.

NEWSLETTERS and PRESS RELEASES

While The Thrilling Detective Web Site isn't there to promote my writing work (it's more the work itself), I was amazed by the number of people who actually took the time to subscribe to the newsletter I started doing. So, yes, I think newsletters can be useful.

And obviously, if they want to subscribe to it, they must find it useful.

Now, sending someone an unsolicited newsletter is a whole other story. That probably DOES have a negative effect.

A press release, meanwhile, is another story. Those, I think, are more readily accepted, even if they're not solicited.

But please do your homework. Make sure you're sending them to someone who is interested. Random mailings to everyone you ever met (or never met -- people hate being spammed) may backfire on you.

Also, if this is someone who you think could help you (an editor, an agent, a publisher) take the time to do a little research, and address the letter personally. "To whom it may concern" is not a great opening. Do your legwork -- it can pay off.

JUST A LITTLE IS ENOUGH

As an editor and critic myself, I get more than my fair share of unsolicited press releases and newsletters -- more stuff than you could ever imagine. I've seen it all, and a lot of it's not pretty. At this point, I know what I like. And one thing I really don't like is overkill.

Part of the effectiveness of advertising surely has to do with knowing when to hold back. Unfortunately, too many new writers (or their, ahem, "publicists") don't seem to have a clue about what to do when it comes to plugging their own work.

When some "publicist" sends me a press release for some "hot" new book, making all sorts of outrageous claims, insulting other writers and trumpeting blurbs from dubious sources, full of misspelled words and a overly-earnest breathless prose style that 's almost embarrassing to read, they probably do more harm to their cause than good.

BLURB ME TO THE MOON

Okay, I'll admit it -- blurbs sometimes impress me. Lawrence Block liking your book, or The New York Times or Otto Penzler liking your book -- that might impress me. Might.

But rah-rah, over-the-top raves from less-than-critical sources (your grandma, your college room-mate, one of those annoying on-line blurb whores who never met a book they didn't love) don't impress me at all.

People indiscriminately tossing out five-star reviews may be the nicest people in the world, and have only the best of intentions, but in the real world they have all the critical reputation of a pancake. And carry less weight.

If you have any blurbs that reek of desperation, don't use them. Don;t mislead or misrepresenting (just because it was the number one seller for one afternoon at Joe's Cattle Feed and Mystery Book Emporium doesn't quite make it a bestseller). Better to just tell it straight about the book, rather than trot out some poorly-written or dubious blurb. Doing so only underlines the fact that you probably couldn't get a decent quote from a real reviewer.

Your blurbs, if you have any, should be as well-written as the book itself. Any less, and you'll end up embarassing yourself. I mean, really: "The best book I efer red." Who will that impress?

And in fact, some of the worst books sent to me had the most blurbs in their press release.

SIG HELL!

"Sig lines" are those cute little lines that accompany your signature on every piece of e-mail you send out.

Rumours to the contrary, I have nothing against sig lines. Used properly, they can be an incredibly powerful way of promoting yourself, particularly if you're an active and intelligent poster on discussion groups. But in the wrong hands, sig lines can do more harm to a writer's reputation than a bad book.

A friend of mine's on the right track, with this idea of a short sig line, changed often enough to be interesting. Changing one word of a 16-line sig line, on the other hand, is hardly enough of a change to make it interesting again. After a while, all sig lines are invisible. But long lists of URLs or ISBNs aren't even interesting to begin with.

To me the best sig lines are short and sweet. As a friend of mine puts it, "Sig lines are a bit like bumper stickers. They tell the reader a little bit about you, maybe some cause dear to your heart or a saying that sums up your philosophical view or something that you find funny.

They also serve as mini-news bulletins, which are how they are used by many writers on discussion lists. Here's my latest work! Here's my website! Here's the nomination I received!

BUT...

... they are not supposed to be a resume or a bibliography. They are not supposed to BE your website, they are supposed to lead readers TO your website."

Three or four lines, at the very very most, should do it. One or two is a lot better. And try to sell push one idea, be it a website or a book or whatever. Nobody wants to hear about the last fourteen things you've written or your wife's crafts.

Pretend you're a POW, and offer the sig file equivalent of name, rank and serial number.

We're writers, fer cryin' out loud. If we can't convey a simple message in a line or two that will hook a reader, we're probably assaulting the wrong citadel.

But often, it isn't even necessarily the sig itself that's the problem.

Almost as bad as too long a sig file is the improper, and inappropriate use of it. If you post to a bulletin board or mailing list frequently (several tuimes a week or even a day), quoting a lengthy sig file, particularly a poorly-written one, every single time is pointless. Those people already know who you are, and probably made up their minds about you long, long ago -- you don't have to keep introducing yourself every day.

Get your sig file message across in as few words as possible. And change it frequently enough to keep it interesting. By all means DO list your last book, or offer an URL to your web site. But quoting numerous reviews, ISBN's, three-line URLs, multiple e-mail addresses, books and writing credits starts to reek, once again, of desperation.

If you want to tell everyone that stuff, get a web site.

MAILING LISTS

Yes, I have broken almost every rule listed here. And have the scars to show it...

Some mailing lists thrive on BSP (that's "Blatant Self-Promotion," folks). Others discourage it. Make sure you know what kind of list you're on.

In fact, before you post on any list, read the FAQs, which are usually e-mailed to you when you first join a group, or are on the mailing list's official web site. If you can't find the FAQs, ask the moderator for them. If there aren't any FAQs, at least sit back and read a few days worth of messages before sticking your head out.

Always try to be supportive. But don't lie or suck up, or let stupidity go unchallenged. Regardless of whether some list pet loves you or not, at the end of the day you still have to live with yourself.

Don't get dragged into flame wars, no matter how much fun they can be when it's a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent. Some people take themselves very seriously, and no matter how right you may think you are, these people will never "get it."

It may not be polite to say, but some people are stupid as shit. don't bother arguing with them.

Read the original post that started the thread. Too many lists have mouthbreathers who have a lynch mob mentality. They react to the response to the original post, not the actual post. (I know -- I've been attacked for opinions I allegedly expressed, that were the exact opposite of what I actually said.)

Don't be a chicken shit. Know what you're talking about, before sticking your foot in your mouth. And if you don't know what you're talking about, shut up.

One author, with a promising new book out, was denied a potential rave review in MYSTERY SCENE because he decided to bad-mouth a critic whom he didn't know, simply because "everyone else was doing it."

Beware of list pets, and never refer or reply to them directly. They may have cute, friendly names, but these are mean spiteful people with a lot of friends (or at least people afraid of them).

Make sure your posts are relevant, and make sure they're well-written (you're a writer, remember?). And if you have nothing to add to a discussion, don't. Nothing's worse for a writer than to be mouthing inanities ("I agree." or "You suck") for the sole purose of running their sig file (see "Sig Hell" above.)

Don't abuse your membership. If you only post infrequently (say, every Friday) and your entire post is a meaningless "Right on" or "Me, too," it soon becomes pretty obvious you're not really contributing to the list at all, but merely there to flog yourself. You'll end up looking like an opportunist with little to say -- hardly something that will inspire someone to read your book.

• Remember, you're a writer -- everything you say is noticed, and how you say it is noted too.
• Avoid "cute" web identities. Nobody is ever going to take you seriously if your web address is "Nuclear Chipmunk" or something.
• Don't requote entire messages to argue one point. Quote the relevant part only. Learn to use your e-mail program.
• Make sure your subject heading applies to your message. If you're starting a new thread, or the thread has evolved from its original topic, change the heading. Nothing's more infuriating than searching a lengthy message in vain, looking for something relevant.
• Double check your grammar and spelling before posting. (Especially if your post is about grammar or spelling).
• Never use ALL CAPS or all lower case, or ridiculous, gimmicky typefaces. That just stinks of rank amateurism.

CROSSPOSTING MAKES ME CROSS

Another thing that can work against you is crossposting a press release. Those who crosspost the same message to numerous lists, regardless of whether they're appropriate to that list, are just rude. That's where a newsletter comes in handy, because that's the people you should be telling stuff to.

MORE TO COME...
In fact, if you have a pet peeve about web promotion for authors, e-mail me. If a cat answers, hang up.