And you blog because you write from the heart—without the felt pressure of politics, without compromise. I find the comments-popularity question interesting as well. Let's take Chasing Ray, for example. It seems to me that you are one of the best-known, most revered, most frequently referred to bloggers out here. Does that mean there are 3,000 comments to every post you produce? No. The correlation isn't there. Those who get the most comments, it seems to me, are those who are giving books away.

Thanks very much for this post, Colleen.

I attended the book blogging panel out of deference to blogs in general, hoping to say hello to a number of the book bloggers (who represent the second wave that came after the first wave of litbloggers). (I was the guy, incidentally, who shouted the correct URL for Chasing Ray during the panel when nobody could get it right.) At the end of the panel, the book bloggers were mobbed by publicists for the reasons you cite. But none of these book bloggers cared to talk with me. I introduced myself after, and they looked past me, and I'm a guy who stands out. They didn't want to know what came before. Didn't want to build community on the same lot, or build off of the flagstones we set down five years ago. Wanted to do their own thing. And that's fine. But what of continuity?

They just wanted publishers to send them free books. They felt entitled to them. Didn't want to ask for them. They wanted to be mouthpieces for the publishers instead of independent entities. And I'm saying this not necessarily to slag them off, but to point to the profound differences between litblogs and book blogs.
Can there be room for both? Well, yes. But I do think assumptive viewpoints, or failing to listen to other perspectives, is part of the reason the publishing industry is in the mess that it's in. And it's sad to me that the book blogs really couldn't care about the litblogs. The book blogging panel was a retread of 2005. And not only do the book bloggers not know this. But they don't WANT to know this.

So do we want the daisy chain to continue like this? Five years from now, will there be a third wave of blogs on a panel? Is that what it will take to unite the first and second waves? Or do we begin communicating now?

Thank you, Colleen. I had been part of a book networking site for two years. We talk about books we loved and we reviewed the books we read. When I joined the fray of book review blog community, there were noticeable differences especially among teen book review blogs: everyone was clamoring for ARC's, reviewing only new releases and every week there are thirty reviews on the same books. It got old. Of course, I had to remember that I chose to read these blogs because I wanted to know from teens what they were reading (I run a community library for at-risk youth).

Well, I've since learned I can go to one or two bloggers for that and return to reading bloggers whose reading habits aren't dictated by release dates and ARC's. I love free books, but I read what I'm interested in, and that has nothing to do with popularity or pub date.

Anyway, thank you so much. And may I add, I was really surprised and disappointed to learn there is so little attention given to multicultural literature especially among teen reviewers. There is some but their world reflects the industry so why was I surprised? The absence of color is a whole other topic. I'll stop now.

Thank you.

Very blunt. Well said. And blunt.

The panel discussion wasn't what I expected, though I should have paid more attention to the write-up. The focus was on blogger-publisher relationships, though the panel was surprised that other questions came up (then why take questions, I ask). They didn't intend to talk about blog tours, and weren't prepared for the subject or particularly educated on it as long time bloggers might have been. The comments thing, however, came up twice where it was held up by panelists as one standard for evaluating successful blogs. It was at the second mention that I felt that I had to clarify that point.

I was disappointed that the panel didn't represent a wider variety of book (or lit) bloggers. I would have liked to see some men - Ed or Ron, perhaps - some more "literary" bloggers, and um, hello, the kidlit bloggers (though I know you hate that term, Colleen.) But speaking from the only book/lit blogger group that has been able to hold its own conference coming on the third year, I think that's significant. Together we've done some amazing things in giving and literacy and community that serves as a great example of what a group with common purpose can do.

Great write-up. I was on the panel at BEA and I just want to reiterate that we all are blogging about books for different reasons. I am totally and absolutely in agreement with your last paragraph. I am so glad that I at least got to mention the backlist and the idea that some of us are reviewing our own books and library books.

I do not blog for the free books or ARCs. I'm a long-term freelance book editor and I read uncorrected manuscript for a living. I love the backlist.

I hope that at least some of us showed that we blog out of a love for books and a desire to spread that love of books. I encourage authors to comment on blogs because it draws attention to their books and to good reviews.

I have worked with authors on a daily basis for 25 years. I am not star struck nor am I interested in drawing attention to myself. I really am about reading and about the books. I haven't done the numbers, but I'm sure I review more backlist and finished books than I do ARCs.

I post negative reviews and I also post about books I couldn't finish. So I don't think I'm just offering free publicity. Not all of my reviews are glowing.

I think the idea of the panel was to show a more grass-roots style of book blogging and reviewing rather than the bigger and more well known blogs. I would love to be as popular as, say Seven Impossible Things, but I doubt I'll ever have that kind of influence.

Anyway thanks for your post.

Well, I have to agree with Ed and say that the panel was very much a wave of the second type of bloggers - book bloggers as opposed to lit bloggers. (I read somewhere on another blog about how lit bloggers are dead - to which I wholeheartedly admit that I have NO opinion one way or another on that, because like Ed mentioned book bloggers aren't particularly educated on them) To which I think there is a profound difference. To me, book bloggers are just normal stay at home types who have found a way to share their love of books with others through blogs. I don't do it for the ARC's. What a waste of my time if it is. Seriously, the cost of my time for the ARC isn't worth it. ARC reviews are not the majority of my reviews and never will be. And if that doesn't capture the attention of publishers, then that's okay. It's at least capturing the attention of my readers. And really, isn't that what it's about. But when we do receive ARC's, what's so wrong about talking about expectations regarding that review? I've seen enough missteps on both the side of publishers and bloggers that it's a conversation worth having.

Hmmmm, you've never heard of these bloggers? That surprises me. I've seen their stats - they get thousands of visitors to their blogs.

I don't think it is particularly helpful to slam other bloggers. There is a place for all of us in the blog-o-sphere. Read the ones you like, ignore the rest. But to suggest that somehow the new wave of book-bloggers are not as serious as the older ones is just silly.

I wasn't at the BEA so I can't comment on the panel - but I think it would be pretty unrealistic to expect a panel which represented all the lit/book bloggers out there.

By the way, I recognized everyone from the panel - and I also read YOUR blog :)

Hi Colleen,

I was the one who brought you into the conversation on blog tours, and I'm sorry if I caused any confusion. Pam and I felt like there were things we wanted to address when the subject of blog tours came up, and since she had already stood up several times, she suggested that I do it this time. I get nervous talking in front of a large group, and I'm afraid that I must have mangled what I wanted to say. I was trying to say that the WBBT and SBBT were good examples of how a blog tour could be done well, and I did try to make it clear that they weren't about just one author. And my uncertainty about your correct URL was because I just type "cha" into my browser, and it automatically fills in the rest. Thank you, Edward, for correcting me, and I wondered who you were when you said it.

As for your other points, I'm totally in agreement about the importance of going beyond the new books and the ARCs and the short publication cycles. But you have to keep in mind that the intent of the session was to discuss how publishers, authors, and booksellers can work with bloggers. That's the primary audience at BEA, so it's only natural that would be the primary interest.

Celebrating reading is very important, and it's the reason that many of us blog. But I'm just not sure that BEA is the right venue for a panel on how blogs can celebrate reading and encourage literacy and discover undiscovered gems and all the other good things that we do. ALA seems like a much better venue for something like that.

I do agree that I would have liked to see more diversity on the panel.

I just wanted to address the diversity issue on the panel. The organizer, Jennifer Hart of Book Club Girl, had contacted me only a month before BEA to ask which bloggers were going to be there (I had been putting together a list of bloggers attenting). She then came up with the idea of putting together a blogger panel. Now I wasn't involved with the logistics, but I would think that had there been a longer time frame to work with maybe Jennifer could have come up with a more diversified panel. As it was, she needed to organize this all last minute and I believe did a great job.

Edward - I was one of the people who spoke on the panel (and like you, tend to stand out with my super short post-cancer haircut). I apologize if in the craziness afterwards you tried to talk with me. It was certainly not my intention to ignore anyone.

I wasn't at BEA so I can't comment on the panel. I can tell you that I subscribe to (and enjoy) a couple of the blogs from those panelists. So I wouldn't want to get into a conversation about who's got the "best" type of book blog.

But I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment: "These are projects that involve both new and old books, that exist solely to celebrate reading - they aren't about bestsellers or building buzz."

That's why I started blogging, at least. There are a lot of things in the world that shouldn't be about money or stuff, but for some people that's what matters. Different strokes and all that jazz.

On a positive note, I wanted to bring everyone's attention to the Nerds Heart YA tourney that just started this week. It *is* all about the books. :-) About finding the great releases every year that don't get all the buzz and hype and Battle of the Books attention.

The audio of the panel discussion is available at Book Club Girl's site at: http://www.bookclubgirl.com/book_club_girl/2009/06/listen-to-the-book-blogger-panel-from-bea-now.html

In reflecting on the panel in regards to the blog tour thing, I think the problem turned out to be the difference with who was expected in the audience and who showed up. It was a big crowd, which was good. However, it was not primarily publisher reps and booksellers, as I think was expected. There were a lot of bloggers and authors and they had their own take on what they wanted to get out of the session, and it wasn't what the panelists had prepared to discuss.

First, thanks to all of you for commenting.

Second, I want to make completely sure that what I said in that post - that I had not heard of any of the bloggers - was not about them being good, bad or otherwise. I wrote that above and I thought I was quite clear. My point was that I had not heard of them just like I haven't heard of tons of other book bloggers. There are too many of them for any of us to know them all. That's just a fact. So - the notion that any small group of panelists could speak for the lit blogosphere in general is silly. However no one should put words in my mouth suggesting that I said one blog is better or worse than another. My surprise was that none of the well known blogs - and I mean ones getting six figures worth or stats each month or getting name dropped in major newspapers or getting interviewed on NPR, or reviewing for major publications, etc. etc. were on that panel. I think that's odd and if you want to have a representative panel then you should take the time to put one together. The fact that BEA did not do this shows how they are out of touch with lit blogs/book blogs in general.

Beyond that, until Ed pointed it out above I had not thought that we were looking at a difference between lit blogs and book blogs and maybe that's what this is. What that means, I don't know yet but I don't see how dozens of bloggers reviewing the same book over and over helps anyone much (except the publisher) and I have to think that over time readers will just gravitate to what is more authentic to them (whoever that might be).

As to ARCs - yep, I get them. Readers of my site know I get a lot of them for my column and for Booklist. I'm not against ARCs. But I think there is a fine line here of people reviewing for publishers and reviewing for readers - that's the line I see being crossed and the mere fact that there is so much confusion over this issue, when the lit blogosphere has discussed it repeatedly (those who recall the NBCC debacle a couple of years ago know what I'm talking about)shows just how much this second wave of bloggers might be disconnected from the first. (And if indeed ARC appreciation was not what the panel was supposed to be about then based on the posts I've read and emails I've received there was a deep disconnect between what was said and what was heard because relationships with publishers was a bigger point of this panel then folks might have intended.)

Finally, I'm glad to hear so many of you mentioned the SBBT & WBBT and thank you for that. We try very hard to bring writers to the attention of a lot of readers and it's good to know that folks remember our efforts.

I have one question stemming from all of this? Why must everything become an us versus them game? I keep reading first wave versus second wave, lit bloggers versus book bloggers. Seems to me that that suggests that the differences are more important than the similarities and in some ways works to actively pit people against each other, even without stating that some blogs are more worthy than others, as you've pointed out that you have been careful not to do. But with an us versus them mentality, there is some unspoken (unwritten) assumption of worth offered and I find that divisiveness troubling and frankly, sad.

I wasn't at BEA and haven't listened to the panel (but given that I have read some on this debate now, I suspect that my listening would be colored by some preconceived notions). Do I recognize the names of the bloggers who were on it. Yep. Would I qualify as a second wave blogger? Perhaps. My blog is awfully new, after all and I haven't heard of almost any of the folks listed here in the comments (or indeed of this blog until today) but I have had a book review site (sites) since 1995 so I've certainly been around long enough. Bet you've never heard of me either though, have you? I won't bother with my other info/qualifications and whether that makes me a book blogger, lit blogger, or hobbyist because my point is that it doesn't matter really.

Some of you were disappointed with this panel. That happens. I've been disappointed with panels before too. Could have been because of expectations, panel content, or just a rock in my shoe as I hobbled into the conference room demanding my attention. But really, why not stop pigeon-holing and making separate camps when building relationships across cabins would be far more productive and go farther towards making a similar panel discussion in future more representative of the wild diversity that is out there in this book world of ours?

Kristen:

As I said in my post and repeated in my comment, this is not about the panelists being better or worse than any other blogger. It's about how I had not heard of them and neither had a lot of other people who have been book blogging for a long time and yet they were on a panel at BEA - the largest annual pub industry meeting in the country - and they were speaking on the subject of books and bloggers. When you do that, when you participate on a panel at a meeting that gets this much notice, then you have to accept that people will comment on what you talked about. That's what I'm doing - I'm commenting on how the discussion seems to have been an awful lot about ARCs and publishers and relationships between bloggers and pubs and that it maybe was not a conversation that was representative of the many facets of the lit blogosphere.

I mentioned the names of the bigger bloggers because I find it odd that you would not plan to include some of them in a discussion of this sort - if for no other reason than that they have been doing this a long time and you might not know them but pubs do and they have worked out a lot of these issues already. If you want to have a panel on books and blogging then you should take the time to form one that will include different types of bloggers and you should do it with as much care as you would do any other panel.

I'm not having an "us vs them" conversation here, Kristen. If that's what you read into this then please look again.

No, there is no way one panel in one hour can discuss ever facet of the lit blogosphere. But if you listen to the audio of the panel, in now way were we ever trying to represent something that we were not. No, none of us are "getting name dropped in major newspapers or getting interviewed on NPR, or reviewing for major publications." The panel was never intended to represent anything of the sort. It was stressed many times that we were just "normal" people who love reading and that blogging was something that we did very much as a hobby. We were presented as mom's or with full time jobs. The audience very much understoood the "hobbyist" facet. Putting major publication reviewers on the panel would have changed the whole intent completely and I honestly, don't think that's what the panel was set up for. The panel was very much a discussion about how authors, publishers, and booksellers can work with hobbyist bloggers. Hobbyist being the keyword here. I believe the audience very much understood that aspect of the panel. There was another panel called Book Reviews 2010 which I think is probably more of what you would wanted.

And I must say that Sheila's comment above is spot on.

Really interesting discussion. With the sheer size of the lit and book blogging world, it's just not possible to know, read, or comment on all the blogs out there--and similarly, one can't assume any uniformity except for an interest in books.

That's all fine. But our individual voices get pushed aside when blog readers--whether they be other bloggers, publishers, or whomever--start to assume that every blog has the same intentions.

The problem with panels at conferences is that they necessarily restrict attendance/participation to those who are willing or able to attend said conferences--not a representative sample. :)

Anyway, just a few comments I had in response to the discussion.

Interesting discussion. I haven't listened to the audio from the panel either, but I'm particularly struck by something that Colleen said in the comments: "there is a fine line here of people reviewing for publishers and reviewing for readers". Personally, that's a nice little guideline that I intend to keep in mind, when I'm deciding about things in the future. Does it help my readers or not? Helpful, to go along with my own personal preferences, of what and how I like to blog.

Another thing that I've noticed lately, in reference to these big blog tours where everyone posts about the same book, is that these tours actually make me LESS inclined to read the book. Seeing the same book talked about on multiple blogs on the same day, I get this kind of over-saturated, someone paid for this coverage sort of feeling, and it makes me less excited about the book. I'm certainly not talking about SBBT/WBBT, which feature different authors, or even a blog tour where the same author does interviews on different blogs across a week. But when I see five reviews, linking to each other, on the same day ... I skim over them all. But perhaps I'm not the target audience for this.

Natasha, pretty much everyone, regardless of the size of blog, has a day job. Some of them are published writers (like Mark Savras at TEV for example) but others have cobbled together multiple freelance writing jobs or like Jen and I and everybody else are self-employed or go to work ever day for someone else. In one sense - as in do we support ourselves through blogging - every single one of us are hobbyists.

So now you see another gray area. The panel was not advertised as hobbyist bloggers - and further, there is no clear definition of hobbyist blogger - for any aspect of the internet (way beyond lit blogging). This raises a question again about publishers and bloggers. Do you think readers have a different standard for a stay at home mom versus a writer who blogs on the side? One of our SBBT/WBBT bloggers is in high school (the lovely Erin) so to suggest this is a line drawn between professionalism vs hobbyist in terms of money or job would not be correct, not really.

And again - we argued a lot of this with the NBCC crew (the paid full time critics) in the past. (I will find the link to those posts, promise.)

It seems to me that BEA should have had a better handle on what they were advertising as a lit/book blogger panel. The fact that they you are suggesting the Book Review panel is something different from the Blogging panel is telling to certain degree. Bloggers are not reviewers - or held to the same standards? In what ways? And perhaps the panelists needed to better understand that nearly 100% of the lit bloggers would describe themselves as hobbyists in terms of earning money from their blogs - but professional in the standards they withhold concerning publisher/blogger relationships. And that brings us back to publishers and what they are looking for in this relationship question.

Not so easy to unpack all of this, is it?

Beth F: Just to be clear on the history here. The litbloggers are VERY grassroots. Before you even blogged, we had lengthy conversations with publishing people explaining who we were, what we were, and precisely what we offered. It took a while for the books to came. But they eventually came when the publishers saw that they could get the coverage that the newspapers denied them. In some cases, it was not easy to persuade the publishers. But we did. And many of them came around eventually. The galleys and ARCs and finished copies that the second wave book bloggers now enjoy is directly attributable to our efforts five years ago. You may want to check out the Litblog Co-Op, of which I was a founding member, to see precisely what we were doing:

http://lbc.typepad.com/

The LBC sadly disbanded: the victim of too many egos and a few people taking on too much of the work. I don't really want to go into the circumstances of why I left yet again, which is a painful and personal subject, but I would say this to the book bloggers. Learn from our mistakes. Stand up for each other and don't let self-interest get in the way. Above all, stand as independent organs. Do not cede all of your power to the publishers. That's what spawned Colleen's post.

Natasha: Here is the problem with ARCs (and this has been argued many times before). Eventually (and you may be there already), you will get to a point in which you receive more books and ARCs than you can possibly read. It eventually becomes impossible to not only review the books, but to even keep all the books in the house. Yes, you've arrived. But at what cost? Many of these ARCs come unannounced and unsolicited. Since you have not requested them, is it really an ethical dilemma if you do not review them? (For what it's worth, for both print and online, I only request a galley or an ARC if it is very likely that I will write about it.)

Wendy: I don't think anybody here is slamming bloggers. We're merely pointing out that we've had this conversation before, and that the book bloggers, as many of these comments reveal, are talking about being the new booksellers. The problem is that litbloggers started off as alternative journalists, and many of us take journalistic ethics very seriously. So when there's talk about being publishers' pawns and the first wave isn't invited to the table, and the second wave isn't willing to check history, then, yeah, there's a problem. Hence, this thoughtful post and this thoughtful thread.

Stephanie: No worries. I'm sure we'll see our short haircuts in person eventually.

Kristen: This is not an us vs. them game. It is an attempt to bring everybody together and establish that there is a history, with all sides learning from each other. I mean, when the moderator of the panel works for HarperCollins, doesn't anyone raise a cautious eyebrow? Levi Asher, who runs Litkicks, is actually the oldest litblogger and never gets any of the credit. (And he was around before Bookslut and Moby Lives.) I too have been blogging since the mid-90s. The upshot is that those who were part of the first wave changed the game and got publishers to pay attention. But they were careful not to cede specific territory on certain matters, which some book bloggers seem to be doing. That's the concern in this thread. And hopefully the coming together of all waves will perhaps facilitate a healthy discussion of the issues, predicated on civil discourse.

There has been quite a bit of conversation amongst this new wave of bloggers about the line between reviewing for the love of reading and reviewing for free books. The latter is very much frowned upon by serious book bloggers. Are there bloggers out there who do it only for the books? Yes, I'm sure that there are, and that's unfortunate. But did they travel (in some cases cross-country) and pay to go to BEA? I highly doubt it.

I firmly agree with your last paragraph and feel as though I could have written it myself. I receive ARCs but that's not why I blog. I blog because I love to read and want to help other readers make informed decisions about books that may interest them. Where I obtain a book has no effect on my review; I judge the book by its merits and give my honest opinion in every one of my reviews. Many of the books I read come from my own bookshelves. I'm not blogging so that publishers will send me free books. It wouldn't be worth my time to do so.

I feel privileged to be part of a community of well-read and knowledgeable bloggers like the folks who were featured on the panel. I believe that there is room for both waves of bloggers and that we can work together.

Holy moly! Can't we all just get along? I mean really. First wave/second wave, lit blog/book blog? Everyone keeps saying they aren't trying to slam anyone, while at the same time doing just that. We should be supporting each other, not pointing fingers. I don't know what the distinction is between a lit blog and a book blog. I've been blogging for four years and this is the first time I've even heard that there is a first wave/second wave. I don't even know if I qualify as first wave or second wave!

And for the record, I don't think that anyone should be criticizing this panel who wasn't there or didn't at least listen to the full audio. If all you've done is read the summaries posted by other people, then you are viewing the panel filtered through someone else's biases. I feel that this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. What I took away from it was apparently not the same thing that everyone else did. "You will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on your point of view."

Did they talk about publishers and bloggers working together? Yes. Was it the only thing they talked about? No. Did they in any way suggest that bloggers would pimp themselves for ARCs? NO! It came across to me as more of a way to teach publishers and authors things they need to know to work with bloggers. Personally, I think that a lot of what they said would be more helpful to small publishers and independent authors than the big publishers, who are already working extensively with bloggers. For example, "Read the submission guidelines on the individual blog" was repeated over and over again as almost a mantra, and yet questioners in the audience continued to ask questions that tried to get a blanket answer covering all blogs.

Pardon me if this isn't exactly accurate, but the audio isn't the greatest quality:

From 43:30: "The most successful tours are the ones where the publicist is pushing it."

From 43:58: "It doesn't take that much effort for a publisher to set up a blog tour. You know, compared with flying from city to city to city, it's really good and you're always going to have that online service up."

The PUBLISHER setting up a blog tour. Not the bloggers organizing it, allowing a broad range of perspectives (including critical ones), and ensuring that there is an independent editorial authority corralling the many opinions. When you play into the publisher's hands like this, then you get into ethically dicey territory. It's fine to promote, but if you do so at the expense of critical opinion, then how is this any different from marketing? How is this any different from being a publisher's pawn?

When I have organized roundtable discussions of books (such as Richard Powers's THE ECHO MAKER, Nicholson Baker's HUMAN SMOKE, and Eric Kraft's FLYING), I have made it clear to all participants that any informed opinion, even a dissenting one, is fair game. If the author participates, I insulate the author from the participating bloggers, so nobody's opinion gets corrupted. I'm the guy who organizes the sending of the books so that the participants aren't contacted directly by the publisher.

Because of this, we've generated discussions that often go on for 20,000 words over the course of a week. And the authors and the participants and the readers come together for an editorially honest discussion.

The publicist does NOT push the discussion. I won't let the publicist interfere in the discussion, because my approach is more journalistic.

Look, nobody is trying to slag off book bloggers. We're just asking you to reconsider what a statement like "The most successful tours are the ones where the publicist is pushing it" really means. In other words, there was a lot more going on here than talk of "read the submission guidelines."

Yes, publishers do organize blog tours, but they do not dictate what the bloggers participating in that tour do or say. I have participated in these types of tours and have written negative reviews of the book being toured. In no way has a publisher or publicist tried to influence me to be anything other than truthful in my review. If they had, that would be the last time I ever worked with them -- and I know I'm not the only book blogger who would walk away.

My blog is my own and I make the final decision about what does or does not get posted there. Negative reviews are just as helpful, if not more helpful, than positive reviews and the publishers that I have worked with have welcomed all opinions of the work, positive and negative.

First of all, Edward, my comments were not directed at you. You were obviously there, so any comments or criticism you make are based on what your own interpretation of what you heard. I'm fine with that. But some of the people commenting here seem to be commenting based only on what they've seen other people post. I agree that the statements you posted are accurate, but they're still taken out of context, so anyone commenting based only on your quotes is not commenting based on full information.

I personally don't see anything wrong with a publisher setting up a blog tour, as long as the publisher is not dictating the terms. I have participated in publisher organized blog tours, but I've also refused to participate in some. And as for the statement about the publicist pushing it, my recall was that they were talking about the publicist promoting the blog tour on their own web site, not that they were talking about a publicist pushing bloggers to do a blog tour. But since you've listened to the audio, maybe my recollection was faulty.

For the record, I'm not defending the panelists. I don't even know any of them! I've never read their blogs and never heard of them before the run-up to BEA. But I do think that it's not fair that all of a sudden there seems to be a lynch mob brewing, and that some of the lynchers are going simply on heresay.

Any of us could have taken the initiative to organize a panel and propose it to BEA, but instead we're sitting around taking pot shots at the people who actually took the initiative and did something.

Instead of bickering amongst ourselves and pointing fingers, wouldn't it be better to have a constructive dialog about how we can work together to support the book/lit blogging community as a whole?

Ed - thanks. I think you rounded up all the prescient arguments perfectly in your comment above.

Sheila Ruth - Honestly if you read my post I am not slamming. My complaint (and I said it over and over and over) is that BEA sat a panel on books and blogging with folks I never heard of. This gave me - personally - pause. I thought it was odd. And then I read round-ups from others who thought it was odd. (Folks I know and folks I don't know.) And then I started to wonder just why anyone would try to have a panel on blogging at BEA - when we all know there are so many different types of bloggers it's impossible. So I thought, well, publishers must be trying to figure this business out - this blogging stuff. And what might come out of all this concerns me for reasons Ed stated above.

I don't think they are "pimping themselves for ARCs". And I didn't say that. I do get to be concerned about bloggers talking about forming relationships with publishers because - again - as Ed states above that's not easy territory to navigate and those who have been down that road before know.
Is posting on this somehow combative? I don't think so - if you can have a panel on the subject then can't we comment on the subject as well? (And please - if you want to see criticism then you should catch some of the twitter posts being thrown around about me.)

I'm sure some of the panelists feel like they are being jumped on but then again - you appear on a panel then people are going to talk about it. I'm honestly not pointing fingers (except maybe at pubs). I'm analyzing and thinking about what was said and I'm considering just what it means for lit blogging (or book blogging) in the future.

Ok, I'm sorry if I'm misinterpreting the tone and intent of the comments here. I'll bow out of the discussion now.

I'm emailing you direct Sheila - we're okay, promise!

Sheila Ruth: We're all good! Just having a friendly discussion, that's all. I shall break out the rubber chicken and the video camera, if necessary.

I wouldn't say that people are taking pot shots at the panel. There is a legitimate argument that presenting a group of book bloggers at a huge book function like BEA and saying that they represent all book genre is a problem. It wasn't intentional, but it means that the panel couldn't respond to questions from either the moderator or the audience with much difference in opinions because they came from the same subset of book bloggers.

I know that there are several subsets of book bloggers. I'm sure many that I'm not even aware of. Many of them have probably had amongst themselves -as I know the kidlit ones have - questions about conflicts of interest, professionalism, the issues of authors and publishers and bloggers playing in the same sandbox, etc. But as we have these discussions in our own subsets, we probably come to different conclusions - even if slightly different conclusions. As bloggers keep their blogs longer, they also gain new perspectives.

In ways, this is the constructive dialog. We're talking about points of view, expressing opinions, and hopefully coming to a better understanding. It will certainly help with any future panels for ALA or BEA or whatever, because we'll all be aware of different perspectives among the larger community.

The whole thing just frustrates me. There are SO many book bloggers. If Colleen and Ed had been on the panel, I would probably be saying the same thing - how could they represent me so well, when they don't know me and I don't know them. We are in the same boat. Yes, the panel wasn't set up very well. We admitted that on the panel. But I still think that a lot of good things were said.

I still think we are talking about two different types of blogging. It was never intentional to talk about one type of blogging as encompassing the other. It would be safe to say Colleen that as a Book Review Editor and book reviewer for Book List that you are immersed far more into this industry then I ever will be. I'm a stay at home mom. I have zero qualifications. I just like to read. We are different and always will be. We need book critics like you. I hope that there will always be book critics. Do people need my blog? I'd honestly have to admit, that they probably don't. I don't bring anything but my own personal opinions to the table. I've never pretended to be a book critic. I'm a reader with opinions. Plain and simple.

So where does this bring us now? I have no idea. But it's been an interesting day.

Oh but Natasha - where do you think I started? I wrote my first review for Jessa at Bookslut over five years ago about Antoine de Saint Exupery's books because I have a degree in aviation and his plane from WWII had just been found and I wanted to point out some of his other writing.

That was it.

Everything else - the column, the editor position at Eclectica, the Booklist review position, came after that. I wrote a review and Jessa suggested I send another. I did and I kept going and from all of this I wrote my book and found my agent and started my site and here you go.

And I have a small child who is sitting at my table beside me right now. I work from home - we are not that different at all. We are all readers with opinions and what some of us are saying is that we have been where you are and we have hammered out relationships with publishers and yet now - at BEA of all places - it was like a panel from five years ago. It was topics already discussed, many times over.

That's my frustration - can you see it?

Hey there...wrote a long comment that got eaten, but will probably just post on my own blog to discuss.

However....if you had already settled all the issues with publishers five years ago that we discussed--well why are we still running into problems? Because we ARE two different groups. Because for whatever reason we HAVEN'T heard of each other (until the panel I heard of you!) and because the very nature of the internet is that it's social media...owned by the user. You can't regulate it...and quite frankly most in our community don't want to.

I'm sorry you did not feel represented. I do think we both love books. So that's a start as a place to come together.

Ed wrote: The problem is that litbloggers started off as alternative journalists, and many of us take journalistic ethics very seriously.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse...but it is these kinds of statements, along with this whole first wave/second wave talk which makes this feel like an us against them argument. If in fact one is a journalist (of any sort) than research is imperative. From what I've been able to gather, many people commenting here state they haven't even heard of the bloggers on the panel...and yet here is a statement questioning (or implying there is something wrong with) their ethics. I am a VERY active blogger in, I guess, the second wave of book bloggers - and I can tell you that there have been numerous posts and conversations about the ethics of accepting review books and ARCs and maintaining our integrity through honest reviews. All it would take is a little research (ie: visit the blogs in question, read their posts, read their review policies) to see that no one is selling out to the publishers and publicists.

Someone said "Can't we all just get along?" I agree - can't we? I remember all the posts about the print reviewers writing derogatory things about the bloggers...it was sort of like a bunch of alpha dogs fighting for territory. Whether we call ourselves lit-bloggers or book bloggers...ultimately we are all out there sharing our love of books and making connections with readers. *sighs*

I can't speak for Colleen. But if I had been on the panel, I would certainly hope that you would challenge anything I said. And in challenging me and asking questions of me, we'd have ourselves an interesting discussion and come to some common ground. That's what civil discourse is all about. For the record, I have never claimed to represent anyone. But I do stand up for my peers. And I stand up for both litbloggers and book bloggers in this thread.

The point being made here -- that the amateur or the hobbyist blogger, at some point in the game, does end up a "professional" -- is one that I hope that we can all agree on. You may claim merely to be a stay-at-home mom, but all that I think Colleen and I are saying here is that with great power comes great responsibility. Whether you like it or not, your viewpoint matters, even if you may claim that you "just like to read." There's an important debate here about what your reviews mean. If you have ANY kind of relation to the publishing industry, no matter what your standing and involvement, you really need to understand what that relationship entails. Would you sign a deed of trust without thinking about the responsibility? Would you sign on for a car loan without considering the monthly sacrifice? It's the same with free books and reviewing.

I wouldn't want to categorize anybody in this thread as "just a reader" or "just a stay-at-home mom." The fact is that the publishing industry has signaled you out. So how do you accept that role?

First - again - thanks to everyone for commenting.

Amy honestly it wasn't that I felt like I wasn't represented it was that I don't think there is any way to represent the lit blogosphere - for obvious reasons. So when a group is presented as if it does (based on the panel title/description) then it strikes me as problematic and that's what I wanted to blog about.

And Wendy it wasn't that I didn't want to take the time to find out who the panelists were - it again was that they were advertised as representative and yet many folks didn't know them (just as they didn't know me). So how could they be "Six top book bloggers"? That's my point and where I think the panel was misguided.

Ha, ha! Really, I can't stop commenting. What's wrong with me! :)

I really liked Ed's comment because although I am somebody who "just likes to read" I do have a relationship with publishers and authors. I know I haven't come across right in my comments, but I do recogniz that relationship. I flew all the way from Utah to BEA, so yes, I do have a role in the industry. I recognize the responsibility that I have. And maybe herein lies the problem. Correct me if I'm wrong. The assumption that we don't realize this or haven't discussed it amongst ourselves? Rest assured, it's a conversation that has taken place more than once, more than twice, many times amongst ourselves. I'd like to think that we are a self-regulating bunch. And it's posts like this that cause us to regulate again. :)

And it's heartening Colleen to see the background that you come from. We aren't so different after all.

If it helps with bridge-building at all, I've been having comments and discussions back and forth with Collen and Pam and Sheila and with Natasha and Amy, for months and years now. This lit blogosphere is not a club or a hierarchy or an us/them thing. It's a network, filled with different relationships, all of them valuable, and all of them offering ways that we can learn from each other. I agree with Amy - what we all have in common is a love for books. It seems to me that taking a step back from time to time to discuss some of these common issues, like publisher relationships, is a good thing. (And I say this as someone who is pathologically conflict-avoidant).

Personally, I'm always struggling with decisions about the blog - do I accept this or that book, do I review this one that I was lukewarm about, do I link to this or that post. These types of discussions help me to keep refining my own position, if that makes any sense. So, thanks!

Jen - you are truly all things to all bloggers. That "literary evangelist" thing makes more and more sense everyday!

Jen: I agree - what we all have in common is love of books. I for one, would love to learn from the mistakes of others and not "rewrite" the manual, so to speak. But as Natasha said, I don't think anyone should make assumptions that the issues are not being talked about.

Colleen: *nods* I understand you didn't know this panel and you are well-connected, so it made you wonder who these people were supposedly representing lit/book blogging (I'm putting those two phrases together because really I don't see a difference between the two and I find it divisive to separate them). But honestly, the book blog community has grown so much in the four years I've been involved, I don't see how anyone could know everyone who is everyone unless they have no other life *laughs*

The last point I want to make, and then I'll step back since this is my third post...I think we should remember as Colleen and Natasha (now) have pointed out - we are not all that different and I think we pretty much want the same things. I don't think there is anyone here discussing this who has not struggled with the issues of accepting review books and making sure their reviews are honest assessments of the book regardless of where it came from. Relationships are hard work - we are lucky that publishers and now starting to recognize that book bloggers are excellent voices for literature...they're still learning about us too...

*comes in late to the discussion*

Hi guys, what'd I miss?

Ok, I don't want to re-hash all of the comments up til now because there have been LOTS of them, and good points made on both sides. If I were inter-omniscient and could see from inter-space, I could tell you that if yes, there are two waves of book bloggers (henceforth 'BBs' and encompassing both 'book' and 'lit' bloggers) and they are mostly independent of each other, or if there are eighteen subsets of BBs, or if the intarwebs is exactly what it sounds like, a web of people who know some people and don't know some other people.

But I don't know these things.

What I *do* know is that I read three of the panelists and have heard of the other three, but I haven't heard of you, Colleen, or anyone you mentioned. This saddens me because I WANT TO BE EVERYONE'S FRIEND IN THE UNIVERSE, but doesn't really strike me as a flaw in the system. The internets are large.

It *seems* like the BEA folks just dipped into one particular pool of bloggers, and snagged six of the bigger fish. It would have been nice to have seen representatives from more genre-d blogs, or even from bloggers who didn't already know each other so that they could hash out some new issues.

On the upside, that whateveryouwanttocallit brought about this discussion, and many of us who weren't aware that we were second wave and that we had shoulders to stand on, now are. I wish this whole encounter had started off with more bon bons and fewer hurt feelings, but such is life, no?

H'anyvays, all that to say that the panelists may not have spoken for you, but I'm going to forge ahead and speak for them and everyone they DO represent and say that we are eager to learn what you have to teach.

Not all of us agree with blog tours *hits face* and those of us who laud the hell out of any and all books generally aren't taken seriously. This comment is getting RULL long, so I'm going to sign off by saying I feel like new doors have been opened, and like they might lead to good places to party. May I come in? Can I play too? Here's to books and how much of the innarnets we have taken over on their behalf. All of us.

Thanks for commenting raych. I honestly did not expect anyone to know me - my blog is not big nor has it ever been. But I am pretty astounded to know that anyone blogging on books would not know about Bookslut, where I have a YA column. It's so big, has been around so long, and has such a memorable name that it's hard for me to imagine that book lovers wouldn't at least know what it was. Plus it's a great monthly magazine with great features, interviews, reviews, etc. That's where I was coming from there.

I really really understand that there are too many lit/book blogs to know them all. That would be crazy. But in this instance, this panel should not have been advertised as it was - and that is a moderator issue (or BEA issue).

As to welcoming everyone to the literary party -well HELL YEAH! We are each other's greatest audience after all - a bunch of book lovers and that is fab.

I do know Bookslut! But I don't read it, because it is precisely what you say..a magazine. I've been to the site, even went today and it was just overwhelming and huge to me.

But I totally get that that works for lots of others. And I love you Raych you always make me laugh.

I'm sorry it doesn't work for you Amy - I think my column is pretty approachable...it's just 5-6 reviews of YA titles each month, so nothing too big in that respect.

What I like about it is that it's set up so you can see what you like and then click through - an interview, an essay, a review. Lots of stuff all in one place and new every month. But I understand if it's not your thing. It's funny though - trying to keep up with 50-60 commenters everyday would be way too much for me!

Speaking my heart, Colleen. Thanks!

Colleen: You do a great deal for books, authors, and bloggers. I salute you.

For what it's worth, I'm lucky if I get even TEN comments a week at my blog. I know people are reading it - they just don't leave comments very often. True, I do wish I received more comments, but I'd rather they be genuine and/or asking for more recommendations ("Help me find a book for a twelve-year-old girl who likes soccer!") than empty compliments or spam.

Comments can be a "cultural" thing, no more (or less) than that.
Does a person reading a blog have the time to leave a comment? Are blogs blocked from their place of work so they can only read via readers? Does work allow that? Is work the only place with computer access?

Once home, if there is Internet at home, how much time does the person have to read, or post, or comment? If (like me) the "computer time" at home is, say, a few hours, should that time be spent commenting (and then returning to blogs to follow the conversation) or creating their own content?

The (in)ability to comment is an issue that is very real for many workers (or at least the people I speak with when talking about blogs).

Is it one thing to look at when looking at a blog? Yes. But it is not the singular thing to judge whether a blog is has readership & community.

One of the frustrating things about the comments discussion for me was that it is often a singular individual reason unique to each site/blog. For instance for well over a year at this blog we had chronic issues with MT which made spam such a huge problem that there were draconian hoops to jump through in order to comment here - so very comments. I know some bloggers have stopped accepting comments because they had "stalkers" or really mean commenters and just decided it wasn't worth it - I could go on and on.

I rarely notice comments on a post - unless there are a lot of them which means a discussion has started in comments separate often from the post itself. Plus I also email a lot of folks to comment on their posts which I suppose defeats the whole purpose in some ways.

I was at BEA in the audience at the book blogging panel. I thought the women did a nice job trying to talk about the book/publisher relationship building while still answering questions that came up from the audience. The ladies also gave time to some bloggers in the audience to talk about their projects. The panel didn't pretend it was more representative than it was. The recognized that they did not represent the book blogging world, but only their experiences in it.

As for not recognizing any of their names and wondering why the list you provided was not included on the panel, I haven't heard of any of those bloggers you identified. Maybe I'll go check them out.