What Publishers Owe Authors Submitting Work

It’s common for an author to feel that publishers hold all the power. Until the advent of print-on-demand and self-publishing, authors trying to break through felt their limits acutely, with the metaphor gatekeeper feeling quite literal at times. And publishers abused this power, taking advantage of the oversupply of would-be authors to treat authors as peons who dared dream of publishing. Think of the established writers who note receiving their first rejection letter as a meaningful step in their journey because all their previous submissions had returned only silence.

Times are changing. Publishing has always been a slim-margins business, and the big publishers find it harder than ever to make their businesses work. They make up for challenges on the book end by buying web companies and magazines and whatever else they can get their hands on. But one thing that hasn’t changed is how big publishers treat authors submitting their work. They act as if deigning to consider a submission is service in itself.

Indie publishers know this approach is destined for failure. We do hold power (because being the ones to say “yes” or “no” is certainly power), but we also know that our dreams of publishing books come true because of the hard work and dedication of authors. Together, authors and indie publishers are making our collective dreams come true. Publishers owe authors everything. And in my view—and consequently the approach of Orange Hat—this attitude manifests itself in several, key ways.

1. We read all submissions, and ideally we have at least a couple people read every submission. We look for quality and for potential. And reviewers—who come from all walks of life and are fundamentally readers—provide feedback to authors. Sometimes that feedback is notes that the author can use to revise the story (even an accepted work). In other cases, it’s encouragement to join a community of writers, to keep revising, to consider the work as a draft and try a rewrite. These comments are focused on making every work we receive better.

2. We treat authors as human beings who are owed open conversation about our process, about our decisions, and about the author’s own worth as a person creating something new. This is worth celebrating, and we want to celebrate each submission even as we publish only a small fraction.

3.  We respect authors’ time by letting them know we’ve received their submission and sharing when their submission will be reviewed. We never want an author left wondering if their submission was received at all or if they should still be hoping for a decision. Every author receives one.

4. We spend a lot of time on the phone with authors, going through comments, answering questions, talking logistics, before we move forward with publishing. Publishing anything is a big deal, and authors deserve to have time for discussion.

These seem like basics to me, and I’m proud to bring these values and approaches to publishing. They feel like the least we can do, given how much publishers owe authors.

Have you had any particularly good or particularly bad experiences with publishing? What are the factors that shape the decisions you’ve made in publishing? Share your thoughts in the comments!