 Howdy. Before I get into the video, I just want to let you know really quickly that this video is not me listing the pros and cons of self-publishing versus traditional publishing. I will kind of be discussing those things, so if that interests you, you may still want to stick around, but I just wanted you to know that before we even start. Anyway, what's shaking? My name's Cam. Welcome back to another video. So the reason I'm making today's video a bit more of a serious video, not as griffy, is that there is an old video I made years ago, like three years ago now. It was called self-publishing versus traditional publishing, where I did pretty much exactly what I said this video isn't. I listed the pros and cons of self-publishing and the pros and cons of traditional publishing, and the general point of that video and the general message was for you to go and do your own research as well and use that information to decide on which of those two things best suits you. I'd also just gotten a new leather jacket and I was really feeling myself, so I just had to show it off. I know, cringe. Anyway, I'm removing that video, not because of the leather jacket thing, and not for any serious reasons, but there are elements of that video that in retrospect, I feel give a really bad impression or a bad idea of certain things, and I'll discuss that. And you should know as well that I have self-published before, but I've never been traditionally published, but I'll get to that as well. So over the last couple of years, I've come across videos on AuthorTube where they've brought up self-publishing versus traditional publishing videos like mine. And hey, maybe they weren't talking about my video. I want to make that clear. I'm not assuming they were talking about me. It's entirely possible and likely they were talking about other people, but even if they weren't talking about my video, they were talking about videos like mine, saying things like the information given was bias or inaccurate. And that is a completely fair critique. Let me be clear, I'm not throwing any shade here at all. Like I said, completely fair critique. But it has been said on AuthorTube that some of the pros and cons in those videos, again, not necessarily my video, I don't know, were lies. I'm going to tell you straight up, I never lied in my video, not once. Yes, I've never been traditionally published, but all of the information I gave for the pros and cons of traditionally publishing in that video came directly from one of the two traditionally published authors that I used to chat with at the time, or from forums where traditionally published authors had conversations about exactly those things. The pros and cons I gave in that video may not be true for all traditionally published authors, but it was at least true for some. But therein lies the problem, and that's where I made a big error when I made that video. And the error was that I gave those pros and cons as outright facts. I essentially said, if you are traditionally published, this is what is going to happen. And I was stupid for doing that. I was wrong. It was really really dumb. The fact is that almost all of the points I mentioned for traditionally publishing can vary drastically depending on a huge number of variables. For example, a lot of the figures I gave for royalties, etc. They may be true for some authors, maybe even a lot of authors, but definitely not all of them. Some of the variables involved in how those figures and how certain things in traditionally publishing are going to change is the type of book that you wrote, the actual publishing company involved, how well known you already are, how good your literary agent is at negotiating on your behalf. The list goes on. There's a lot of things that could change your experience with traditional publishing. And I never said that in my video, and I should have. I was dumb for not doing that. For example, I said that traditionally published authors don't do any marketing. The publisher does. That was very wrong. The point I was trying to make is that, as opposed to self publishing, where you do all of the advertising yourself, with traditional publishing, they will at least put your book on their platform for it to be advertised. And depending on how much confidence they have in your book, they may even go the extra mile and do a whole sweep market campaign. But the point is, I said traditionally published authors don't have to do any marketing. That's incorrect. Maybe, maybe Stephen King can get away with simply jumping on Twitter and tweeting out a link to the Amazon page for his new book. But for most other traditionally published authors, they have to put a lot of work into marketing themselves and building platforms and advertising as well. Another thing I said is that you have to get a literary agent before you can be traditionally published. And to be clear, personally, I think you definitely should, for a number of reasons. But the point is, you don't have to. Maybe not the big five, but a lot of other traditional publishing houses will let you query them without an agent. Again, I still think you've got a better chance if you have an agent. I think it's safer. And I think in the long run, it's a lot more beneficial for you to have a professional in your corner who knows the industry, but compulsory? No. Another thing I said is that the publisher has full creative control. And this is one of the points I actually still stand behind. I think it's one of the, one of the few things when it comes to traditional publishing that I did kind of clarify, at least kind of well in that video. They've put a huge investment in you when they put this money down to distributing your book and advertising it, this kind of thing. So they're going to do whatever they can to make sure that they maximize their return. In the worst cases, I've actually heard of some people who have had to change the writing parts of their books, like some of the writing, so that it would appeal to another whole audience just to sell more copies. I'm glad that I did clarify that depending on the publisher, you may have a lot more input. I still believe that at the end of the day, the publisher or a publishing company is a business. Your book is an investment and ultimately they're not going to go in a direction that they feel will risk the bottom line. That's what I believe, but again, it comes down to a number of factors. Probably most importantly, your literary agent and your relationship with the publishing company. I also threw out a bunch of figures as far as quotas go, like how many books you have to sell to maintain a good standing with the publisher. I threw out a bunch of numbers on the quotas for traditional publishing and good lord. I shouldn't have done that. I was using figures that were given to me by a traditionally published author, but after looking into it more, those numbers jump up and down by huge amounts, depending on who the author is, who the publisher is. I shouldn't have provided specific numbers on quotas at all. That was stupid. Look, at the end of the day, I feel like my intentions were good. I genuinely just wanted to make a good, informative video. The intention was to provide all of these stats and data and facts about self-publishing and traditional publishing that at the time I thought were objectively true, so that people could make an informed decision about which direction they want to go in. I really did think that I'd done as much research as I could, but the problem, and it's a big problem, is that I didn't provide clarification in a lot of places that I should have a lot of important places in that video. It was really really dumb of me, it was wrong of me, and I really am sorry. One other thing I do want to touch on is that I have heard it said that saying self-publishing is accessible to everyone is extremely classist. Personally, I disagree, at least in the context of my video, and I imagine all of the videos talking about self-publishing versus traditional publishing. Again, the people saying it's classist might not be talking about my video, but I have said that self-publishing is accessible to everyone, so I feel like this kind of applies to me. And what I meant when I said that, and I clarified it in the video, is quite literally just that there is no gatekeeper. There is no person or group of people who can see your book and refuse your ability to self-publish it based entirely on the grounds that it has no commercial value. That's what I meant when I said it's accessible to everyone. That's it. Of course, self-publishing isn't an option for everyone financially speaking. It is damn expensive. And I mean, I said that in the video. That you pay for everything. I hope you have a few dollars in your pocket because you are going to have to pay for a lot. You could get through the whole process without really paying anything, but if you want your book to look professional, if you want it to sell, if you want people to take you seriously, you are going to have to have some money to really put behind this, some capital. But if we say that saying self-publishing is accessible to everyone is classist, that logic could be applied to almost anything in life that we say is accessible to everyone. It's a common expression that watching YouTube videos is accessible to everyone. But in reality, that's only the case if you have the money for a device, access to a stable internet connection, a government that doesn't buy your ability to do so. I don't think saying YouTube is accessible to everyone is classist. I just think that that statement is accessible to everyone, especially in the context of these self-publishing versus traditional publishing videos. I feel like it's pretty obvious that what we're saying is that there is no gatekeeper. That's it. I don't know. Am I out of line saying that truly? I'm not trying to make people feel bad or anything. And I am not at all invalidating that critique, because in a lot of cases when we talk about, you know, being able to self-publish, we definitely don't talk enough about how much it actually costs. That's a conversation we should be having a lot more, so I agree in that aspect. We shouldn't be giving people the impression that you can just go out and self-publish. I mean, technically, you could if you have an internet connection, but if you want to do it properly and well, it's expensive. It is. So yeah, I'm not invalidating the critique. I just don't agree with it personally, at least in this context. So yeah, personally, I think saying that anyone who isn't traditionally published can't talk about the pros and cons of traditional publishing is kind of silly, because it feeds into the narrative that people are too dumb to do their research or, you know, speak to people who are traditionally published. It's basically the same thing as when people say you shouldn't be making writing tip videos because you're not a published author. It's asinine. But with that said, my old video isn't a great example of being able to talk about traditional publishing when you aren't. While a lot of the things I said may be true for some traditionally published authors, they are absolutely not true for all, and I shouldn't have given the impression that they were. I accept responsibility for presenting things as facts when they simply aren't that cut and dry. It was dumb, and I am sorry. There are traditionally published authors and industry professionals on AuthorTube who can give you great insight into traditional publishing. So definitely watch them, and watch other people before taking any one person at their word based entirely on their personal experience. This is basically why I don't do writing tip videos anymore. Now if I talk about writing, it's usually just a discussion video where I talk about my personal experiences, tastes, and insights on writing. And yeah, I might give some suggestions that I think are good and bad writing practice, but I definitely try to steer away from saying do this and don't do this. Because the fact is there's a lot of people on YouTube that are better qualified to give you that information. So yeah, I know this video. This video is probably a bit of a drag. There weren't really any jokes or anything like usual, so I'm sorry. If you watched this far, thank you. I actually do really appreciate it, and I promise you that the next video will be a lot more fun. Stay safe out there guys. It's getting crazier, it seems. Catch ya.