I really like talking about blogging, so I thought it might be interesting to try an occasional blogging advice/support/pimp/whine thread.

What’s happening with your romance blog? Want to share any news? Upcoming events? Contests?

Got a new blog? Give us the link and tell us what it’s all about.

Facing any vexing issues with your blog? Something technical? Annoying commenters? Funny spam? Fresh out of ideas? Blogging taking over your life?

If you’re a blog reader, let us know what blogs you have been enjoying lately. What you would like to see more of? Less of?

Contest: Enter to win a gift certificate of $15 to the online bookstore of your choice if you leave a comment by 7:00am EST Monday (that would be 12:00 GMT, I think).

I’ll cheat by starting with my own comment:

Images: my web host just informed me that I had used up all my disk space because I had so many hi res pictures. So I went and basically nuked all the images from all my 2008 posts, which made me very sad (I shed a few tears over the loss of the the orgasming lions from the Come for Me, Baby post). What was my alternative? Any advice?

Also, many of those images (I assume) were copyrighted, and I did not pay for permission. Here’s my rationalization: (1) no one who reads this blog could possibly think they are mine, and (2) I am not profiting from them in any way, (3) I would take them down if I got a takedown notice, (4) my readership is so small, what harm can it do. The problem with this argument is that it would likely justify stealing a lot of things.

How do you handle the question of images?

I’ll start with three quotations:

1. In an interesting post called “The Reviewer/Promoter Hat“, Mrs. Giggles wrote,

I found myself wondering why do reviewers in the online romance community sometimes feel the need to wear the promoter’s hat? … Reviews are meant for readers. I know authors have muddled this concept by telling each other that reviews play a part in the promotion of a book … Which brings me to my question: why do people who review also want to act as interviewer, promoter, and best friend to the people whose books they review? Why even review? Why not just write about the book in a casual manner without even using the word review, because at least that will defuse some of the criticisms leveled at those blogs?

2. At All About Romance’s blog, Blythe posted about promotion in blogging, putting AAR’s position this way:

We love to promote great new books, but that’s not our job…at least not exactly. … our job is really reviewing, not promotion.  Our goal in reviewing a book is to help the reader decide whether it’s worth buying…whether we liked it or not.  I’ve had people tell me they rushed right out and bought something that I’ve recommended.  I’ve also had them tell me they rushed out and bought something I hated, or not bought something I loved because they could tell they wouldn’t love it.  I’m fine with all those reactions.

3. At Romancing the Blog, Malle Vallik, Director of Digital Content & Interactivity for Harlequin Enterprises Ltd., offered some tips for authors on using blog commenting to promote your book, which include: “Comment on several blogs every day, if you can. ” and

The experts state that in order to be successful you need to be authentic and genuine; you have to think more about other’s needs than your own; you should be everywhere everyday BUT you need to be careful that you are not obviously or shamelessly self promoting.

What you want to accomplish is to come across as a smart, nice, genuine person who likes readers and books. You never know what might develop from such a reputation. Readers who read the review but then read your comment may decide they like you and want to try your book for themselves.

Reaction to the recent FTC guidelines from book bloggers was swift and severe. I agree with many of the criticisms — the most serious being that the guidelines are so broad that they may unconstitutionally restrict speech, the second most serious the unfairness of treating bloggers differently than print media. This post is not to defend the FTC, but to defend the legitimacy of a certain way of looking at what book bloggers do.

The FTC shined a light on something that makes us uncomfortable: our role as cogs in the publishing promotion machine. Book bloggers got annoyed at being lumped in with quick dry paint and dog food, as the AAR post makes clear. No, book bloggers insisted, we are having a conversation. What we do is different from what the natural headache remedy people are doing.

Book bloggers tend to see themselves as fellow consumers and have a hard time thinking of themselves in the ways the FTC does. They kept insisting on differences. For example, a natural headache remedy can seriously hurt you, what harm can a book review do? Others claimed that the FTC rules are an insult to readers, who can very well decide for themselves whether to buy a book, and hardly need Big Government protection on this matter. Still others said that if book buyers are dumb enough to be fooled by shill reviewers, then they get what they deserve. Many were outraged by the suggestion that free books are somehow payment for positive reviews, pointing out the many negative reviews book bloggers write.

For me, it all starts with a simple question: Why would an author or a publisher give me a book and not ask me to pay for it?

The answer is clear. They give “free” books as part of a campaign to promote the book. This is not about whether bloggers write honest reviews: some do, some don’t, and the honesty/dishonesty line doesn’t track the paid for/freebie line. There are too many reasons to be less than honest in a review to list, and getting free books is only one of them, and probably less common than some of the others, such as fear of angering someone, hope of making someone happy, friendship with the author, or hating the author. (I mean dishonesty here, as in, deliberately misleading readers as to one’s actual opinion about a book, not bias, although all of these things may contribute to bias.).

Being an honest blogger doesn’t make your book any less free. If you were a promoter (and by this I mean anyone whose job it is to get the word out about a book, whether an author, editor, marketer, etc.), and you had three choices: (1) no mention on a blog, (2) negative mention on a blog, or (3) positive mention on a blog, which would be the worst? I am thinking (1). Even a negative review gets word out about a product. It is better that people hear bad things about it than hear nothing at all, which is why promoters take a chance even with critical bloggers. (in this, I diverge from the FTC, which sees negative reviews as nonpromotional.).

Most of us bloggers are small potatoes. But isn’t it true that even a few thousand (hundred?) books can make the difference between getting and failing to get another contract? Wouldn’t you do everything you could to sell those extra few thousand books, even if it meant visiting 20 blogs and answering the same set of questions again and again? While I am sure there are lots of reasons you see greater numbers of aspiring, nearly published, and newly published authors in Romanceland than you see of bigshots, as Ms. Vallik’s series on RtB shows, their need for this kind of “small potatoes promotion” is surely one of them.

Mrs. Giggles’s point about the amount of free press bloggers give to authors is a good one. Many of us have noted the rise in contests, author interviews, and other posts that are a promoter’s dream, all being done unpaid, by book bloggers. In some ways, the wave of summer blogger manifestos reflected an attempt to come to terms with that recognition.

Some bloggers may write false positive reviews to get free books. Some blogs are nothing but promo after squeeing promo. Some are dishonest, some are not (some people really do squee over anything and everything). But with the rise of the web, more and more consumers are relying on comments from other consumers before buying anything. And the FTC is trying to find a way to alert those consumers to relationships between bloggers and industry which create an appearance of a conflict of interest, whether or not one actually exists. From the point of view of industry, and from my personal point of view as well, there really is no difference between kinds of romance bloggers (honest or dishonest), or between book bloggers and dog food bloggers.

Sure, when we write a book review, we are not claiming to know how this product will work for you. But, at least some of the time, we are saying something about a product to potential consumers, who may use what we say as part of their deliberations in purchasing this or similar products. And it is at least in part because book promoters see us this way that they give us “free” books, and visit our blogs, and follow us on twitter.

Social media experts are very blunt about the need to make the most of these relationships. Think of Ms. Vallik’s language above. It’s not enough to pretend. You have to be “authentic”, to use one of the buzzwords:

The Tools – the Technology. They only do one thing. They enable conversation. And conversations help build relationships between people. And Social Media is about relationships. People want to do business with people they trust. And people don’t trust strangers. So once again Relationships Matter. People Matter. -Erica O’Grady, Feb 18, 2008

I’m not sure whether authors are supposed to cultivate trusting relationships in order to mine them for promotional support, or cultivate promotional relationships they can then turn into trusting relationships, or whether, as seems most likely, it is all supposed to happen simultaneously. (If you are detecting some skepticism here, you are detecting aright. I won’t turn this into a rant against “social media gurus”, though, because others have done this much effectively and humorously than I possibly could).

The FTC guidelines clearly suck in achieving their purpose, but the whole discussion raises the question of overlapping relationships between bloggers and industry, which is a good one to ask.

I don’t mean for this to come off as anti-author. For one thing, many, if not most, authors just want to write, and want to sell their books so they can keep writing, and all of this promotion is not exactly a happy addition to their job description. For another, most authors would be online talking about romance novels whether or not they ever wrote one, because they’re fans too.

And for their part, bloggers are not always just “pure fans” blogging “for the love of the genre”. They often get other things from this deal, too, such as:

–increased web traffic, especially good if their blog is a means to grow their own career, in journalism, marketing, or social media guruship, for example.
–increased status in their fandom
–contact with published authors and editors for aspiring author bloggers

So … am I saying we are all just using each other? No, of course not. Many of our real life social interactions are often overdetermined in just this way — ever dated a coworker? Gone golfing with your doctor? Had a student wait on you at a restaurant?. In Romland, the promotional stuff can, and often does, coexist with non-instrumental interaction, i.e. genuinely liking and enjoying each other, valuing each other, respecting each other, and wanting each other to do well.

And even if mutual use is all it is, that wouldn’t be a problem as long as we are consenting to it, and respecting each other at the same time. As a wise homo interruptus once wrote:

To use is necessary and if you can’t be used, then you are useless.
-Kanye West, Thank You and You’re Welcome

Being a part of the promotional machine is not something only weak, bad, or dishonest book bloggers do. We all do it. Sure, from my point of view, I am merely talking about the books I read with other readers. But from industry’s point of view (and sometimes also from my own), the strength of my speech can be harnessed to achieve other effects. The fact that we don’t intend all the consequences of our actions doesn’t necessarily make us less responsible for them. If the social media experts are being totally upfront about using informal web 2.0 relationships to sell books, then I don’t see why we can’t also be honest about this aspect of book blogging, talk about it, and try to maximize benefits and minimize harms that may result from it.

This is why I like it when questions are asked about ethics in reviewing, or about whether sidebar ads constitute an endorsement of the product by the blogger. These kinds of questions reveal a recognition of the fact that “free” books are not free. Book bloggers are not mere consumers but are also participating, in their small way, in the promotional aspect of the industry. As such, we may have some responsibilities that someone who buys her copy of a book and reads it in her living room does not. One of those may be looking out for conflicts of interest, whether in reality or appearance. Another may be thinking more critically about the relationship between blogger and promoter that the giving of the physical book represents. Another may be thinking hard about it and deciding these potatoes really are too small to get worked up about. I honestly don’t know, but if nothing else comes out of the FTC mess, I hope even more discussion of the complex overlapping relationships that constitute — for worse and for better — Romanceland ensues.

By Tumperkin

I’ve been pondering the extent to which blogging is a public or private concern.  The answer might seem obvious at first sight but the more I think about it, the more interesting it gets.

The public and private realms are not, of course, separate.  They co-exist and overlap.  The public realm includes the state, institutions, media.  The private realm, home, families, identity.  Public law, put simply, governs the relationship between the person and the state; private law governs relations between persons.  What goes on in one’s own home, is not, generally a matter for the state.  However, there are certain activities – crimes for example – that are not permitted to take place even in the purely private realm.  In these situations the public cuts across the private.  Similarly, certain lawful activities which are private may be considered to be of public interest, such as the sexual proclivities of public figures.  So identifying something as public or private is not always straightforward.

Blogging, at first sight, is plainly a public activity.  Blogs exists on the web and are generally publicly accessible and searchable.  A recent judgement by the English High Court confirms that English law views blogging as ‘essentially public in nature’.

But is that how bloggers see it?  Romance bloggers in particular?

One thing that I’ve found striking is that bloggers have a strong sense of place.  Comments like, head over to X’s place to check out her post on A, are endemic. Yet a blog has no physical reality.  It’s just a bunch of code buzzing around on the ether.  And yet bloggers are proprietary about their ‘space’.  They go to great efforts to make it attractive and decorative.  Some of them explain their blogs’ values and policies (rating systems, approach to comment moderation, how they expect people to behave while commenting etc.).  People who read and comment are ‘visitors’.  They may or may not be ‘welcomed’.  They may even be ‘banned’.

Blog software recognises that blogs have owners.  The blog owner chooses the URL and if they decided to pull the plug and delete the whole blog, all the carefully crafted comments are deleted too without reference to the poster of the comment.  Blog owners can choose certain criteria for the comment function, for example, by refusing to allow comments to be left anonymously or restricting the group who may comment.  Comments can also be deleted at a later stage.  History can be rewritten by the blog owner in this way.  (Whilst this troubles me slightly, I have myself used this function once, when someone left a bizarre rant on one of my posts a full year after I posted it).  Bloggers can also sell their space to advertisers.  All of these points demonstrate that blogs do have private characteristics.

In terms of perception, I think it goes further than that. The ability to control – to a degree – what happens on a blog can give blogging a sense of happening in the private realm.  This is especially so in a relatively small community like the romance-blogging community where there is a high degree of predictability as to who may ‘frequent’ certain blogs.  In short, I suspect that it doesn’t *feel* public to a lot of people.

Does it matter?  Well, a couple of recent cases have sought to identify anonymous bloggers through the courts on public interest grounds such as the one linked to above and this more recent example in the US, so yes, it could matters to some bloggers a great deal.  But it has a day-to-day significance, too, which is how bloggers and readers of blogs relate to one another; how we post and how we comment on other people’s posts.

Are blogs like a shop window?  A private space which browsers may enter provided they meet certain rules (which may or may not be evident from the face of the blog itself)?  Or are they more like a soapbox set down in the street?  An appropriation of public space by an individual to spout their views?

Is it for the visitor to accept the blog-owner’s paradigm?  Or ought the blog-owner to accept that they are occupying a public space and live with the consequences of that, subject to the availability of tools that enable them to pre- and post- select comments?

How do you view your blog? The blogs of others?  Is this activity public, private, or a mixture of both?

Alas, despite Racy Romance Reviews being shortlisted for Best Romance Blog in the Book Bloggers Appreciation Week (BBAW) contest, no.

For one thing, we know Dear Author and Smart Bitches, Trashy Books withdrew their nominations (thanks for making sure we all knew that, ladies! Luv ya, mean it! ). And who knows how many others did as Karen Scott did, and blew off the BBAW nomination email? In short, many great blogs are not even a part of the process for one reason or another.

For another, shortlists were based on 5 blog posts. Who’s to say the submitted blog posts are representative? Maybe I only ever wrote 5 good posts.

Finally, the one bit of the panel process no one seems to be bothered by is the one that makes the least sense to me: the panelists do not judge blogs in their own area of expertise. (This rule was meant to avoid conflicts of interest, but I will take the threat of a COI over the threat of ignorance every time)

I could continue, but you get the idea. This is not rocket science. In fact, it’s no kind of science whatsoever.

Having said that, I am a person who gets excited when she finds an edible piece of candy at the bottom of her purse. As a person whose day is made by a measely $2 scratch off winner, the fact that someone saw fit to nominate RRR, and that a group of 5 people whom I don’t know read my posts, along with those of dozens of other blogs, and thought mine were among the best … well, that’s very nice! It’s really very nice!

(If you are curious about the process, visit the The Book Smugglers, who served as judges and lived to blog about it.)

This is also a fun way to cross pollinate the book blogosphere. I’ve already gotten new visitors here from the BBAW link, and by checking out the other shortlisted blogs, found out just what a small corner of the web I have been keeping to.

The other nominees for Best Romance Blog are Katiebabs’ Babbling About Books, AnimeJune’s Gossamer Obsessions, Marg’s Reading Adventures, and Holly, Casee, and Rowena’s The Book Binge. I’m in good company.

The shortlisted blogs are linking to the five posts they submitted to the judges. I love this idea. Here are mine:

1. A Rape By Any Other Name

2. Review: Not Quite a Husband, by Sherry Thomas

3. The Top 9 Most Romantic Love Scenes in Romance

4. Do Author Comments Have a Chilling Effect on Review Discussions?

5. Top Ten Signs you Are Reading Too Much Historical Romance

In my nomination email, I was also supposed to say something about how I contribute to social networking, reading challenges, and memes. I drew a big fat zero on that part of the application.

Voting closes on Saturday night. I think the other winners get either Neil Gaiman’s personal library, or a $20,000 gift certificate to Borders. The romance winner gets a backhoe and 30 minutes in her local WalMart.

The weekly opinion and news post.

1. It was an eventful week in Romanceland last week, and with the Book Blogger Appreciation Week nominations out any time, things promise to get more even interesting.

I have one of two things to say about BBAW, and will let you know which later:

A. I got shortlisted! Vote for me! Squeeeee!!!!

B. BBAW? So over it. But good for you, if it’s your thing.

2. As a public service, I hereby introduce the Romanceland Kerfuffle Advisory System (R-KAS). R-KAS is designed to guide protective measures when kerfuffles on a particular blog, message board, or social networking site are detected.  R-KAS combines threat information with vulnerability assessments.

Low — low threat of kerfuffle activity. You are free to move about Romanceland with minimal concern, even to high risk areas.

Guarded — things seem ok, but if you put your ear to the ground you can hear rumbles (you can also find several books you have been looking for under the couch, but that’s a topic for another post). Proceed with caution. Avoid known controversy seekers at this time.

Elevated — one or more 50 comment thread has been detected, Tweets increasing in frequency, trolls have been spotted. Be sure to carefully check post titles before clicking though, and do not make comments on any blog which lacks an edit window.

High — the kerfuffle has been named, has its own hashtag on Twitter, and is being being discussed on three or more blogs. Big Bloggers who have never visited you suddenly show up in droves. Few blogs are safe, although Ramblings on Romance, The Thrillionth Page, and DIK Ladies are likely to be able to provide temporary safe harbor. Avoid Twitter at all costs.

Severe — the original kerfuffle now serves merely as platform for old feuds, the origin of which no one recalls or cares about. Things are still dangerous, however, as it has spawned meta-kerfuffles about who started, how to conduct, or what counts as settling the original kerfuffle, and it has attracted interested parties outside Romanceland, which a contingent of kerfuffle warriors has broken off to battle back behind non romance-genre lines. Even SuperWendy’s mad. If you are serious about your sanity, stay on your own blog (close comments and quickly write a post featuring LOLCats or hot men, preferably both, if you find yourself an unwitting kerfuffle host), and don’t open your non-work email for a week.

3. 2009 Golden Heart Winner Vivi Andrews has a very interesting post up at Damned Scribbling Women, called “What Makes a Good Book Good?”. what really caught my eye was this unusual admission:

“I love romance. I love writing romance. But I want to write a Big Book someday that examines and impacts society in a way a happily-ever-after could not do. So I can’t take offense when people ask me when I’m going to write something real. Yeah, it sucks that they don’t respect what I’m doing now, but I understand that to them a RGB [Really Good Book] has to be electro-shocky and romance just ain’t.”

4. This is why I blog. From a speech given last year by someone whom I may or may not personally know and admire the heck out of:

“Researchers report that only 20 percent of Americans read a book not connected with their work last year. A few more read about four books. No one has reported on how many people participated in discussions about those books. How can I bridge the gaps that separate me from my neighbor if I do not talk with my neighbor about things that matter? In discussion, our solitudes open and admit the other and we meet: not to agree or disagree, not to tie up and pin down the answers to questions raised by the reading, but to explore the possibilities offered by the book. When we fail to read and to discuss, we become less human.”

5. CNN.com had an interesting article on the changing social role of the librarian the other day:

“In a world where information is more social and more online, librarians are becoming debate moderators, givers of technical support and community outreach coordinators.” I had never thought about the way digitizing of books affects the role of the librarian.

6. Yet another book blog taking a bow! Let’s Gab is taking a break. They will be missed — although you can still find most of them at their other blogs.

7. I wish I could be like other bloggers and tell you what I have coming up this week, but I’m honestly not sure. A review of Judith Ivory’s Black Silk, probably. A post from Tumperkin that is going to singlehandedly raise the R-KAS to Severe (No pressure, T!). Not sure what else.

Happy week!