleteUm. People. It's a blog. You didn't foresee this???? Really? *sigh*
ReplyDeleteWhat Jan and Hart said.
ReplyDeleteLove the lime headed cat. ;)
oh, I'm all about social media. it's awesome and hugely important.
ReplyDeleteExactly what KarenG said -- the print media is choking on its own bad behavior.
ReplyDeletePatricia
Here, here! (=
ReplyDeleteHi Talli .. a sign of the times and authors can promote themselves how they wish ..
ReplyDeleteHowever - the problem I see is that serious journalists are not getting rewarded for their work, because they're employed by the print media.
It's an interesting arena .. one we'll see more of -
Well actors have been advertising for oscar nominations for decades, so in a way it's no different to that, except that it is online rather than in printed form.
ReplyDeleteWow - that's really... lame?! It's not fair? What kind of argument is that? Sheesh...
ReplyDeleteI don't see anything wrong with self-promotion via social media at all. That's just the way it is these days. I think they need to embrace that. I'll ask @StephenFry what he thinks!
ReplyDeleteThat's ridiculous. If it's a PUBLIC vote, then why shouldn't authors lobby for their work via social media?
ReplyDeleteI could MAYBE (big maybe) understand if there were a panel of judges who were going to vote and authors were trying to pressure these judges by showing them the force they wield via social media. But if the whole idea to begin with was that the PUBLIC got to vote and choose, then the Guardian is just being stupid.
Well, that's what marketing and publicity is all about--popularity. If they're putting it to a public vote, then they're making it a popularity contest anyway. If that's not what they wanted, they should have had a committee vote, the way most literary awards are given out.
ReplyDeletehmmmmm. very interesting. I can see both sides. However, I would be more annoyed that my vote didn't count over whether social media was used (as you say, writers are encouraged to do so)
ReplyDeleteI see both sides, but mostly I se the needs for some competition rules! Great post!
ReplyDelete