,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Imo, another casualty of authors using ghostwriters instead of writing their own books is reader expectation of how long it takes to write a book. Just had a reader tell me that publishing "several books a month" is totally doable if an author writes full-time. #Copypastecris
Again, this wasn't "several books a month" as a pre-planned publicity push, for a total of 4 or 5 books a year. This was the expected pace every month of the entire year.
To clarify, the reader wasn't being rude. She was genuinely confused why people accused those authors of using ghostwriters b/c "if it's your full-time career, you can do it."
More collateral damage of authors pretending to be prolific by using ghostwriters & not disclosing it.
More collateral damage of authors pretending to be prolific by using ghostwriters & not disclosing it.
More clarification since the fab @courtneymilan just re-Tweeted this & now it's getting lots of views: I'm not against ghostwriters. I'm against authors pretending to be prolific by using ghostwriters to pump out mass quantities of books, all the while claiming *they* wrote them.
Used a ghostwriter to smooth out rough patches in your book? I don't think people expect co-author accrediting on that. But "authors" who haven't written in years b/c they hire ghosts to pump out x-amount of novels every month/year that THEY claimed they wrote? That's scamming.
