I've seen a lot of discussion online recently concerning the 'bestseller' or 'bestselling' tag that many authors add to their online persona. There seems to be a general feeling that such tags are often not what they seem, or worse, seem to have no basis in fact.
Let me state at the outset that this post is not a criticism of authors who genuinely are 'bestsellers'. To gain such an accolade takes a lot of hard work, dedication and devotion, and would not have been possible if their work were not of a high standard. No, this post is aimed at the author who appears to be making claims that are not substantiated, in the hope of artificially increasing their discoverability, and presumably bolster their sales.
Many authors are desperate to achieve success (usually measured by sales volume), and will often employ underhand tactics to achieve that. This is odd, because there is no evidence that merely making such claims actually improves an author's sales. However, actually appearing on 'bestseller' lists almost certainly does increase sales. Hence, there's actually no short cut and making false claims is not helping you at all.
In fact, it may actually hinder you. The backlash is that readers very quickly become aware of marketing scams. Eventually, they distrust even the simplest claims, even ones that may be true. Although a particular 'bestseller' will not be to everyone's taste, the expectation in the book-buying public is that a 'bestseller' is called that for a reason, and they would like to have confidence in that accolade. Sadly, it seems their faith in the 'bestseller' tag is diminishing, which is bad news for all authors, whether they are 'bestselling' ones or not.
We could go even further and state that, at the very worst, making such false claims is misleading advertising, something for which big corporations are legally challenged. In the UK in 2009, for example, Olay were taken to task over their Definity eye cream for digitally altering Twiggy's features to be 'wrinkle-free'. I'm not suggesting all authors claiming to be 'bestsellers' are hounded for proof of their claims or sued for misrepresentation if they don't have any. But I am suggesting that falsely claiming 'bestseller' status is ethically (and probably legally) no different to Olay's misrepresentation, or any one of a number of high-profile false advertising scandals.
So, what does it actually take to get your book onto a 'bestseller' list and hence claim the 'bestselling author' status? Well, there are numerous lists which purport to show which books are the most popular, and most of these, as you'd expect, are based on sales volume.
Perhaps the easiest to understand, and possibly the easiest to aim at, is the Amazon bestseller list. The list is directly related to sales rank, though Amazon won't divulge exactly how sales rank itself is calculated. It's not a simple case of sales volume, but probably also takes into account click-throughs, number and quality of reviews, print versus ebook sales and the daily rate of sales. But, essentially, selling more books increases sales rank, and a higher sales rank can get you in the top 100 list, the top 10 list, and so on. If you're aiming for this list, the single most effective thing you can do is get a huge volume of sales on a single day. How many books do you need to sell? I'm afraid the goal-posts move but you might reach the #1 spot by selling a few thousand books in a single day. Sell 500 and you might make it to the top 100 list. If you sell 10,000 books throughout a year you still probably won't get on the bestseller lists; you need to concentrate those sales into a short space of time.
Unfortunately, Amazon don't display a sales rank for their 'bestsellers' lists, so it's difficult to know what sales rank you need to get you in those lists. But, crucially for the book-buying public, an Amazon sales rank that is 'visible' means your book isn't a 'bestseller', so you'd better have some hard evidence for why you're calling it such! If you're a 'bestseller' somewhere else or were sometime in the past, say so, because the buying public can see you aren't one at the moment on Amazon!
What about those other lists? Well, similar lists appear on Nook and iTunes, probably mostly driven by sales, although Kobo currently don't have bestseller lists. The advice is the same; if you want to increase rankings, and hence appear in bestseller lists, you need to sell more books! And finally there are the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and USA Today bestseller's lists. The former is probably the most coveted by authors, which is why I'm confused more authors don't substantiate their claims to this list. The NYT list is said to be driven only by consumer sales and market research indicates the number one spot probably means sales of around 9000 books per week. Although the NYT publicly state that their list doesn't include 'self-published' works, a number of self-published works have appeared in the list. I guess if the sales are sufficiently competitive with traditionally published books, they can't be ignored, and get quietly added to the list.
Although traditional publishers have a lot of advertising dollar available, and all 'bestseller' lists are probably manipulated to some degree, it isn't impossible for indie authors to get real 'bestseller' status, probably most easily on Amazon, but with the big players too! If you do attain these accolades, then you should wring every last bit of good marketing out of your success. But, please, don't make it up, because it's actually very obvious when you are. If your Amazon sales rank is visible to me I know you're nowhere near being an 'international bestseller' or however you want to phrase it!
Is there a simple rule that authors should apply in order to call themselves a 'bestseller'. Opinions differ. In the truest sense of the word, a 'bestseller' sells the 'best', so appearing in a top 100 does not make you a 'bestseller', although you should of course be proud of appearing in the list. If you reach #1 in a particular list or category, then you can call yourself a 'bestseller'. But you also have to be clear about which list you're referring to (#1 bestseller in 'children's books', for example). I would also suggest that appearing at the top of a list of 'free' books also doesn't qualify you for 'bestseller' status. Nothing was actually sold and the statistic doesn't relate to a book's popularity at all, only its download rate.
Just as corporations are now very clear about their advertising claims in order to avoid litigation (usually demoted to the 'small print'), authors should be too. Why not put a footnote to your 'bestselling' claim stating, for example, 'achieved #1 sales ranking in the 'children's books' category on the US Amazon site during September 2014'? There's something to be proud of in that statement, not ashamed of. If you are honest about it the reading public will respected you for it. They may even buy your book.
Let me state at the outset that this post is not a criticism of authors who genuinely are 'bestsellers'. To gain such an accolade takes a lot of hard work, dedication and devotion, and would not have been possible if their work were not of a high standard. No, this post is aimed at the author who appears to be making claims that are not substantiated, in the hope of artificially increasing their discoverability, and presumably bolster their sales.
Many authors are desperate to achieve success (usually measured by sales volume), and will often employ underhand tactics to achieve that. This is odd, because there is no evidence that merely making such claims actually improves an author's sales. However, actually appearing on 'bestseller' lists almost certainly does increase sales. Hence, there's actually no short cut and making false claims is not helping you at all.
In fact, it may actually hinder you. The backlash is that readers very quickly become aware of marketing scams. Eventually, they distrust even the simplest claims, even ones that may be true. Although a particular 'bestseller' will not be to everyone's taste, the expectation in the book-buying public is that a 'bestseller' is called that for a reason, and they would like to have confidence in that accolade. Sadly, it seems their faith in the 'bestseller' tag is diminishing, which is bad news for all authors, whether they are 'bestselling' ones or not.
We could go even further and state that, at the very worst, making such false claims is misleading advertising, something for which big corporations are legally challenged. In the UK in 2009, for example, Olay were taken to task over their Definity eye cream for digitally altering Twiggy's features to be 'wrinkle-free'. I'm not suggesting all authors claiming to be 'bestsellers' are hounded for proof of their claims or sued for misrepresentation if they don't have any. But I am suggesting that falsely claiming 'bestseller' status is ethically (and probably legally) no different to Olay's misrepresentation, or any one of a number of high-profile false advertising scandals.
So, what does it actually take to get your book onto a 'bestseller' list and hence claim the 'bestselling author' status? Well, there are numerous lists which purport to show which books are the most popular, and most of these, as you'd expect, are based on sales volume.
Perhaps the easiest to understand, and possibly the easiest to aim at, is the Amazon bestseller list. The list is directly related to sales rank, though Amazon won't divulge exactly how sales rank itself is calculated. It's not a simple case of sales volume, but probably also takes into account click-throughs, number and quality of reviews, print versus ebook sales and the daily rate of sales. But, essentially, selling more books increases sales rank, and a higher sales rank can get you in the top 100 list, the top 10 list, and so on. If you're aiming for this list, the single most effective thing you can do is get a huge volume of sales on a single day. How many books do you need to sell? I'm afraid the goal-posts move but you might reach the #1 spot by selling a few thousand books in a single day. Sell 500 and you might make it to the top 100 list. If you sell 10,000 books throughout a year you still probably won't get on the bestseller lists; you need to concentrate those sales into a short space of time.
Unfortunately, Amazon don't display a sales rank for their 'bestsellers' lists, so it's difficult to know what sales rank you need to get you in those lists. But, crucially for the book-buying public, an Amazon sales rank that is 'visible' means your book isn't a 'bestseller', so you'd better have some hard evidence for why you're calling it such! If you're a 'bestseller' somewhere else or were sometime in the past, say so, because the buying public can see you aren't one at the moment on Amazon!
What about those other lists? Well, similar lists appear on Nook and iTunes, probably mostly driven by sales, although Kobo currently don't have bestseller lists. The advice is the same; if you want to increase rankings, and hence appear in bestseller lists, you need to sell more books! And finally there are the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and USA Today bestseller's lists. The former is probably the most coveted by authors, which is why I'm confused more authors don't substantiate their claims to this list. The NYT list is said to be driven only by consumer sales and market research indicates the number one spot probably means sales of around 9000 books per week. Although the NYT publicly state that their list doesn't include 'self-published' works, a number of self-published works have appeared in the list. I guess if the sales are sufficiently competitive with traditionally published books, they can't be ignored, and get quietly added to the list.
Although traditional publishers have a lot of advertising dollar available, and all 'bestseller' lists are probably manipulated to some degree, it isn't impossible for indie authors to get real 'bestseller' status, probably most easily on Amazon, but with the big players too! If you do attain these accolades, then you should wring every last bit of good marketing out of your success. But, please, don't make it up, because it's actually very obvious when you are. If your Amazon sales rank is visible to me I know you're nowhere near being an 'international bestseller' or however you want to phrase it!
Is there a simple rule that authors should apply in order to call themselves a 'bestseller'. Opinions differ. In the truest sense of the word, a 'bestseller' sells the 'best', so appearing in a top 100 does not make you a 'bestseller', although you should of course be proud of appearing in the list. If you reach #1 in a particular list or category, then you can call yourself a 'bestseller'. But you also have to be clear about which list you're referring to (#1 bestseller in 'children's books', for example). I would also suggest that appearing at the top of a list of 'free' books also doesn't qualify you for 'bestseller' status. Nothing was actually sold and the statistic doesn't relate to a book's popularity at all, only its download rate.
Just as corporations are now very clear about their advertising claims in order to avoid litigation (usually demoted to the 'small print'), authors should be too. Why not put a footnote to your 'bestselling' claim stating, for example, 'achieved #1 sales ranking in the 'children's books' category on the US Amazon site during September 2014'? There's something to be proud of in that statement, not ashamed of. If you are honest about it the reading public will respected you for it. They may even buy your book.
Comments
Post a Comment
Feel free to argue with this post...