Book bloggers — the old and new “waves” and what you need to know about both
A few weeks ago, I posted some tips about how book bloggers can work with publishers to get review copies. Although the post itself was fairly straightforward, an interesting discussion emerged in the comments section. Sarah Weinman of Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind made a distinction between two “waves” of bloggers who write about books:
“Wave one are the ‘litblogs,’ the ones who are cited most often in mainstream media. The original bloggers who fit this bill include the Literary Saloon, Bookslut, Maud Newton, MobyLives (which has had several incarnations since), Moorish Girl and LitKicks. By the end of 2003 Ed [Champion] re-started his blog as Return of the Reluctant, I joined the fray, as did Old Hag, the Elegant Variation, Beatrice.com, The Millions, Conversational Reading, The Reading Experience, Bookninja et al. Many of us were either contacted by or solicited book review editors to write for their newspaper sections. There was a journalistic feel to many of the posts on said blogs, and a sense that the blogs were, and still are, a jumping-off point to professional writing.
“Wave two are the book blogs [of which] there are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples. The emphasis is less on ‘blog-as-professional vehicle’ and more on community, on having conversations about books, often active ones, with a small but devoted following of readers.”
(And in an earlier Follow the Reader interview with The Book Maven’s Bethanne Patrick, Patrick also spoke about “professional” versus “community” book bloggers.)
I was fascinated by what Weinman and Patrick wrote because although as a book publicist I’m familiar with both the “old” (professional) and the “new” (community) book blogs, I’d never made the distinction between the two except when it came to figuring out whether to stick a blog in the “Lit Blog” or “Book Blog” folder in my RSS reader.
Why is this important?
What it boils down to for us in book publicity is how we pitch — and work with — these bloggers. The other day, for example, a book blogger asked if there was an appropriate “waiting period” between review copy requests. I nearly toppled out of my chair — you don’t get questions like this from someone with whom you’ve worked for years — until I realized that someone new to the book blogging scene would have no reason to have any knowledge about requesting review copies from publishers. (For the record, there isn’t a waiting period.)
Kassia Kroszer refers to a similar issue in her Booksquare post entitled “Bea 2009: A Bit of Deja Vu All Over Again” in which she wonders exactly how many times a BEA book blogger panel will discuss how bloggers can work with publishers. (This year the panel consisted of bloggers from Stephanie’s Written Word, Book Club Girl, Beth Fish Reads, Maw Books, Booking Mama, My Friend Amy and She Is Too Fond of Books.) For the bloggers who’ve been around since the Internet was invented — or at least since book publicists first figured out what a blog was — this panel was indeed what Kroszer calls “hallucinatory,” a bit like teaching a book editor how to, say, read. But for those bloggers who have only recently come to the book scene, the panel provided invaluable information. (For complete coverage of the SRO-panel, you can check #bbpbea or write ups at Edward Champion’s Reluctant Habits or Publishers Weekly. And Firebrand Technologies — best known for their NetGalley product — hosted both the old and new waves of bloggers for “signings” at their booth; Levi Asher of Literary Kicks lists all the bloggers who signed in his Book Expo Wrapup.)
What do you think about the “waves” of book bloggers? And how would you characterize the two? Or do you not make the distinction?
The Book Publicity Blog 
I guess I would be considered second wave – but to be truthful, I have a hard time with separating the two because it sounds like one is more professional than the other…and I don’t think that is true. I’ve been around four years, and I just am now discovering there is this group who characterize themselves as first wave semi-journalists. To me, it is not important – what is important is that we honestly represent and review the books we read; and that we love books and portray that love to our readers…and yes, that we talk about the things important in the bookworld and publishing.
With sincere respect and in a spirit of merely grammarian zeal I gotta point out that the verb you needed was not “portray.” I’d go with “convey.” Thank you.
http://poetrypoliticscollapse.blogspot.com
This is an interesting discussion. From my humble point of you, I always classified book review blogs and/or sites as serious and not so serious. I don’t consider a one paragraph review very serious but rather an opinion-something like you see very often on Amazon. On the other hand, when you have a minimum of four hundred words with some meat in the review, you then have something more serious. Bookpleasures’ has a minimum requirement of 400 words unless it is a children’s book, where you can have between 200-300 words. Most of our reviewers are very serious about their reviews and do take the time to write something that will garner interest. I guess this is why we have been around since 2002 and are inundated with review requests.
I see the difference between lit-blogs and book blogs but I also notice a difference AMONG the book blogs with regards to book review length. I don’t count words but I try to make my reviews long enough to properly say what I want to say while I’ve seen other book blogs (usually newer ones) that give literally one paragraph. And yet these blogs STILL get books for review from publishers which I think is silly. I suppose any mention of your book is good and if it’s a huge publisher they have the money for it but still.
Good point — and one day publishers may find that it’s not feasible to send out free books to anyone who might mention a book in a blog post. It’s the kind of thing that we’ll need to play by ear, balancing the cost of sending out review copies with the kind of coverage we’re getting and its effect on book sales.
I’d missed the two waves part of the discussion. Interesting.
Hi, Yen! I’ve kept kind of quiet on this whole issue because I didn’t really have much of an opinion, but after reading your post I had a gut feeling that I decided to see if it was grounded in fact.
I checked out most of the lit blogs you mention, and *most* of them have comments turned off. The ones who don’t have comments turned off have very few comments on their post, except for one the blogs, TEV, which had a fair amount of comments, though nothing spectacular.
This, to me, is the difference between the first wave and second wave. The first wave is talking at the reader and sticks with a journalistic style of writing. The second wave is in it for the conversation. I don’t know any book bloggers (as opposed to lit bloggers) who have comments disabled.
I’m not saying the first wave is wrong, though it’s certainly not my preference to shut down conversation by turning off comments, so I obviously prefer the second wave. However, it just seems silly to not have conversation on a blog about books when reading is such a solitary hobby anyway. Readers tend to want to talk about what they’re reading, want to talk about books and authors and their book club.
So while I really admire what the lit bloggers did to start up what I would call book blogging, I think they continued a style that newspapers are finding unsustainable.
Interesting point. I didn’t check through the comments section of all the blogs I mentioned, but a couple — for example Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind or Edward Champions Reluctant Habits — do have their comments on.
Maybe this is all indicative of a move toward the “people.” That phrasing sounds dorky, but what I mean is the phenomena of “Here Comes Everybody,” Wikipedia, or most recently, Richard Nash’s new initiative Roundtable. Whatever makes more people read and talk about books, I say let’s jump on that bandwagon.
I concur. To me it comes down to either taking a more traditional journalistic approach, or taking an approach where there is actual conversation involved. There are often, but not always, be a degree of literary elitism in the so-called “first wave” of book blogs.
Wendy — I would absolutely agree that for the reader of a blog (and a book) it may not be important at all whether the blogger also happens to freelance for, say, The New York Times Book Review. (Some readers do care, though — it just boils down to personal preference, I guess.)
But for a book publicist — and, arguably, for anyone in the publishing industy — I do think it’s important that we recognize the differences (whatever they may be) between blogs. This difference may be between “professional” and “community” blogs, or it may be, as Bookpleasures notes, the difference between blogs that run short and long reviews.
I’m not saying one group is better than the other (in my book, *any* blog that talks about books is better!) but in publishing, we interact with bloggers in a different capacity than do readers, and part of establishing successful relationships with bloggers is knowing who they are: their interests, their demographics, their writing styles and formats, etc.
I oddly straddle the two waves, I think. I’ve been reviewing since 1998 (started out reviewing for the roleplaying game industry, then moved into more mainstream books). I was posting reviews as static content on my website before blogs existed, so it took a while before I moved everything over and switched it to a blogging format. I started out as a professional writer (freelance, again for the RPG industry) before becoming a reviewer, instead of the other way around. And these days, I rarely end up requesting review books because I get more than I can handle without having to ask. Over time my style has become more conversational as I’ve adapted to the blogging format, but it’s definitely more formal than some. So I find the distinction between the two “waves” kind of fascinating.
Yen, Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying that publicists need to carefully select the platform where their books are getting reviewed…but I don’t think that just because one blogger started in the first wave means they are more professional than the second wave…I love when a publicist does their homework and it shows in their pitch to me. I guess the problem I have with some of the discussion right now about lit blog vs. book blog is that some people are willing to lump everyone together and make assumptions that are just not accurate. Every blog is individual – trying to categorize them into two groups (when there are thousands of blogs out there) is a little silly in my opinion!
whoops, that should have read: I’m not saying that publicists DON’T need to carefully select…
Everyone’s been very modest and hasn’t been flogging their own websites, but given that this is a discussion *about* book websites, don’t be shy about mentioning your blog’s URL! Here are the sites of existing commenters if anyone is curious:
http://www.caribousmom.com/
http://www.bookpleasures.com/websitepublisher/
http://condalmo.wordpress.com/
http://heylady.net/
http://www.errantdreams.com/
I wouldn’t even call it first or second waves. What I’ve seen looks like a web of groups; it’s not just two. Each cluster of bloggers has their own styles and focus. There are “lit blogs”. There’s a group loosely connected to My Friend Amy’s BBAW. There’s a group of science fiction bloggers. There’s another group of mystery bloggers. There’s the Christian Fiction Blog Alliance. (And there’s schlubs like me who are too iconoclastic to really integrate with any group.)
Anyhow, I think breaking things into two groups is far too simplistic. And I think a few folks from some groups are looking at other groups too much as “the other.” Don’t like what they are doing? Think they are upstarts reinventing the wheel? Don’t read em. Run your blog the way you want to. If your personality, style, and quality of writing get you what you want, be it free books, readers, commenters, new friends, or whatever, then more power to you! It’s not a zero sum game.
I’ve seen both “waves” of book reviews, and they both have a lot of merit. I tend toward the first wave – the comments are turned off on our site, and I’m not looking for any reader feedback. But I don’t think my writing style leans towards “literary” in any way. I try to speak my readers’ language and offer my thoughts on a book, but I’m certainly no expert. 🙂
As Wendy and King Rat point out, there are indeed more than two groups of blogs, but this particular post deals with these two. Is this old / new distinction any better or more valid than others (e.g., general interest vs. genre blogs)? Of course not — it’s just something that happened to catch my attention.
To be honest I just enjoy discovering new books through like minded people and am more likely to take note of the views of unprofessional passionate bloggers than people who take a journalistic approach. This is not to say I don’t read the professional blogs, just that wen I am considering a new author I want the views of someone with no other motive than to share the books they loved/or didn’t with people of similar tastes.
Can somone explain what makes a litblog? Is it the types of books and authors you review and talk about? And just because a person’s blog is mentioned in the mainstream media, does that make them even more special?
And who decides if a blog is a professional vehicle? You leave your personality at the door and maintain a constant professional air?
Many people use the term “litblog” to refer to the blogs that have (mostly) been around for several years. These bloggers are (mostly) writers by profession and so the style of their posts (often) mirrors what you might see in a print publication. (In her original comments, Sarah Weinman actually noted there are lit blogs that have started more recently, like Mark Athitakis’ American Fiction Notes, but I cut down her comments for this post and left out that part.)
The blogger is the one who decides the direction and tone of a book blog — whether reviews are longer and more formal or whether they’re chattier and written to encourage discussion.
Although I do think it’s important that book publicists recognize these differences, I can say we’re happy to work with all kinds of book bloggers!
Litblogs usually always review books given to them by publishers (I think) whereas book bloggers are more likely to put up reviews of library books or books of their own.
All I know is that any book publicist who sticks to a list of “book” blogs is just asking for FAIL. There are people like me who mix in other posts with the occasional book mention (I won’t call them reviews because I believe reviews are dead). We have audiences who do not frequent book blogs and therefore address the general audience book publishers would like to reach.
Knowledgeable publicists have long since realized that there are many non-book blogs that mention books and that should therefore receive attention — but this particular post deals with the book blogs.
I think there’s another distinction to be made, between bloggers who write commentary not only about books but about the publishing industry as well, and those who write only about books, in whatever fashion. That’s what I would have thought the difference between “litblog” and “book blog” was.
The thing that I have noticed — and someone please correct me if I’m wrong, since I’m very new to the first wave blogs — is that lit bloggers focus much more on the book industry as a whole, whereas book bloggers (generally) tend to focus on their own reading, with maybe a bit of industry news thrown in. I will highlight publishing news if I feel that I can add something constructive to the conversation. If not, I leave it to the folks who are in a better situation to do so. I’m not saying that this is true of every lit blogger or every book blogger, just a broad trend that I’ve noticed.
I honestly think there’s a place for both. I’m grateful to the lit bloggers who forged relationships with publishers so that publishers are now much more willing to look at bloggers — both first and second wave bloggers — as viable means of publicity. There are readers who will be more attracted to the style of first wave bloggers and readers who might feel a little more comfortable with the more informal style and community feel of second wave bloggers. Does that mean that one is better than the other? Absolutely not. Just as readers are highly individualized, so are there blogs.
And, as KingRat pointed out, there are subsections within each wave of bloggers. There are very genre-specific blogs and then there are blogs that bridge many different genres. If my blog were a dog, it would definitely be a mutt — there’s a little bit of everything thrown in.
I’m looking forward to learning more about literary bloggers and how they helped make the community that I enjoy as a book blogger possible. We share a common passion — love for the written word — and even though our styles may differ, in the end it all comes down to the books.
Ruth — you bring up some very interesting and thoughtful points. Lit bloggers did indeed forge relationships with publishers once upon a time — I remember when, almost 10 years ago, one now-prominent blogger came to our offices and all I could think was, who? What? Why should I care? (I imagine that must have been shortly after I figured out that “blog” was short for “web log.”) Clearly I’ve revised my opinions somewhat since then, thanks in part to their persistance and dedication.
Of course, just because I talked about two waves of bloggers in this post doesn’t mean that bloggers themselves should feel compelled to adopt the moniker — I’m not the ultimate authority on book blogs. But I wrote the post because I am a publicist who has been working with book blogs for long enough now to be witnessing some remarkable changes. (Plus, I have to admit — let’s not kid ourselves — I enjoy naval gazing as much as the next Gawker reader.)
As a columnist for Bookslut I interact with publicists mainly in that capacity; my personal site is a more informal place to discuss books and other literary topics.
I’m bothered by how much of this conversation seems to keep coming back to comments (and I don’t mean just the conversation here but everywhere today and at my blog yesterday). There are comments on a lot of the lit blogs Sarah provided – The Millions and Tev and Ed (the comments on the Alexie interview the other day are unreal)for example. Now there seems to be a “they don’t allow comments” distinction being thrown around and really – you can’t say that. Some lit blogs do comments and some don’t – it’s a personal preference. And those who decry the lack of comments and are suggesting that lit bloggers just want to “talk to you and not with you” (the big twitter topic lately) should consider that Jessa for example might not have comments on her blog at Bookslut but does host a monthly reading series with real live authors and a real live audience. She talks to people face to face – isn’t that the ultimate blogger/reader/author interaction? There is also the Tournament of Books (with tons of comments) hosted by The Morning News that many of the lit bloggers participate in and other group projects/interactions with big time feedback.
I find the notion that lit bloggers have less of a sense of community to be funny – as it is a community that has thrived for several years now.
To me the book bloggers seem almost as an extension of book clubs (in a much bigger more organized and busier way)with a heavy focus on daily interaction and communication.
Hi, Colleen! Since I was the first one to mention comments, and since I brought up the subject of a blogs’ comments on Twitter, I’d like to mention a couple of things.
What I was trying to do was find one of the differences between (what people are referring to as) lit blogs and book blogs. Obviously, they both have their place in the blogosphere.
I didn’t say all lit blogs close comments. What I said was, of the lit blogs I looked at before I posted my comment, most either had comments turned off or had very few comments on their post. I was comparing and contrasting that to book blogs, where I’ve never seen comments turned off.
Yen asked how I would characterize the two “waves”, and actually I think you and I agree because you say, “To me the book bloggers seem almost as an extension of book clubs (in a much bigger more organized and busier way) with a heavy focus on daily interaction and communication.”
I think that interaction bit is key Trish – it’s not that lit bloggers don’t want it or care about their readers…it’s just not what the focus of their blogs is about.
It’s hard to explain this without over analyzing it. I honestly don’t think anyone has ever thought about it this much, so I don’t want to suggest what people think or why they do things a certain way. It’s just how they do it and it works for them.
Does that make sense?
Yes, that totally makes sense Colleen. 🙂
The original book bloggers were really not blogs. These were web sites such as bookpleasures that posted reviews from several reviewers. When blogs came along, the landscape changed somewhat where you now have a more personalized set up and more commentary. I noticed that only within the past 2-3 years have publishers and publicists begin to understand the importance of these book reviewing sites and blogs.
Actually, many of the original book sites — which I list in the post — were and are blogs. Others, like Bookpleasures, are review sites. Still others, like Bookreporter or Bookslut, are review sites with separate blogs.
Ten years ago
I used to listen to bloggahs flow
Bloggin’ bout the way
They rocked the stacks at the booksto’
I liked how that shit was goin’ down
With my own sound
So I tried to write post
Somethin’ like them, my boys said,
“That ain’t you Ed,
That shit sounds like J. Wood.”
So I sat back, thought up a new tack
Didn’t fantasize, kicked the pure
Facts. Motherfuckers got scared
Cause they was unprepared
Who would tell it how it relly was?
Who dared?
Satirical motherfucker from the West Coast
San Francisco fool
Where the Hippies and the Eco freaks play
When I blogged about parties
It didn’t fit
Overdue library fees
That was the real shit
O.G.L.B. Original Gangsta Literary Blogger
LOL.
hehehehe
I definitely think it’s an error to conceive of the difference in terms of successive “waves.” Since internet time immemorial there has been both kinds of commentary available on web sites, and community is important to each– if not in the form of comments, then as links and guest bloggers. A more useful distinction might be between professional and amateur book bloggers.
I agree with Matthew, Debra, and Maitresse, though I’m not sure I’d divide bloggers into “waves.” Bloggers have different personalities, and that’s the real distinction, I think. I always thought lit-blog referred to the bloggers with more literary tastes, whereas book bloggers are the chatty, lively ones. There’s nothing wrong with either; in fact, most bloggers do both. It depends on the blogger’s personality and style.
In the end, the “wave” distinction probably doesn’t matter that much. We’re all part of the larger community. Most of us have blogrolls, or we link to one another from time to time. We don’t always agree–in fact, we love dissent–but we’re a friendly bunch of folks, no matter what “wave” you may ride.
I’m chiming in here to say how much I enjoy these kinds of discussions where I can consider new ideas and perspectives.
I know for sure I am not a litblogger, because I focus my book and software reviews, and posts about literacy squarely at parents. I keep my reviews short because I am so conscious of how time-crunched we all are. But I certainly don’t think I am any less professional than the many review blogs I admire.
The point that resonated most with me was that made by Trish above.
“Maybe this is all indicative of a move toward the “people.” That phrasing sounds dorky, but what I mean is the phenomena of “Here Comes Everybody,” Wikipedia, or most recently, Richard Nash’s new initiative Roundtable. Whatever makes more people read and talk about books, I say let’s jump on that bandwagon.”
I am so excited to be blogging right now. Yes, some people refer to mass amateurization when referring to web 2.0, 3.0 or whatever you like to call it, but to me, with Google Wave about to break, we have an unprecedented opportunity to engage people in discussions about books. There will always be a place for static content, but I believe a savvy book blogger will seize any chance to engage with their audience.
Here comes everybody? Bring it on!
Just to chime in on comments…that part of the discussion has been most interesting to me, because I’ve been part of many blogging communities (outside of books) and comments are pretty much always seen as a sign of readership and reader engagement. I just wonder how you all go to know each other without that feature…simple ignorant curiosity.
I agree with the concept of waves (though I think that has more to do with timeline than content), but your claim that litblogs are more “professional” is mistaken. I, for instance, began several years ago with no readership and have since gone on to publish professionally (reviews and articles). True, I’m an untrained freelance writer, but it was my book blog that propelled me into writing for various online site and print magazines. My book blog (and it fits your definition to a T) gave me my professional start, so I think your claim to be somewhat unjust.
What an interesting distinction, one I hadn’t considered. I like the dawn of the Internet concept. There is a real sense in some quarters that the literary movement on the Internet exploded around 2003/2004, when many sites, including mine, went online (I fancy myself as part of the et al noted by Sarah Weinman ). Obviously, there were book discussions and review sites long before this time, many of which remain robust today. But there was a real public push around this time. At BEA06, litbloggers were public in their efforts to engage the publishing community.
Sarah’s distinction is accurate and smart. I hadn’t considered the reporterly quality of these early blogs in that light. It doesn’t make them better than the community blogs — a powerful force for the all-important talking about books — but makes it clear that when it comes to blog/websites, there is not a one size fits all quality. Which, yeah, makes it harder for people like Yen, who must not only juggle the sheer number of sites, but also the range of focus blogs have.
From an author’s perspective — there is a group of bloggers that my publisher automatically sends to — and a group that I contact directly, because they tend to be overlooked, and haven’t gotten full recognition and traction yet, despite their popularity.
Kelly Simmons, author of STANDING STILL
bykellysimmons.com
I have also seen the ‘Wave’ of book reviews over the years. We do a little bit of reviews ourselves, but most of the reviews are sent in by our readers. The only issue we have is that we are not leaning towards any particular book genre.
Nice post BTW 🙂
Helen
http://jroller.com/bookreview
[…] Not all of us are as hot as me and Jessa, see. But I digress. Apparently Bookninja was part of wave 1.5, after old folk like Moby, Maud and Jessa. And this wave structure creates certain realities for […]
[…] authors (Jonathan Lethem! Neil Gaiman!!) for recommended summer reads.Bookninja points us to this debate about book blogs vs. lit blogs. A snippet:“Wave one are the ‘litblogs,’ the ones who are cited most often in mainstream […]
Pingback by Bookmarks: Seth designs book bag, rediscovered Agatha Christie stories, book blogs debated - The Afterword | June 5, 2009 |
From the point of view of a reader, I don’t care. I still have to figure out where their tastes lie to know how much weight to give their opinions when choosing a book for myself.
From the point of view of a writer, I don’t much care either. Any review from anybody of good faith is welcome.
This might matter, legitimately, to bloggers and publicists because there might be practical implications for them. But for the vast majority of the book-buying public, it has about as much significance as imprints, which is to say, virtually none. And why should it, really?
[…] Yen Cheong’s Book Publicity Blog, I glanced through a discussion of the distinctions between the old and new waves of book bloggers. […]
[…] at Viking and Penguin Books, considered whether the kinds of people hosting those conversations roughly split into two camps. Working from some thoughts by Sarah Weinman, Cheong notes that there’s a distinction between […]
Pingback by Waving « Mark Athitakis’ American Fiction Notes | June 7, 2009 |
Very interesting. I’m glad someone has tried to explain the difference. I didn’t hear the term old/new wave until recently and it threw me for a loop. I’m definitely in the books & conversations category blogger. There is definitely room for both.
I know every one of the bloggers you label “first wave.”
I know none of the bloggers you label “second wave.”
I don’t know what that means except that I am old and have limited time to read blogs.
[…] on a distinction/controversy: • The Book Publicity Blog: Book bloggers — the old and new “waves” and what you need to know abo… • My Friend Amy: This Social Media Thing • GalleySmith: Who’s Your […]
Thanks for great posting
Will back to read your other useful post 😉
[…] then there were epic rivalries that people had no idea they were a part of. Old-skool vs. new-wave, cool vs. uncool, ARCs for everyone vs. you-are-a-book-grubbing-whore and so help me I am not […]
Pingback by Let’s do it all again! by Raych of Books I Done Read | Book Blogger Appreciation Week | May 23, 2011 |