One reason to avoid CreateSpace's Expanded Distribution

When you publish your book on CreateSpace, you have the option to choose up to five distribution channels versus just using Amazon.

"Expanded Distribution offers you the opportunity to access a larger audience through more online retailers, bookstores, libraries, academic institutions, and distributors within the United States. Expanded Distribution will also improve discoverability of your book across all the channels. Regardless of whether or not you include your title in Expanded Distribution, all CreateSpace titles can be distributed through the Amazon.com and Amazon Europe channels."

This sounds great. Your book could be sold by Barnes and Nobles, or in independent bookstores. But there is one major downside to choosing this option. Create Space only provides the option to choose one overall price for all five channels. Listing your book at

$9.99 on Amazon may provide a couple of dollars in royalties but it may not be enough to cover costs on the Expanded Distribution channels. Which means you would have to raise the price of your paperback on Amazon to cover costs on other channels. 

When I published my book "Io Hunter and the Guardians of Aldernar," I chose to avoid Expanded Distribution. My reason for doing so was to ensure my paperback price was in line with similar titles. My book would attract a lot of the same types of readers who like the Harry Potter series. As I type this, the paperback version of "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is $8.29. Yet to appear on Expanded Distribution, I would have to price my book at $12.99, almost $5 more. By avoiding Expanded Distribution, I can list it for $9.99. And if I had chosen to list it at $12.99 for Expanded Distribution, I would have made a royalty of only $0.06 per book. This may not be a big concern for established indie authors who already have a reader base. But if you're publishing your first book, it is something to think about.

Should you limit your distribution options to have a lower list price, or choose to have more distribution options at a higher price? There are pros and cons to whichever option you choose. If your book is picked up by libraries and bookstores that could be great for your writing career. And it could make up for any lost sales on Amazon due to having a higher price. However, there's no guarantee your book will be picked up by these distribution channels. As is often the case, you have to make a decision without knowing what the future holds. You have to decide what's right for you. Think about who your audience is and how much they may be willing to pay. 

If net neutrality repeal worries you, ad-blockers should too

In 2015, App developer Marco Arment pulled his wildly popular ad-blocking app from the Apple app store for this reason.

"Ad blockers come with an important asterisk: while they do benefit a ton of people in major ways, they also hurt some, including many who don’t deserve the hit."

Many people who use ad-blockers may not even consider the fact that someone is getting hurt. They may just think ads are annoying, and possibly harmful, and here's a handy app or browser extension that will get rid of them. They may never consider the ramifications for content creators, especially smaller creators. When people put content, written or video, on the web whether that's news articles, educational tutorials, how-to's, or entertainment, they often do so with an expectation of being able to make money. Writing and researching an article, or making and editing a video, can take several hours. Creators put in time and money to provide something of value (and it is something of value if large numbers of people consume it) with the expectation they will get paid for their investment. Many, especially independent creators, get paid from ad revenue. When people use ad-blockers they are in a sense robbing a creator of potential income. 

Some compare it to music or movie pirating in the sense that people are trying to get something for nothing. And if people want content for nothing, we could reach a point where creators have no incentive to create. A counter-argument is that many people don't click on ads anyway. If someone wouldn't click on ads, how are they stealing from a creator? It's a little like the argument that a record label doesn't lose money if someone downloads an album they wouldn't have bought. Of course, a counter-argument to that argument is that many people who would have clicked ads will never see them if they're using ad-blockers. And ad revenue isn't always based on clicks. Many websites make revenue based on impressions. So even if someone doesn't click on an ad or even look at it, the creator is still getting paid just because the ad is there when the page loads. 

There are some valid criticisms of advertisers in this. Some use very intrusive methods like pop up ads to get people's attention. Or video ads that slow page loading times. Even worse, some ads engage in phishing or spoofing. Some may argue that it's not immoral to use an ad-blocker because intrusive ads are themselves immoral. An advertiser is opening up content on someone else's computer that they didn't ask for. Or an ad is trying to deceive them in some way. Still non-intrusive or legitimate ads can fall victim when these "immoral" or "unethical" ads are blocked by frustrated website users.

The Investopedia article "This Is How Adblocker Hurts Your Favorite Websites" points out some valid reasons to be wary of ad-blocking. 

"Ads are the bread and butter for websites. They pay for the website’s infrastructure, operations, content and the payments to associated staff."

The article states that there's an implicit deal between the website and the visitor. The website provides free content. The visitor sees ads in exchange for getting access to that free content. When a visitor uses an ad-blocker they aren't living up to their side of the deal. Just like if a customer at a restaurant doesn't pay their waiter or waitress a tip. Legally they don't have to but that's how the waitstaff make their living. They're hurt financially when customers refuse to live up to their side of the deal. Big businesses can afford to pay ad-blocking companies to ensure their ads continue to show up on the web. But smaller independent operations may have no choice but to shut down. Big companies can afford to beat the system, while smaller players get hurt.

Ad-blockers can go beyond harming creators. Take music blogs as an example. Indie artists or musicians trying to get their careers off the ground have a hard time getting into major publications like Rolling Stone and Billboard. They often depend on smaller websites or blogs that focus on the indie music scene to get exposure. If these sites can't afford to operate due to a lack of ad revenue, these lesser known musicians may have a difficult time reaching listeners.

Appealing to morality or ethics may not be the best way to get users of ad-blockers to reconsider their decision. Appealing to common sense and practicality might. Your favorite musicians will have no incentive to make music if fans don't buy their music in some form, your favorite authors will have no incentive to write books if readers aren't willing to pay for them, and movies studios will have little incentive to make the movies you watch if people won't buy movie theater tickets, DVDs, or digital movies. More people are becoming aware of this simple fact. Wanting something for nothing may lead to a situation where nothing they want will be available. The same could happen with the Internet. 

According to a 2017 survey by PageFair "US ad-blocking usage is 40 percent on laptops, 15 percent on mobile." Think about all the advertising revenue that is lost to creators. Some critics of ad-blockers fear that if they become too widespread, they could lead to creators finding other lines of work. Websites and forums may have no choice but to shut down or put their content behind paywalls. Bigger websites will likely survive by charging for access. Advertisers will also resort to deceptive methods like advertising “dressed up” as news content. People will think they are reading an objective news article when they are in fact reading an ad. Sure, some people who read this may respond by saying "It's my computer. I can do what I want with it. Websites need to change, not me." But the reality is any change will likely end up costing that user more money to access the content they want to see. Most people would prefer to deal with ads that cost them nothing than subscription fees. As consumers of content, we may at some point be forced to choose between seeing ads or paying to access our favorite websites.

Many Americans were riled up when the FCC repealed Net Neutrality, fearing that repeal could be the end of a free and open Internet. Yet many who protested that decision likely use ad-blockers, unaware that they could also lead to the end of a free and open Internet. So, what can be done about this? 

Creators should be making as much noise about this as the music industry did about piracy. Most users of ad-blockers have no idea this is a problem because no one is telling them. YouTube creators have been outspoken about YouTube ‘Adpocalypse’ and some of their fans have responded by supporting them through Patreon. Many people will try to help if they know there’s a problem. 

Websites can deal with this problem by using ad-blocker detection and only allow access to content if ad-blocker is disabled. Or they can ask visitors to white-list their site to gain access to it. If you're concerned about this issue but also feel there are legitimate reasons to keep your ad-blocker, consider white-listing sites you frequently visit and trust. If you find an article, tutorial, or video that you thought was useful, white-list it to support the creator.

The Black Panther movie character is not named after a political group

The Black Panther movie, set for release on February 16, 2018, has been receiving some backlash from people who complain that the character is named after a terrorist group. They're referring to the Black Panther Party, a group founded by Huey P. Newton in 1966. That was the same year the Black Panther character was published by Marvel Comics. But the character wasn't named after Newton's Black Panther Party. Vulture called it "one of those weird historical overlaps with zero real significance."

The Black Panther comic book character made his first appearance in July 1966 in the Fantastic Four #52. The creators originally considered calling him The Coal Tiger. Marvel attempted to distance the character from the Black Panther Party, which often engaged in violent confrontations with police. For a time, the character was just called The Panther and then renamed the Black Leopard to avoid association with the controversial group. However, neither name caught on. 

Easy and free ways to increase your Twitter followers

Starting out on Twitter can seem overwhelming. You have no followers, or just a few if you have some friends and relatives who follow you. So, how can you get your numbers up? These are a few free and easy things you can try.

Create a Good Bio
This is very important. People will be less likely to follow you if they have no idea what your account is about. I didn't put any focus on my bio when I first signed up with Twitter. I basically just said "I follow back." When I updated my bio to promote my book "Io Hunter and the Guardians of Aldernar" I experienced a sizable increase in followers.

Look for Relevant Hashtags
This can be challenging at first as you learn to find your way around Twitter. Hashtags can be a great way to find people to follow. For example, as a writer I often use the #amwriting hashtag to find tweets that are of interest to me. I check who likes or retweets those tweets. If someone has an about even number of followers and following, I'll follow them and see if they follow back. If they don't I unfollow. I've got a lot of new followers this way. But this is helpful in another way. A lot of other people are doing the same thing. If you retweet or like a tweet, your account bio will be visible to any who checks who is liking or retweeting that particular tweet. Some of those people may choose to follow you.

Always Follow Back*
Many people who follow you will unfollow if you don't follow them back. Your goal should be to get as much exposure for your tweets as possible. The more followers you have the more exposure you get. So, hold onto people who follow you by reciprocating. You can always unfollow people who stop following you or who become inactive on Twitter.

* Bots will follow you. Don't follow them back. It can sometimes be hard to distinguish bots from real people. Look for articles with tips on what to look for.

Tweet Relevant Content and Use Hashtags
If you would like to attract certain kinds of followers, tweet out content that would be interesting to them. And use hashtags to target them. For example, I love the Star Wars movies, so I'll often tweet Star Wars related articles or videos. I'll use hashtags like #StarWars and #TheLastJedi, so that people can find my tweets.

Interact with Others
Like tweets, retweet tweets, respond to tweets. Make yourself someone who is worth following.

Use Twitter Following Tools like Twiends
I have another post on the tool Twiends that goes into details on the pros and cons of this service. Check it out at A Review of the Twiends free Twitter followers tool. Be careful with these tools. Make sure they aren't violating Twitters Terms of Service (ToS) before you sign up.

A list of music streaming alternatives to Spotify and Apple Music

Apple Music and Spotify are by far the most popular music streaming services. Apple Music has 30 million subscribers, while Spotify has 70 million. But they aren't the only options available. Many other streaming services are smaller with perhaps a few million subscribers. Since they offer similar features for similar prices and most offer free trials, they're worth checking out.

Most music streaming options are similarly priced. An individual plan is usually $9.99 a month. Most offer family plans for up to six members for $14.99. Many also offer student accounts for $4.99.

Amazon Music Unlimited - Includes tens of millions of songs that are ad-free with unlimited skips and the ability to download for offline listening. This is an excellent value for Amazon Prime subscribers at just $7.99 a month. Most similar services are $9.99.

Deezer - Listen without limits, no ads, and download for offline listening. The family plan comes with a kids-only profile. Tidal is not the only option for HiFi. Deezer also offers lossless quality.

Google Play Music - 40 million songs on demand, ad-free radio with unlimited skips, download to listen offline, and upload up to 50,000 of your own songs. Google Play Music is an excellent value because it includes YouTube Red, which offers video downloads for offline viewing.

Microsoft Groove Music - Formerly Xbox Music and Zune Music. You can listen on PC, tablet, Xbox, the web, and mobile phones, and use OneDrive to bring tunes into Groove and then listen on Xbox, the web, tablet, and your smartphone.

Napster - Formerly Rhapsody. Millions of songs, no ads, download any song to listen offline, stream music from your phone, computer and home audio devices.

Pandora Premium - The radio streaming service has launched its own full service option that allows users to search and play any song, create playlists, download for offline listening, and enjoy unlimited skips and replays. Ad free.

Tidal - Offers both standard sound quality and Lossless High Fidelity sound quality. Also offers high definition music videos, and expertly curated editorial.

A Review of the Twiends free Twitter followers tool

When I first set up my Twitter account @io_tweeted to promote my book Io Hunter and the Guardians of Aldernar, I struggled to get followers. After two weeks I had maxed out at 11, gaining a couple, then losing a couple. So, I turned to Twiends, which offers to "Grow Your Twitter Followers Responsibly Free." It's easy to sign up for Twiends. Just sign up using your Twitter account. 

When I first signed up for Twiends, I expected to be able to follow people based on similar

interests. As a new indie author, I wanted to follow other self published authors, readers, and creators of all kinds. But the site isn't really laid out that way. I ended up following a lot of people with random interests and people with random interests followed me. But that was fine. All kinds of people read books, so it worked for me.

At first Twiends was great. For every person I followed, I tended to get a follower. That often wasn't the person I had followed though. Many people never followed me back. I didn't want to end up in a situation where I was following hundreds of people but only getting followed by dozens. To prevent that kind of imbalance, I started unfollowing people who never followed me back. I didn't realize at the time that Twiends was penalizing me for doing that.

"The more connections you drop the less reliable you are as a someone to connect with. We prioritise the twiends experience for those users who are the most reliable. You can of course unfollow whoever you want (especially if you don't like their tweets), but if your drop rate becomes high then your own exposure will decline." - https://twiends.com/chartinfo#ratio

When my ratio dropped, I no longer got followers. I followed new accounts but because I was getting less exposure for dropping people who didn't follow me back, I didn't get new follows. This ended up being a big downside of the service. If Twiends determined reliability by focusing on reciprocal followers, well I'm at 100%. I continue to follow everyone who follows me. I unfollow people who don't follow back, or who initially followed me but then unfollowed. That puts me at 46%, making me unreliable in the eyes of Twiends. For me, there's no longer any point in using the service because it's unlikely I'll be given any exposure.

Still, Twiends was good for building up my initial count, so I don't regret using it. I went from being stuck at 11 followers to reaching 45 in a week. That might not seem like much but it can help a new account get off the ground. And about 90% of those accounts still follow me. Twiends also has a paid service where you are guaranteed exposure. They have a one week free trial for $1.

How to create a 6 x 9 document in Google Docs for self published books

You're a new independent author getting ready to upload your first self published paperback book to CreateSpace or Kindle KDP. Then you see something unexpected. You need to upload a PDF but the recommended size for a novel is 6 x 9, 5.5 x 8.5, 5.25 x 8, 5.06 x 7.81, or 5 x 8. You check out Page Layout in Google Docs. Not only do they not offer these sizes but they don't offer a custom size either. Luckily there is a very easy way to customize sizes using a Google Docs add on. 

See How to Create a 6 x 9 Document for Self-Published Books in Google Docs for instructions on how to do this.

How does The Last Jedi compare critically with other Star Wars movies?

There are two major websites that aggregate critical reviews of movies. Rotten Tomatoes uses a simple thumbs up and thumbs down to determine if a movie is rotten or fresh. Metacritic is similar to grades in school. A movie can receive a Metascore from 0 to 100. A Metascore above 81 is critically acclaimed, between 61 and 80 is positive, 40 and 60 is mixed, and anything below 40 is negative. This is how the movies in the Star Wars franchise rank on both Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic.

Rotten Tomatoes Ranking:

• The Empire Strikes Back - 94%
• A New Hope - 93%
• The Force Awakens - 93%
• The Last Jedi - 92%
• Rogue One - 85%
• Return of the Jedi - 80%
• Revenge of the Sith - 79%
• Attack of the Clones - 66%
• The Phantom Menace - 56% (Certified Rotten)

Metacritic Ranking:

• A New Hope - 92% (Critically Acclaimed)
• The Last Jedi - 86% (Critically Acclaimed)
• The Empire Strikes Back - 81% (Critically Acclaimed)
• The Force Awakens - 81% (Critically Acclaimed)
• Revenge of the Sith - 68% (Positive)
• Rogue One - 65% (Positive)
• Attack of the Clones - 54% (Mixed)
• Return of the Jedi - 53% (Mixed)
• The Phantom Menace - 51% (Mixed)

The Last Jedi ranks fourth on Rotten Tomatoes but second on Metacritic.

Self published book is too expensive on CreateSpace and Kindle KDP

So you've decided to self publish a novel, a children's book, or a nonfiction book and you want to make it available as a paperback as well as an ebook. But after uploading your file to CreateSpace or Kindle KDP to create a print version, you get a massive shock. You would have to price your book at close to $20 or perhaps more to make a profit with all distribution methods.

Both Create Space and KDP offer only one pricing option. A book published at this price may make you a profit in one area but a loss in another. As an example, a book listed at $12.99 may provide a $2 royalty on US Amazon but zero on Japan's Amazon. The same can be true with CreateSpace. That $12.99 might get you a couple of dollars in royalties from US Amazon but lose $1.50 on Expanded Distribution.

To earn a royalty, you may have to price your book way above similar titles, which won't be good for sales. Self published authors are already at a disadvantage compared to big publishing houses, which mass produce hard covers and paperbacks. Create Space and Amazon KDP offer print on demand or POD. This means that a title only gets printed when it's ordered. That raises production costs.

So how can you go about bringing down the production cost? The cost is based on the number of pages and on whether the book is black and white or color. Reducing your font size is one great way to cut costs. When I first uploaded my book "Io Hunter and the Guardians of Aldernar," it was 524 pages because I had used a 14 pt Times New Roman font. That size made it easier for me to constantly reread and edit my manuscript. But I would have had to price it at an insanely high $18.99. I was able to get the price down to a more realistic price of $9.99 by reducing the font to 11 pt Times New Roman. That brought my page count to 338.

If you're writing a book with lots of pictures, especially color, consider reducing your costs by increasing the size of your book. Novels and works of fiction are generally no more than 6x9. But nonfiction works like recipe books or educational books for children can be larger. Play around with different sizes until you get to a realistic price. You can also play around with reducing image sizes as well.

CreateSpace has a handy tool that will let you approximate your production cost. Choose whether you want black and white or color, the size of your book, and the number of pages. Enter a price at which you would like to sell your book and see how much you would make in royalties.

How Rolling Stone's top 20 albums of 2017 fared with critics

Rolling Stone released their annual top 50 albums of 2017. This is the top 20 along with the album's Metacritic score, which shows how well each album was received by critics. A score of 80 or above indicates the album was critically acclaimed. A score from 61 to 79 indicates the album was positively received.

20. SZA - Ctrl
Ctrl has a Metascore of 86, a big improvement over her previous release Z, which had a score of 66.

19. Father John Misty - Pure Comedy
Metascore 85. All Father John Misty releases have scores in the mid 80's 

18. St. Vincent - MASSEDUCTION
Metascore 88. St. Vincent's lowest score is still an impressive 78. 

17. Harry Styles - Harry Styles 
Metascore 68. This is a pretty low score for top 20 on a best of list. It's positive but 13 points away from critically acclaimed.

16. Margo Price - All American Made
Metascore 82. Her previous album has a score of 86.

15. Courtney Barnett and Kurt Vile - Lotta Sea Lice 
Metascore 79. Courtney's previous album has a score of 88. Kurt's albums have ranged from 59 to 83. 

14. Waxahatchee - Out in the Storm 
Metascore 80. Previous albums were 81 and 79.

13. Randy Newman - Dark Matter
Metascore 82. Previous releases were 81 and 86. 

12. JAY Z - 4:44 
Metascore 82. That's a big improvement over a previous score of 60. Jay Z's scores have been very mixed with some in the 60's and others in the 80's. His career average is a respectable 74. 

11. The National - Sleep Well Beast
Metascore 85. Other than a score of 78, all of The National's albums are critically acclaimed.

10. Sam Smith - The Thrill of It All 
Metascore 72. This is another that I'm surprised to see so high on the list because it's critical reception was decent. 

9. Migos - Culture 
Metascore 79. That's a big improvement over a previous score of only 67. 

8. Queens of the Stone Age - Villains 
Metascore 81. The band's scores range from 75 to 89.

7. Taylor Swift - Reputation
Metascore 71. That's a decent score but the album likely made it this high on the list because Taylor's is such a big name. It's her most poorly received album critically. Her highest scores are two 77's.

6. Khalid - American Teen
No Metascore. The album didn't receive enough reviews from major publications to receive

a score. But considering the success he's having, his next album will likely have one.

5. LCD Soundsystem - American Dream
Metascore 86. Other than a score of 75, all of LCD Soundsystem's albums have been critically acclaimed.

4. Kesha - Rainbow
Metascore 81. Previous two releases were in the low 70's.

3. U2 - Songs of Experience 
Metascore 77. U2's albums range from 64 to 90. 

2. Lorde - Melodrama 
Metascore 91. Lorde managed to top her debut Pure Heroine, which scored 79, by 12 points.

1. Kendrick Lamar - DAMN
Metascore 95. Kendrick has had three albums with scores in the 90's and two in the 80's. His career score is a very impressive 90.

The Star Wars movies ordered by critical reception

In just a few weeks, we'll know how well the new Star Wars movie The Last Jedi will be received by critics. Reactions to other movies from the franchise have been mixed based on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic scores. These two major aggregaters of movie reviews use a different approach.

Rotten Tomatoes uses a simple thumbs up and thumbs down to determine if a movie is rotten or fresh. Metacritic is similar to grades in school. A movie can receive a Metascore from 0 to 100. A Metascore above 81 is critically acclaimed, between 61 and 80 is positive, 40 and 60 is mixed, and anything below 40 is negative. This is how the movies in the Star Wars franchise rank on both Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic.

Rotten Tomatoes Ranking:

• The Empire Strikes Back - 94%
• A New Hope - 93%
• The Force Awakens - 93%
• Rogue One - 85%
• Return of the Jedi - 80%
• Revenge of the Sith - 79%
• Attack of the Clones - 66%
• The Phantom Menace - 56% (Certified Rotten)

Metacritic Ranking:

• A New Hope - 92% (Critically Acclaimed)
• The Empire Strikes Back - 81% (Critically Acclaimed)
• The Force Awakens - 81% (Critically Acclaimed)
• Revenge of the Sith - 68% (Positive)
• Rogue One - 65% (Positive)
• Attack of the Clones - 54% (Mixed)
• Return of the Jedi - 53% (Mixed)
• The Phantom Menace - 51% (Mixed)

The top 3 movies are the same for both although the positions for the Empire Strikes Back and A New Hope are flipped. Revenge of the Sith beats Rogue One and Return of the Jedi on Metacritic but is behind them on Rotten Tomatoes. The Phantom Menace trails the movie above it by a whole 10 points on Rotten Tomatoes but by just two points on Metacritic. On Rotten Tomatoes 7 of the 8 movies were positively received with a fresh certification. But only 5 out of 8 were positively received on Metacritic. We'll find out soon where The Last Jedi will be in both rankings.