Ethics in writing…
Part of being nice (Rule #1 from my article “Rogue Waves in Calm Seas”) is being ethical about how you treat readers and other writers. One of my interests is scientific ethics, but this is a little more general and more complex. Let’s say you receive a bad review from person X. Is attacking that person online ethical? If X is a writer, is it ethical to write a bad review of X’s book in revenge? I hope you agree with me that it isn’t.
I’ve been on both ends of this little debate. I received a questionable review and made the mistake of saying something like “I’m sorry you didn’t enjoy Y, but I can offer you a free copy of Z.” (I won’t go into details here because I have so few reviews you might be able to figure out who it is.) On the other hand, one person called me to task for a review I wrote, saying that I hadn’t even read the book (exactly what the first person did—he admitted it). Again, I apologized (I’m human and read a lot, so there’s a small probability I mixed the book with another—that’s about as likely as winning the lottery, though). But I also stuck by my guns (that’s Rule #2), and added the experience to my list of reasons to stop reviewing on Amazon and return to my mini-reviews for booksI casually read. (BTW, if I review a book, I’ve read it. For casual reading, I often only read it once. For my Bookpleasures reviews, I usually read the book twice, once as a casual reader and again with a critic’s eagle eye.)
If I sinned, it isn’t at the level I described in the first paragraph. But we can go farther. I once discussed a plot idea with an author who didn’t express any interest in the idea (I was thinking we might become the next Preston and Child). Later I found he’d written a book using basically that plot idea. Is that ethical? Whatever your opinion, it taught me a lesson that I’d better not discuss my plot ideas with other authors. I’ve worked hard over the years to accumulate what-ifs, story and character ideas, and possible venues for my novels. I’ve learned now to keep them to myself. (When you see an excerpt for the next ebook in a series at the end of the present one, be assured that novel’s done and in editing mode at least—it will be released before another writer can release her/his with the same plot idea.)
Authors who think they need a cliffhanger at the end of a book in a series so a reader is forced to buy the next book in that series deserve a special place in hell. Not only is that amateurish and unprofessional, it’s the epitome of unethical commercialism. Every novel should stand alone; it should be a complete story. If your novel doesn’t meet that ethical requirement, I’ll slam you in my review of your book on behalf of all readers. Isaac Asimov and Robert Ludlum didn’t do this to sell more books, for example—you shouldn’t either.
When J. K. Rowling released her detective story The Cuckoo’s Calling under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith, it was an immense flop until it was leaked that Galbraith was really Rowling. Rumor has it that the leaker was her lawyer, but the question is: was it ethical? While I realize lawyers only worry about whether something’s legal and rarely whether it’s ethical, there’s an ethical question here. (I wonder if the new Jurassic World repeats that marvelous scene from Jurassic Park where the T. Rex snaps up the unscrupulous lawyer.) To avoid detracting from Ms. Rowling’s success, let’s also consider the Heat books associated with the ABC series Castle. Is it ethical that the publisher doesn’t say who the author is?
Some readers and writers might call these minor offenses or, in the case of my stolen plot idea, evidence of my own stupidity. But what about pirating? What some countries do with music, books, and software (e.g. China and Russia) is definitely questionable as far as ethics go. Some argue that writers shouldn’t complain—after all, that means someone is reading their books. Should we just write it off as an investment to increase name recognition like those free giveaways Amazon’s KDP Select sponsors? Isn’t it the same thing? My answer is that it depends on the scale. Massive pirating of a popular ebook (they’re the easiest to pirate) isn’t ethical; a wee bit among close friends, probably not. I wouldn’t worry too much about the ethical questions related to Amazon freebies—those massive giveaways don’t happen now and a Kindle Countdown Deal at $0 (better at $0.99) will serve the same purpose.
Price-fixing is another issue. Apple is still fighting its case in court, although Hachette and other publishers threw in their towels and settled with the federal government respect to Apple’s debunked “agency pricing” system designed to curtail the power of Amazon. Now the EU is going after Amazon in more litigation. Is what Amazon doing ethical? Or is it just smart business acumen? Was Apple’s attempt at price-fixing ethical? Or just smart business sense? Is the EU just trying to play catch-up by coming down hard on Amazon and other American firms operating in Europe? Is their stance ethical or just unethical protectionism? Should we put a VAT in place as a counter attack? Oddly enough, most of these questions will be answered in courts where ethics often plays no role, only perceived illegalities.
While I could imagine putting a bumper sticker on my car saying “I’d rather be writing,” people should be paid for their work and time, even if the work is fun and they wouldn’t want to be doing anything else. All of the above are cases detrimental for writers in spite of the pressure Patterson, Preston, and other famous traditionally published authors tried to apply in their support of Hachette against Amazon (yes, I know, that was a different dust up—Hachette doesn’t have a good track record). There the consumers, the readers, were caught in the middle, which is odd, because, without them, there would be no writers or publishers. You’d think that publishers would want to keep both readers and writers happy. The former don’t want price controls and prefer competitive prices (the traditional paradigm implies expensive ebooks); the latter just want freedom to create and be recognized for their work, whether traditionally published or not.
Writers work hard to entertain (fiction) and inform (non-fiction) their readers. Whether traditionally published or indie, royalties are how a writer is paid. A traditional contract often has a signing bonus, but don’t forget that it’s just an advance on royalties, usually with many onerous conditions I find unacceptable. Indies, on the other hand, only have their royalties, so each ebook readers don’t pay for denigrates her/his hard work. Indies writers work hard to bring you quality entertainment at a reasonable price. Their ebooks are often as entertaining as traditional authors’ and average about half the price or lower (compare a $2.99 indie with a $12.99 traditional).
I’m not uptight about this. All my ebooks are lending enabled as far as I know. That means you can share them among family and friends. People did that with pbooks all the time. It’s not a big deal. I’ve denoted some of my early works that have a pbook version to public libraries. I can’t do that easily for ebooks, but services like Overdrive and Scribd (affiliated with Smashwords) and Kindle Unlimited and Lending Library (Amazon) are in the same spirit. I make royalties via those lenders (reduced, but they’re there), in contrast with Self-e (Library Thing) where I have to pay for the privilege of allowing readers to borrow my ebooks for free (a good business model for Library Thing, but a terrible one for authors). My goal has never been to become rich; instead, my goal is to entertain readers.
We often walk a tightrope regarding these ethical issues. But there is no question of ownership. An author obtains an automatic copyright of his book. I registered some of my early pbooks with the Library of Congress; now I don’t bother (I don’t even know how to do it for ebooks, and the cost would imply additional drain on my operating finances). Traditional publishers often “lease the rights” to a book when they publish it (although many times the conditions in the contracts are onerous for the author), but the author owns it as intellectual property. That’s internationally accepted too, in spite of countries where pirating is common. In all this discussion, it’s best to use common sense and learn from mistakes. One person’s ethical finger-pointing might be another’s “business opportunity,” but as long as readers and writers use common sense, we’re probably OK, because that common sense will produce reasonable regulations of this huge publishing industry.
In elibris libertas….
