Defacing Books: Why don't Authors Have Respect for their End Result?
Saturday, April 17, 2010 
Post by Irene Watson
Did you just hear someone scream? Yes, that was me! Why? Because I'm looking at a stack of books that just came into this office for potential review and some of them have been defaced. By defaced I mean:
*"Review Copy" stamped or written on the cover, inside the book, and/or on the ends
*"Not for Sale" written across the front cover or inside the book
I have yet to get an answer to my question: Why would a proud author, that just published his or her book, deface their pride-and-joy? Is it because:
They have a fear someone (reviewer) will sell their book ?
They feel if they deface it, then the person may actually buy a copy?
An expert in the industry told them to put "review copy" on the book?
Good grief! Why would anyone, that spent hundreds of hours and finally getting to the stage of opening up that first case of books, smelling the newly printed ink, running their hand over the smooth and shiny cover, immediately take a book out and deface it? This is the birth of a baby, and what do we do with a new born baby? We nurture it. We are proud of it. We handle it with care. Would these same people, when the new (human) baby arrives, take a thick sharpie and make a big "x" on the forehead so that no one will steal the baby? Doubtful. So, why do these same people, after birthing their book, deface it?
We, as reviewers, feel if the author has no respect for their own book, then why should we give it any consideration either. They want a free review, no, some actually some demand a free review, yet, they send us a product that has been defaced. I just don't get it.
By the way, some even make "secret" marks on specific pages before they send them out to reviewers, and when they see their book being sold on amazon.com by a re-seller they order it to see who is actually selling their book. Good grief! Is there so much distrust and anger by the author that he or she takes much time and effort to prove the "I told you so" theory? And then what? Just more wallowing in the self-proven theory. I propose the time and effort be spent in another place, e.g. volunteering in the community to make it a better place to live.
To address the selling of the books a little further, I have to say that yes, some reviewers do sell the books. This is a recent excerpt from a self-publishing forum:
According to an email I received from Midwest boss Jim Cox, the reason Midwest wants finished/final copies is that the reviewers "get paid" with books that they can sell after writing the reviews.
Michael N. Marcus
-- author of "Become a Real Self-Publisher: Don't be a Victim of a Vanity Press
Yes, it is known in the industry that some reviewers do sell the books. In our case, most of the reviewers keep the books in their personal library. They take pride in the book they reviewed, especially if the book is autographed. As well, we donate books to local libraries, charities, and Books For Soldiers. Defaced books cannot be used and are thrown away. What a shame. A soldier in Afghanistan would have appreciated some reading material after a long day in the desert, or, an abused wife in the local women's shelter could have used the book as an escape from her battered reality. Instead, the defaced book gets recycled and either hits the landfill or, hopefully, is used to make another book.
My puzzlement continues. I don't get it. Why do authors deface their books and expect us, as reviewers, to give them consideration when they themselves don't show respect?
What are your thoughts? I want to hear from you.
Reader Comments (25)
Although I myself have not had any of my books "defaced" with stamps or otherwise in the way you cite, and I have personally given away over 13,000 copies of my books, I can see why some authors do it.
I have had the displeasure of actually having book store owners and book store workers return autographed copies of my books (which I gave to them) to my distributors for a refund.
Get this: The complimentary book is autographed and made out to them and they return it for a credit to my distributor even though they didn't pay anything for it. Talk about sleazy, wouldn't you say?
So, yes, I can see why authors do what you cite as defacing even though I have never done it.
They do it because there are people both in the media and the bookstore industry with a lack of integrity, class, or excellence.
Of course, I don't deface my books because I know that these people never actually attain true success in their lives. Anyone who thinks they can get ahead by selling books or returning them for credits operates at a very low level of intention with absolutely no creativity and end up getting what they deserve in life. Their own poverty consciousness keeps them poverty stricken, financially and/or psychologically, for most of their lives.
So, perhaps you are right, the authors don't really have to "deface' their books.
Ernie Zelinski
The Creativity Guy Too Prosperous to Do Mornings
Author of How to Retire Happy, Wild, and Free
(Over 120,000 copies Sold and Published in 9 Languages)
and The Joy of Not Working
(Over 240,000 copies Sold and Published in 17 Languages)
I do understand Ernie's point, and why some authors/publishers might cringe at the eventual fate of their comp copies, especially when the book has not been published yet. Advance reading copies of my books have a small box printed on the back cover which says 'Advance Reading Copy--Not for Resale'. In this case, the book has not yet been published. We wouldn't want copies sold--the books are not in final form. There is no distributor involved yet.
HOWEVER, I don't care what the reviewer does with them--he/she can keep them or give them away. If the book is already in print, the reviewer is free to sell it or whatever. I really don't care. It's not as if we're talking about 'flooding the market' here.
I've provided tons of comp copies--it's part of the cost of doing business. And y'know what? Oh, well. I'd rather see those comps in good condition, finding new homes in libraries or women's shelters or wherever, than thrown out because I scrawled all over the front covers.
What's a reviewer supposed to do with books he/she receives--keep them forever? I know and understand the time and effort required in reading a book for review and then crafting that review. Trust me...my time is worth FAR more than the cover price of that book!
Professional reviewers are paid by the publisher who employs them (NYT, Kirkus, Washington Post, etc.). The kind folks who work for ReaderViews (and others like them) are paid a small fee for their effort, and they probably get to keep the book, too. Wow! Makes me want to quit MY day job, that's for sure.
I have piles of books which have been sent by fellow authors hoping for reviews from me. I've read some and reviewed them, I've started others and declined. They take up space and I probably won't read/finish them, but I keep them anyway because the writers loved them even if I didn't. I have been known to pass some of them on to friends I believe will enjoy them. My logic may be flawed, but apparently I am showing more respect to some authors' books than they do. Now there's some flawed logic! I'll tell you one thing; if a writer solicits a review from me and sends a copy that has been defaced, I'll probably send it back. I would find that insulting. Would I scrawl all over my gorgeous covers with a black El Marko? I think I might chew off my own hand first.
When we send out books as comps, that's what they are. There should be no strings attached to the 'privilege' of reading and reviewing my books--and there aren't any. We knew the job was dangerous when we took it. Sleazy is as sleazy does.
I don't know what my RV reviewer did with my three books, but if they turn up used on Amazon, well, someone will love them. That's what counts for me.
www.elfhunter.net
I guess my drummer is a different one. I don't care if a reviewer sells a copy of my book (it's not like it's part of Tut's treasures) or gives it away or whatever. I give away lots of copies of my books, to reviewers, to friends, to those who want to read them but can't afford them, to use as "doorprizes" for various worthy events, all kinds of reasons. I don't care about e-book piracy, either. I got an email from a young man who admitted frankly he'd downloaded one of my books illegally - but he also told me he'd been contemplating suicide and he put that off for a while. How could I begrudge him the book? I sent him another one free. For me, it's all about people reading my books. That's a big part of why I write them.
But I respect the right of other authors to see it differently. I know, and the Lord knows, that one of me is enough.
Victor
Irene,
As a writer and a book collector I would never deliberately damage a book but I completely understand why an author would stamp "Review Copy" or the like on a book. Within weeks of publication of my novel, Houses, there were multiple copies of my book, undercutting Amazon's and the publisher's price, described as "new." Most of these copies had been requested by reviewers. In some cases, I was able to trace the request to the Amazon seller's address. I see this practice as unethical and an affront to legitimate reviewers. I find myself wondering if many so-called book reviewers aren't simply stocking their used book business. I don't see why a legitimate reviewer, particularly one who is being paid, should mind a copy stamped to indicate its purpose: for reviewing or reading, not reselling.
I'm not an author, but I know authors and record companies send out promo copies. These promo copies are not supposed to be re-sold, but since people have abused the system and have re-sold the books/records, the authors or their publishers have found a way to make sure the books can't be resold.
One of my good friends worked for a big publisher before she retired, and the salespeople were told to tear the covers off the books before throwing them away.
Economically, the first book costs a lot to print. Each addtion after the first takes pennies to print.
My opinion is: If you're giving away a book, it's free advertising to you. Might as well make it look pretty!
Although it is wonderful to sell books, my primary purpose in writing is to share the story. So I, like many of the other authors posting comments here, give away, donate, and send out comp copies at my own expense. It feels like Karma - if I share freely, it will come back to me. I would not think of defacing my own books to somehow protect them from distribution. Distribution is the whole point - the more people who read the book and talk about it to others, the greater the likelihood that others will actually buy the book.
I work through publishers, so I do not mark books myself, but I believe the reason publishers put marks on remainder books and on review copies is because books are one of the few products that are always fully refundable. (A tradition that started to help risk averse book stores during the Great Depression.)
A publisher/author may be happy to give out lots of review copies, and is probably not that worried about seeing them sold as used books on Amazon or somewhere else. (Incidentally, when I was a newspaper reporter, we were not allowed to keep books/products sent for review because of the idea that it might be considered some kind of influence on the content. They were kept by the newspaper and sold at a special sale before Christmas with proceeds going to charity.)
What I believe publishers really worried about is having complimentary or deep discounted copies returned as new copies for a full refund, essentially in that case, they're not only giving away a free book but paying the person who returns it the cost of the book as well.
I believe homeless people or soldiers in Afghanistan would still appreciate a copy of a book with "review copy" stamped in it, and I would not hesitate to donate the book to a worthy organization because of such a stamp.
Irene,
I'm with you. Defacing a book sent to a reviewer seems self-defeating. It's like saying "I don't think you would actually buy this book, so I'm not going to let you resell it either. So there! But give me a good review, please." Makes no sense to me.
When I sent autographed copies of "'Life's a Bitch. So am I.' Rachel Cord, P.I." out to reviewers, all I was sure of was that someone was going to read it. If it got reviewed--like the wonderful one Cherie Fisher did for Reader Views--then that was great. If not, that's part of doing business. And if the reviewer wants to pass it on by selling it or giving it away. That's okay, too. It means more readers, and somewhere down the line more readers mean more sales.
And I'll be doing the same again when "Rachel Cord, PI--'Still a Bitch'" comes out next month.
R.E.Conary
This is a curious subject. Speaking as a reviewer it is not one that I had given much thought to. I for one keep all of the books I receive and would never dream of selling them. Many are autographed and I think it would be a huge disservice to sell them. So from my perspective it really does not bother me if it is stamped 'Review Copy' or anything else.
Irene,
For years, authors have been reading classic self-publishing books such as those by Dan Poynter, as well as other "how to promote your book" books, which explain in detail how to create and send review copies. Many of these practices, which go back to more traditional publishing days, should be outmoded, but as long as authors see these kinds of instructions as the norm, they will likely keep doing it. Having been on a small publishers listserve for many years, I have also seen discussions and heard details about many publishers who do early printings with special review covers. Again, these practices were always considered as professional by the bigs, so the little guys follow suit to imitate what they believe to be the norm.
On these lists, I've also heard many a new author lament, as if a major catastrophe had struck, when they see a used copy of their book for sale online. They are shocked beyond belief that the prized copy they donated to the library has been decommissioned or that cousin Janet found no need to hold and cherish her volume. (These same people thought nothing of sharing a copy of a novel they enjoyed with a friend or family member.)
While fraud can be found and some authors do occasionally fall victim to it, I think it would be good policy for us to do away with the stickers and other defacings. Does an author/small publisher really believe that the lost of income from these handfuls of their books will make or break them? Can they not see that every time their book changes hands and is read that it is yet one more golden opportunity to make that reader a fan? And who knows which fan may be the very one who has the power to pass on the good word through a large list, via an important blog, or to a radio or TV host? In such a case, the cost of that one book may be priceless in the return it brings.
As in many other things today in our society, we often overlook the big picture and become intensely focused on the minute details. I agree that it is time to stop the defacing and see these books for the possible promotional tools that they are. As for me, when I give a book I often say, when you are done reading it, pass it on to someone else.
Great comments and thoughts, everyone. I hadn't considered some of the notions you've mentioned.
Dear Ms. Watson,
The title of your editorial surprised me. Saying that an author defaces his or her book is just like saying that a mother defaces her child. No author does that or, at least, should not.
In reality, most of the books reviewers receive originate from publishers. And publishers are businesses that do not appreciate free for-review copies entering the secondary market and hurting genuine sales.
Therefore, the target of your comments should be the publishers and why do they deface for-review books, and generally not the authors themselves. As you states, “some reviewers do sell the books”, sometimes without even reviewing the book they got for free.
I fully agree, books should not be defaced, ever.
Rodrigue Tremblay,
Author of “The Code for Global Ethics” (Prometheus Books: 978-1616141721).
There are advance copies of my book circulating that I really didn't want resold because they are unedited. These advance copies are not defaced, but they do have a clear message on the title page that the unedited book is not for resale. These 100 copies were printed for the reviewers so I could get books into their hands with plenty of lead time (it takes months to get some reviews back) while I was improving the work.
Many of the advance copies of my book on stem cell research were sent to experts in the field to get their feedback, make sure I had quoted them correctly, and that the information was factual. Not only did the publisher leave out 25 pages of my bibliography in the advance copy, the tone of the final book was softened quite a bit. One passionate expert committed to the cause and volunteered to edit the entire book, so I’d say probably 15 percent of the text in the final version is different from the advance copy.
It’s hard for me to refer to my advance copies as babies—especially since I produce (either through editing or ghosting for clients, or writing my own material) about eight or more books per year.
I hope reviewers will honor my request that these copies not be resold, but I have no control over what happens to them once they leave my hands. If donated to a local library, there's a good chance the books would never see any shelf time because of the scrutiny and evaluation process that donated books go through. An advance copy would probably be trashed or re-donated.
I don't have a problem with other titles of my books being donated to charity. It's better for a person who has suicidal tendencies to read an unedited copy of MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE, True Stories About Death, Dying, and Afterlife than to not be helped by the information it contains. My first book, EMAIL EPISODES, A Hilariously Honest Look at Life was written before I had experience as an editor, but the book is so freaking funny it still cracks me up to this day even though it is full of typos. Regardless, I would prefer the advance copies of RIGHT TO RECOVER, Winning the Political and Religious Wars over Stem Cell Research in America be trashed.
Books are not babies; they are stacks of paper bound together with glue for ease of reading and transportation. To me, they are the output of doing business. Even so, they are an emblem of the hard work, time, energy, and love that created them.
Am I being too hard-nosed about this?
I'm not an author...yet! Hope to be soon.
I only keep books I think I'll read again and that includes books as gifts or for review. The only exception is if the book is from a friend and/or inscribed with a specific message.
I've been given many books to review. I've only kept a small percent in my personal library because I really enjoyed the book or thought one of my kids might.
I've given books to my local library, friends and family and used a few for giveaways on my blog.
I have also sold a couple online. They weren't ARC's and weren't signed so I didn't feel tooooo guilty. But I did a little bit.
I'm going to look into donating more to the Books for Soldiers and local shelters.
Thank you for a new and refreshing perspective. I certainly can see your point of view and as others have said and I repeat, that when a book is sent out the author should let it go with no attachments. Who knows who will pick it up and read it and the book just might make a difference in another's life.
I would suggest that the solution to the "review copy" issue is simple. Change your policy to that of the Midwest Book Review. They state specifically that they will NOT review any book sent to them that is so marked, or that's an advance review copy.
That said, I think it's likely there will be complaints is you do that, since RV charges for reviews. The mindset among authors is that if they pay for a review, the reviewer is ethically bound not to sell the review copy. This spills over into the book blog community, where the majority adhere to that code--they donate the copies to local libraries or other charities. The reasoning is that a review copy is the property of the publisher NOT the reviewer, and that therefore the reviewer can't sell it.
As for booksellers returning review copies for credit, the returns system has long outlived its usefulness and needs to be eliminated, for many reasons including this particular abuse. And, if you think about it, it's really no different whether the stock was sent as a review copy or ordered--the bookseller didn't pay for either one.
Irene,
During the last months of editing before "Confessions of a Trauma Junkie" was released, I went to bed every night picturing the book's cover in my head, imagining the weight of it in my hands, yearning to smell that freshly-printed ink on the pages that represented my soul. It was indeed my child, reflected in the cover art chosen for the book (the child within and the birth of the book!). I only inscribe copies that are given to friends or purchased with the expressed request for autograph (it is an option on the book order page). Some people are purists and don't want anything written in their books.
When I buy a book, I dog-ear pages, write notes in the back, underline parts that have special meaning to me. There are some books I will re-read, anxious to review what I underlined or wrote. But those are MY books to do with as I choose; it would seem rude to mark a book I'm giving away for promotion or as a gift.
I understand the frustration of those who double-pay for their own books because of the bad behavior of others (returning books not purchased). People will always find a way to 'beat the system' if that is their personality and character, and 'you can't fix stupid'. I sold a book recently through my website to a gentleman who confirmed that he got the book, but disputed the charge with his credit card company. It takes all kinds.
But for those who pass along free books, I'm grateful that they are spreading the word, giving me the opportunity to touch the hearts of people with whom my only contact is through my writings. The standing joke is that maybe someone will pass along a reviewer's copy to Oprah or Gayle. Hey ... I can dream, can't I?
I believe in recycling--books, magazines, bottles, cans, etc. And even though I don't review books very often--mostly on amazon and my media blog--there is no way I can keep all the books that come into my house. They go to used bookstores, the library, an SF con charity auction, etc. Not only that, I buy used books on amazon that may have been review copies. And I come across ARCs for sale now and then--and buy them. However, returning an unbought book to the publisher for a refund is stealing!.
Right on, Irene. Defacing is an act of selfishness. I take the time to sign all the books I ship to Amazon, or to anyone. Everyone gets a signed copy. So what's wrong with that?
Ed
The previous postings show the wide disagreements among writers, publishers and reviewers regarding the resale of review copies. When I attended the American Library Association convention in Boston, I noticed that most of the major publishers distinctly label their review copies as review copies. Usually that is because the book is in pre-published format.
Independent and self-publishers ultimately should NOT label review copies, unless they are bound galleys printed far in advance of the final printing (expensive and very unlikely with self-publication). There are really two common sense reasons for this: First and foremost, it comes across as mistrusting the reviewer, and that's not a great first impression! My latest book went out to scores of reviewers, and shortly afterwards ended up on amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com as "New, never read," with no money coming back to me. Boo-hoo. Chalk it up to the cost of doing business, take a tax deduction, and if you're really worried about the unfair competition, buy up all the cheap copies and boost your ratings. Second good reason to not label review copies is strictly business. Most legit reviewers have made it clear that "defacing" is at least distracting and at worst, a deal killer. Authors and independent publishers who have their own best interests at heart will heed the consensus.
When you send your book out for review do not expect it back. Do not track it to see if someone you gave it to sold it. Do not be shocked that some book you autographed might end up in the returns, or on some shelf in a second hand bookstore--it's the nature of the business.
Imagine how much it would cost in time and money if reviewers packaged up your book (having read it or not) and sent it back to you. Hmmm, 800,000 new books a year times postage and handling...
Book reviewers are flooded with books--most of them receive enough that they could build a house made entirely of books.
Promo copies should be sent out and let go of...If you want your book back, don't send one out. If you hope that everyone who reads or accepts your book loves it and is going to put it in their permanent library for all time, then you are having vanity problems.
Defacing the book is not the answer. Unless you're John Grisham and it's the first off-the-press copy of The Firm, and it is signed and stamped with Review Copy and it's worth a whole lotta money--you're just defacing a book, and it will end up in someone's garbage. What a waste.
Some reviewers need or want galleys. Most online reviewers don't.
If you want a review, send your book out in pristine condition. Send it out with love, and let it's fate alone.
You just might find you garner some great reviews and then you'll think , So what if someone sold the book I autographed to Dave...perhaps someone who couldn't afford it new will find it in this second hand bookstore, buy it for another Dave and your book will live on. Isn't getting the content of your book out there important? If making money is the main motivating factor in your (new) career as an author---you will usually be greatly disappointed.
This is the reality...
By the way. I love my autographed books. Some I keep in my treasure trove of books--others I bless them and send them on to a new reader by way of donation, door prizes at book fairs and such. But unless you're famous, most buyers aren't interested in purchasing books they've never heard of by authors they've never heard of. And ,no, being on Amazon doesn't make you famous.
So lighten up, send your good looking book to reviewers and understand that some of them will end up being reviewed, some donated, some will end up in seconhand bookstores and some will meet a worse fate...
This post surprises me. I understand the frustration, but why outrage?
I've reviewed many a book, some labeled and some not, and it's never made one shred of difference to me whether they were marked. Who cares? Sure, it looks better if it hasn't been childishly scribbled on with a Sharpie, but why would that effect my reportage of the book's content? There are other careers riding on the book's success, too, not just the label or not-to-label marks of the last person in line to have held it. It's not fair to penalize the rest of them because of a minor alteration, even if you choose to view it as a defect (as is your right.)
There's a secondhand bookstore I frequent, and if I'm being honest, I have to say that seeing a book labeled as an ARC actually makes me more likely to purchase it out of curiosity, especially books from a major house that have seen the top pub lists. Makes me feel I'm getting an inside peek, in a way, like I'm in the know. I have bought a proof copy and an obviously-different final version of the same book from the same shelf in the same visit, even, just to compare them, look for changes, and see into the author's mind. It was a fun little adventure, and I'd do it again if I saw a title that interested me.
I can appreciate preferring an unmarked copy, don't get me wrong. But I fail to see why it would make THAT big a difference to a reviewer (and in this, I'm not talking about the folks who black out the whole cover, but those who put a small and fairly discreet stamp in the front or end papers.) Is it that hard to overlook a little red stamp, that infuriating? I don't get it.
It's not a distrust issue every time. I would be furious if the author/agent/marketer/publicist mailing the book also included a "Hey, and please don't steal this copy" letter. Of course you're the reviewer, and it becomes your personal copy with which you can do whatever you'd like. That is (and should be) understood. But the book in this case is also free marketing material provided by the maker of a product, and they get to send it in whatever condition they'd like. Does it make the little Cheerios sample less tasty because it came in a box marked "Free Sample"? It's just a marketing decoration. IMHO, the ARC or review copy notation is no different at all. No biggie.
All that said, why WOULDN'T you donate a book just because it was marked? That strikes me as rather ridiculous. Do you honestly think that a woman in a shelter who has just left her husband, home, and belongings is going to take one look at the book and say, "Nope. Can't read it, there's a red stamp on the inside cover" and walk away? Same for the soldier; I think you've a very noble idea for using the review copies you aren't going to keep, and it's an idea I hadn't actually ever considered myself. I find that admirable, and will have to revisit my "reviewed" collection for a second look! But why would the stamp prevent donating a good book to people in hard times or service to our country? That's silly.
And to answer the question within the text, yes, I have seen other sites that advocated using the stamp over not, but this isn't the first blog I've read on the opposite preference. There are those of both camps, and not all who advise stamping are on the author's end of the equation, either.
This is a really interesting topic. I'm glad you opened it up again. None of my response is meant in criticism; you're allowed to feel however you'd like, of course. I can absolutely understand your annoyance, and love the post. I just don't agree in the slightest.
Whew! Read all the responses from justification to blasphemy and find my thinking falling somewhere in the middle tilting towards the blasphemy.
I have a resale bookshop online [Paul and Paula's Plaza Inc] as well as writing stories for children. Mandy The Alpha Dog is a POD which I was happy to see in print as it carries a message to children on treatment of animals and the result of mistreatment. For now free reading, there are more books in this series, The Chronicles of The K-9 Boys and Girls on Locus Street in the form of e books on http://www.bookrix.com/-paulashene
I was very pleased with the review by the two young sisters, Sophia and Madeline - almost 7 and almost 9 at the time of the reading who work with ReaderViews. The book being geared to the humorous absurdity that age group embraces, still fully covers the life of a dog who started out in a puppy mill and through trial and error found her 'forever' home. If these girls decide to 'share' the book through donation, sale, or giveaway, so be it. Then the story is told to another child.
I've also worked in libraries and have seen many books donated. Some put on shelves to replace others that have been well read; some defaced by patrons who think they know better, correcting spellings that are old English or spellings still used in places other than the 'colonies'; others yet, written in to denote 'they' have read it or, horrors, 'they' do not agree with the philosophy of the author.
I have some books I've picked up that are advance copies so denoted by the publisher but never have I seen a book defaced by an author. Resale of a book does not seemingly put coin into the author's pocket if all you are considering is the sale of that one book but as a business person, the return customer is the key to future sales.
So as an author, do I want just one read from that 'customer' or do I want them to read more of my stories? Am I satisfied with writing that one 'masterpiece' that will live on if only in my own household or am I willing to allow it to grow into a marketable entity and be happy to see it in someone's hands be it new or used?
In today's market many, not just the young adult, are turning to the internet for their entertainment which includes e books even for children. As a seller of hard copy books that would seemingly eat into profits but it does not. There are many people who love both and will embrace both copies of the same book; others who like either but not both. My clientele obviously likes to curl up with a book and are happy to get it because they cannot find it locally - the local bookstore carries only 'new' books or best sellers and 2nd hand bookstores can't afford the overhead rents of a storefront.
I write because the 'dogs' won't shut up until I tell their tales. I sell pre-owned books because it saves trees. I keep signed copies of books I buy from authors [and I do reviews because I am a fan] but I do sell books that are discarded with author's signatures and they fetch higher prices than a normal 'used' book. I sell my own book locally and know some are destined for resale at a higher price and some treasured because they know me. The ones bought on line, I'm glad to know were sold.
I give my book to raise money for animal rescue and to raise awareness. I read my book to my granddaughter so she will be a responsible person and care for animals not abuse them. I give my book to children who can't afford to buy it.
Give and find profits grow or just look on it as advertising for your next 'masterpiece'.
I read an article from an author that was having fake reviewers contact her asking her for copies of her books, just so they could get free books If this is a big problem then maybe that's why some authors are defacing their books.
What made me want to scream was when I used to work for Walmart and when the books didn't sell they tore off the front covers and thew away the book. This was not Walmart doing this but a representative of the book company. I just couldn't understand it. Just because a book doesn't sell in 3 weeks or so doesn't mean it's not any good. Why couldn't they donate them to shelters or hospitals or something. Carol
I have done free reviews for a few authors, but by no means claim to be "a reviewer" in any professional sense of the word. As an avid reader, aspiring writer, and occasional reviewer I get irritated when I see advanced copies or not for sale copies. I don't want to read a copy that isn't ready to be read. I don't want to spend my time reading a copy that will be changed (typos excluded). I will admit that I have donated some advanced copies and others I have kept. It all depended on how I felt about the book. If I love it, or heck like it just a little, I will keep it in my personal library because I will later reference or think about it. Sometimes I have even bought copies for my friends because I loved it so much and wanted to spark a conversation or informal book club about a particular book that I had been asked to review. I personally dread reading an advance copy because I feel like the author is fishing for something, compliments or advice, either of which signals to me the work is not completed in their mind.