An article in today’s PW Daily notes that there are over a million books published each year — about 75% self published and 25% traditionally published.

Assuming publishers work Monday through Friday, that’s a staggering 4,000 new books published per day!

CV, an editor, told me that what’s wrong with book publishing today is that there are too many books published. Given these latest statistics, it’s hard to argue.

Do you think the glut of books is bad for aspiring authors, because there’s already too much to read out there — and too much competition for new books?

Or do you think it’s positive, with so many new authors getting their books out these days through either traditional publishers or self publishing?

Newspapers are dying not only because readership is dying off, but also because few journalism students have any incentive to work for them.

When I graduated college, writing for a newspaper was glamorous — a dream come true.

After all, Superman … Clark Kent … was a newspaper reporter!

Even though I didn’t have a journalism degree (I majored in chemical engineering), I sent letters and resumes to 300 newspapers.

I got only one interview — the Associated Press in Buffalo, NY — and they didn’t hire me.

Today, if you graduate with a B.S. in journalism, you have no incentive to write for a newspaper.

It isn’t glamorous — print media are moribund — and to add insult to injury, it pays poorly vs. the Internet.

According to an article in the Folio: Superbook 2009 (p. 9), the average salary of a journalism major going to work for a daily newspaper (where pay is much higher than weeklies) is $28,000.

Beginning TV journalists don’t fare much better, with an average salary of $29,300.

The highest paying job for journalism majors is online, where the average salary is $37,400 — 33% higher than newspapers pay.

Is there ANYONE reading this blog who writes for newspapers or wants to?

If so, given the decline of the medium and the lousy pay — why?

Do typos in promotional materials matter?

I pondered this question after receiving a mailer from a local company that gives writing workshops.

In the third paragraph of a self-mailer describing their writing workshops, the copy reads: “We hold them in around a conference table in a wood-paneled office.”

Of course, it should say “We hold them around a conference table in a wood-paneled office.”

In a mailing for a writing teacher, this error stands out like a sore thumb.

But do typos like this really matter in marketing materials for other businesses?

For example, would you not hire a plumber because of a typo in his Yellow Pages ad?

Or would you refuse to visit a cosmetic dentist because of a spelling error on her web site?

Do typos matter?

Experienced copywriters know that strong language has greater effect on the reader than weak, watered-down, mealy mouthed prose.

And now a study in the journal NeuroReport proves the power of strong language to regulate human feeling and experience (as reported in Time, 8/10/09, p. 15).

In the study, 64 college students were asked to immerse their hands in ice water for as long as possible. They were allowed to talk. But in one test, the students were permitted to swear; in the other, they could not.

Result: swearing not only allowed students to withstand the icy water longer but also decreased their perception of pain intensity.

The researchers found that people have an emotional response to swearing, which increases heart rate. The emotional response somehow triggers the reduction of pain.

Am I suggesting that we curse in copy? No.

But I AM advocating use of conversational language rather than stiff formal prose or “corporatese” in your copy.

Write naturally, in a way that sounds like people talk — only cleaned up and smoother flowing, without all the stumbles.

Unsure of how colloquial vs. formal to make your copy because of your audience? Then follow this rule of thumb:

If you have to err on the side of being TOO conversational vs. being TOO formal (because of your client or the audience you are writing for), err on the side of being too formal rather than being too high falutin.

In my 3 decades as a copywriter, no PhD, scientist, engineer, or programmer has ever complained to a client of mine that the web site or brochure I wrote for them was too easy to read.

Virtually every day I get at least one phone call or e-mail from some stranger asking for my help or advice or to answer a question … with 99% of them, of course, not offering to PAY me for my time and trouble.

If you want to approach someone you view as an expert or guru to ask a question or get advice, here are the 2 rules you should follow to maximize your chances of getting a positive response:

1–Don’t waste the person’s time.

2–Be cooperative.

ML, who called me just a few minutes ago, violated both these rules in short order.

She was looking for a ghostwriter to help her write her memoirs. It’s a service I don’t offer. I told her so immediately, and offered to hook her up with a ghostwriter who could help her (I know several good ones).

“Well, let me tell you my story,” she interrupted, and began telling me about her adventures in WWII as a nurse or whatever her book was about.

Why? I already said I was not the one to do the job. Why would I be interested?

So I cut her off, not because I am rude, but because I am extremely busy, asking her to go online to the Vendors page on my site so I could show her who to call.

“Oh, I hate the web and e-mail and all that stuff,” she told me, indicating that she couldn’t be bothered to do as I instructed.

I gave her the URL anyway and wished her luck.

“What is it you do?” she asked me, like I have the inclination or time to chat with her while deadlines press in all around me.

“I’m a copywriter,” I answered.

“What is that?” she asked, as if I now would spend time giving her a tutorial in the writing profession.

When I told her she could find out everything she needed to know about my services again on my web site, she seemed stunned, and I politely wished her luck and ended the call.

My colleague CM, a top copywriter, tells of similar experiences, where readers of his newsletter get angry that he won’t stop what he is doing to hear them read their headlines to him and get a quick opinion — all without paying him, of course.

CM is less calm about this than I am. “Don’t they $#%*&* realize my TIME is for my PAYING clients?!” CM complained to me.

A lot of our readers — people who get our free newsletters but do NOT buy or services OR our paid products — ask for our help, and are surprised and offended when we put limits on the free help we are willing to offer.

Would you ask a dentist you didn’t go to to examine your teeth for free? Would you ask a gas station where you DID buy gasoline to fix your engine for free?

Then why expect a writer to work for free?

Harlan Ellison says it best: “The writer should be paid.”

Do you agree? Disagree? Why?

HH, a freelancer I hired to write an e-book for me, sent me the first draft of the manuscript today as an attached Word file with his e-mail.

He ends the e-mail: “P.S. I’ll send me [sic] invoice under separate email.”

My question: Why, HH?

I just got your FIRST draft a minute ago. I haven’t even opened the file, much less reviewed it. And I certainly haven’t given you my comments so you can make the necessary revisions for the next draft.

Sending an invoice along with your product is bad form — it leaves a bad taste in the client’s mouth. He feels the only thing you care about is getting paid, not whether the copy is good.

But sending an invoice with a FIRST draft — when the project is not yet completed — can really piss off the client, as it did me in this case.

BTW, our agreement calls for payment upon completion.

To me, completion is an acceptable manuscript. Most publishers and business clients feel that way.

If the term “completion” is too vague, this rule of thumb applies: any ambiguity in the agreement is the fault of the vendor, not the customer.

If HH expected a check upon submission of a first draft, he should have specified that in his agreement and has me sign it.

He did not.

So what do you think?

Did HH make a major faux pas with his client — me?

Or am I getting crabby and difficult in my old age?

I am often asked by aspiring authors, “What’s better — self publishing or traditional publishing — for getting my book published?”

Here are your choices today … and the pros and cons of each:

>> Traditional publishing (selling your book to a major NYC publishing house or smaller press) — has the most prestige … the least work for the author … no cost … my choice if you are writing books to promote yourself as an expert in your field.

>> Self-publishing — less prestige than mainstream publishing … cost can be moderate to considerable … higher profit margin per book sold … lots of work to produce and market the book … my choice if you are a speaker who needs a physical book for your speaker’s kit and a product to sell back of the room (BOR).

>> E-books — least prestigous of the 3 options … almost no cost … highest profit margin … can make a lot of money selling it online … my choice if your goal is maximum revenues and profits.

Here’s the secret: most successful authors and information marketers use a combination of all three options.

Which are you choosing for your first or next book … and why?

On 5/15/09, Susanna K. Hutcheson said on this blog that copywriting is a skill that takes many decades of learning and doing before one is truly a master at it.

On the other hand, many of the superstars in Internet marketing — a key skill of which is writing (of both copy and content) — are barely out of diapers.

Which would lead one to conclude that copywriting is fairly easy and can be learned rather quickly.

I am increasingly ambivalent about this question.

At times, I read copy by the top pros (Clayton Makepeace, Frank Joseph) that dazzles me and turns me green with envy — and I conclude that copywriting is a skill that, after 3 decades, I am just starting to get the hang of (and that I have so long to go in my training!).

On the other hand, I have also seen writing from younger folks that has me pretty damned impressed (and also some that makes me cringe, which I almost never see from the masters).

So what’s the truth here?

A–Susanna is right: it takes decades to master the skill of copywriting.

B–Copywriting is easy. Any idiot can do it.

C–Copywriting is a skill that can be learned. Yes, it takes practice. But it’s not brain surgery.

D–Other (fill in your answer here):__________________________________________

My view is that writing in general and copywriting in particular is like learning to play the piano: easy to do poorly; exceedingly difficult to do well.