worse than mediocre – NY Times

A recent diatribe in response to a NY Times piece about Amazon’s Kindle Unlimited program:

Although the article focused on the problems with Kindle Unlimited (which I agree is grossly unfair to self-published authors) what really stood out for me was the claim that the last few years have been a ‘golden age” for writers. In my opinion, for readers, it’s been anything but.

As more and more decide they can “write”, quality plummets. And if you have a large social media platform, the chances of your sloppy, abysmal work gaining a following, becoming a bestseller, and getting hundreds of “OMG, this is SO GOOD!!!!!!!!!!” five star reviews is great. Which enables really bad writers to continue putting out really bad books. What also happens is you have a whole generation of readers who are never exposed to truly great storytelling and interesting, unique characters, and potential writers who hold up this bad work as the standard to aspire to.

How is that a “golden age”?

I have no idea what Amazon will do with Kindle Unlimited. Truth is, I don’t think they care. What I’m more concerned with is returning to the time when books were good and hacks who were slightly worse than mediocre weren’t applauded and rewarded.

Jonathan Winn

author of Martuk the Holy: Proseuche

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s