News Pop-Ups

[Ed Simnett]

This might be of interest- a discussion (from a music focused YT guy) of high profile Youtubers quitting:

 

[Adrian Bagley]

So sad to hear this FWIW I agree with @Pamela Jo's suggestion, though limiting participation to Litopians only might reduce overall viewer interest.

but it does suggest that folk were watching through the intro, but turning off at some point during the first submission.

It's hard to think how Pop-Ups could be improved, because it was just about perfect as a tool for helping writers get published. Absolutely invaluable. But I can see why that wouldn't necessarily translate into high viewing figures. Especially if a lot of people start watching with a view to submitting their own work and then (as I'm sure we all did) experience utter terror just watching the show with that goal in mind...

Something that might help there is to remove the scores entirely? Or at least, keep them private. Have each judge & the lounge pick their own personal favourite and then use the hidden scores purely to declare an overall winner. That way, no one would be worried about their word baby scoring badly or coming last. There'd be no losers, only a winner.

I also think a shorter, daily show might appeal better to the way folks consume media these days. Maybe don't reveal the winner until Sundays to build suspense.

If submissions are down, then pivoting to focus more on self-pub might also help. There doesn't necessarily need to be an actual submission every day, since shows can focus on other things. Maybe have a sub every other day, with a winner picked fortnightly. The pop-ups would still be your USP but they wouldn't be the whole show anymore.

On a similar note, I strongly agree that the current format is just as useful to self-publishers, but it doesn't necessarily seem that way. "Pop-Up Submissions" sounds like it's aimed purely at trad publishing. But the title, cover blurb, first few pages & commercial bang are exactly what self-publishers need to be focussing on too. So a change of name could work wonders? Something that makes it clear the aim of the show is to help writers sell their work, regardless of how they go about it.

Just my thoughts...

 

[AgentPete]

This might be of interest- a discussion (from a music focused YT guy) of high profile Youtubers quitting:

Yes, I’ve been following this trend. There seem to be a combination of factors… general burnout (e.g. Tom Scott), lack of financial compensation (Google inevitably got greedy), living or dying at the whim of a secret algorithm that's in constant flux, other platform options (notably TikTok) and so on. None of those really affected Pop-Ups, tho.

I wasn’t happy with any of the reformatting that went on during our hiatus since November. Some people have complained about the lack of info re return date… I do apologise about that, but it was initially the intention to return with a reformatted show. The problem was ultimately that none of the attempts at reformatting actually answered the key issues. So finally, it was curtains.

Everyone who sent in an unbroadcast submission has been refunded, btw.

I would like some version to return, maybe it will as and when inspiration strikes.

 

[AgentPete]

It's hard to think how Pop-Ups could be improved, because it was just about perfect as a tool for helping writers get published. Absolutely invaluable. But I can see why that wouldn't necessarily translate into high viewing figures. Especially if a lot of people start watching with a view to submitting their own work and then (as I'm sure we all did) experience utter terror just watching the show with that goal in mind...

Thanks, Adrian, we've had some very nice comments post-mortem, particularly from many of our guests.

Something that might help there is to remove the scores entirely? Or at least, keep them private. Have each judge & the lounge pick their own personal favourite and then use the hidden scores purely to declare an overall winner. That way, no one would be worried about their word baby scoring badly or coming last. There'd be no losers, only a winner.

Interesting idea. I was very proud of the behind-the-scenes tech that enabled pretty much live scoring, but I can see your point.

I also think a shorter, daily show might appeal better to the way folks consume media these days. Maybe don't reveal the winner until Sundays to build suspense.

Yeah, that was a key part of the reformatting. Still record en bloc but release as dailies.

If submissions are down, then pivoting to focus more on self-pub might also help.

I have a horrible feeling that most self-publishers wilfully ignore the imperative to produce compelling prose. The “rules” apply to traditional publishing with editors and other people who are there to be snotty about your writing, right? Self-publishing lets the people decide.

I understand writers feeling that way, but it’s so terribly wrong. If anything, self-published work has to be executed to an even higher standard than traditionally-published, because it is so totally dependent on great word-of-mouth. The manuscript is your marketing.

So yes, a show like Pop-Ups could well fulfil a vital role for self-publishers, but I’m not convinced that most self-publishers would see the need.

On a similar note, I strongly agree that the current format is just as useful to self-publishers, but it doesn't necessarily seem that way. "Pop-Up Submissions" sounds like it's aimed purely at trad publishing. But the title, cover blurb, first few pages & commercial bang are exactly what self-publishers need to be focussing on too. So a change of name could work wonders? Something that makes it clear the aim of the show is to help writers sell their work, regardless of how they go about it.

Will think about that, thx Adrian.

 

[Claire G]

Thanks, Adrian, we've had some very nice comments post-mortem, particularly from many of our guests.

Interesting idea. I was very proud of the behind-the-scenes tech that enabled pretty much live scoring, but I can see your point.

Yeah, that was a key part of the reformatting. Still record en bloc but release as dailies.

I have a horrible feeling that most self-publishers wilfully ignore the imperative to produce compelling prose. The “rules” apply to traditional publishing with editors and other people who are there to be snotty about your writing, right? Self-publishing lets the people decide.

I understand writers feeling that way, but it’s so terribly wrong. If anything, self-published work has to be executed to an even higher standard than traditionally-published, because it is so totally dependent on great word-of-mouth. The manuscript is your marketing.

So yes, a show like Pop-Ups could well fulfil a vital role for self-publishers, but I’m not convinced that most self-publishers would see the need.

Will think about that, thx Adrian.

Any self-published author with an ounce of sense and humility would recognise the benefits of Pop Ups. I know I did. (Whether or not I had the talent to implement improvements afterwards was another thing.)

 

[Pamela Jo]

So yes, a show like Pop-Ups could well fulfil a vital role for self-publishers, but I’m not convinced that most self-publishers would see the need.

Will think about that, thx Adrian.

Could be self-selecting. Those who see the need are the ones that show.

I have a feeling that when you took away the Head of Zeus prize the submissions dropped. But I also think the prize was the fatal flaw. If the benefit is basically what you get from coming to the Huddle that is prize enough, I think, for serious writers . But that's a harder message to get out. An introduction to a publisher is a delicious sort of dessert to dangle in front of starving writers.

The Apex version of Popups has a visually static and not very interesting format but maybe they got right that bit. You get an informed critique from a bunch of people that can help you pinpoint what's wrong. No more. No Less.

Turning to reality TV - makeovers have an eternal draw. Anybody remember Trinity and Susannah? They'd make their "guest" strip to underwear and look at themselves in the mirror so that there was no cognitive dissonance about flaws and assets.
Then they would help find clothes that work with said flaws and assets AND express personality. Pretty much what I want from an editor.

If Popups comes back in any form I think the assets are the camaraderie in the Genii room. Find some way of including the subject in that? Maybe begin with shows in which the genii are critiqued so that viewers can see no one is asked to do what they themselves haven't done. Suggesting fixes is always loaded, but remarks could be limited to, "This works. This doesnt. This is what helped me fix my work when I was in a similar bind." But the key moment in any makeover show is the reveal, when you get to see the change. I think that would be the hook for a new Popups.

 

[Adrian Bagley]

I have a horrible feeling that most self-publishers wilfully ignore the imperative to produce compelling prose.

<Waits for the riot to kick off>

The “rules” apply to traditional publishing with editors and other people who are there to be snotty about your writing, right? Self-publishing lets the people decide.

Well, there's never been a shortage of the lazy & unprofessional, and they're certainly destined for self-publishing these days. But they wouldn't have been tuning in twenty years ago either.

Maybe it looks different depending on which side of the fence you're sitting on. Some writers think self-publishing earns more than trad-publishing these days. Some want complete control over the process. Many find querying utterly traumatic, or are too shy to even try. Some genuinely believe querying is a complete lottery with no skill involved (!). And of course, if you get to the end of the process with no interest from agents and no clue how to improve the MS further, it's surely better to self-pub than throw the thing away.

None of which means the author doesn't want to write the very best book they can and wouldn't welcome help...

 

[Jan L]

Didn't pop ups begin as a podcast? Maybe I'm wrong. IMO it might be a great way to reach a larger audience. Just change the platform to audio only, still have the litopian room, guests, voting, a few submissions. I think people would dig it and you wouldn't have to worry about showing up in your pajamas. Toss it onto the popular podcast distributors.

 

[Hannah F]

Didn't pop ups begin as a podcast? Maybe I'm wrong. IMO it might be a great way to reach a larger audience. Just change the platform to audio only, still have the litopian room, guests, voting, a few submissions. I think people would dig it and you wouldn't have to worry about showing up in your pajamas. Toss it onto the popular podcast distributors.

I'm a visual person. If I can choose the same content via podcast or video, I will always go for video. (I also find it easier to understand if I see the mouths move even though I can't lip read). But I may be in the minority. It certainly wouldn't have hooked me the same though without seeing the smiles, the faces, the laughter (though of course I never saw the genius room).

 

[Pamela Jo]

I'm a visual person. If I can choose the same content via podcast or video, I will always go for video. (I also find it easier to understand if I see the mouths move even though I can't lip read). But I may be in the minority. It certainly wouldn't have hooked me the same though without seeing the smiles, the faces, the laughter (though of course I never saw the genius room).

I always saw the Genius Room as backstage at the local amateur theatre. Pete was the emcee in Hawaiin shirts, Matt dressed like Humphrey Bogart/ Jack Nicholson, Bev always wore flamboyant hats, and you were in feathured tutu for Swan Lake.

 

[AgentPete]

Didn't pop ups begin as a podcast? Maybe I'm wrong.

Funnily enough, no. We did do a lot of early podcasts (here) but this wasn’t one.

IMO it might be a great way to reach a larger audience. Just change the platform to audio only, still have the litopian room, guests, voting, a few submissions. I think people would dig it

Pop-Ups also went out as an audio podcast thru Spotify, but only got a few dozens listeners. It was a way to add more media coverage for zero effort, but as a standalone it wouldn't be worth it.

and you wouldn't have to worry about showing up in your pajamas. Toss it onto the popular podcast distributors.

I’ve never worried about that, strangely. And it keeps the neighbours amused

 

[Trey]

Didn't pop ups begin as a podcast? Maybe I'm wrong. IMO it might be a great way to reach a larger audience. Just change the platform to audio only, still have the litopian room, guests, voting, a few submissions. I think people would dig it and you wouldn't have to worry about showing up in your pajamas. Toss it onto the popular podcast distributors.

The reason i listen to podcasts a lot more than watch you tube programmes is simply due to lack of time and the ability to walk the dog/drive whilst listening. For this reason, i agree.

 

[Hannah F]

The reason i listen to podcasts a lot more than watch you tube programmes is simply due to lack of time and the ability to walk the dog/drive whilst listening. For this reason, i agree.

When I walk the dog, I hear chiff chaffs, blackbirds, the buzzard's cry, the gurgles of the river, sometimes the ghosts that must have drowned in the river, the woodpeckers drilling to mark their territory, my dog barking because he's just seen something exciting or wants to play. I chat to people I meet along the way. I'd miss so much if I listened to podcasts/audiobooks while I walked.

 

[Vagabond Heart]

When I walk the dog, I hear chiff chaffs, blackbirds, the buzzard's cry, the gurgles of the river, sometimes the ghosts that must have drowned in the river, the woodpeckers drilling to mark their territory, my dog barking because he's just seen something exciting or wants to play. I chat to people I meet along the way. I'd miss so much if I listened to podcasts/audiobooks while I walked.

If I lived where you do, I'd do the same. But, sadly, where I walk I have to drown out traffic.
(Don't ever invite me to stay: I'd never leave, and you'd be forever dragging me back from the river where I'd be gossiping about you with your ghosts).

 

[Trey]

When I walk the dog, I hear chiff chaffs, blackbirds, the buzzard's cry, the gurgles of the river, sometimes the ghosts that must have drowned in the river, the woodpeckers drilling to mark their territory, my dog barking because he's just seen something exciting or wants to play. I chat to people I meet along the way. I'd miss so much if I listened to podcasts/audiobooks while I walked.

That’s the first draft of a poem

 

[SusanT]

I loved watching Pop-ups and don't think there would be anything to improve it because we all got so much out of it as it was. Thanks to everyone involved for all their hard work, entertaining content and insights.

These days so many people want to get themselves into content. To possibly engage more people with their chance to be mentioned, and perhaps linking to comment from @BrianY have an 'ask the experts' where a person is mentioned with their question towards the end of the show. Or a challenge to write the next sentence of a short story to send in and a few of then are read out at the end of the show. It might encourage watching to the end and keeping the algorithms happy.

 

[Pamela Jo]

I loved watching Pop-ups and don't think there would be anything to improve it because we all got so much out of it as it was. Thanks to everyone involved for all their hard work, entertaining content and insights.

These days so many people want to get themselves into content. To possibly engage more people with their chance to be mentioned, and perhaps linking to comment from @BrianY have an 'ask the experts' where a person is mentioned with their question towards the end of the show. Or a challenge to write the next sentence of a short story to send in and a few of then are read out at the end of the show. It might encourage watching to the end and keeping the algorithms happy.

I really like your ideas.

 

[JohnBertel]

"I agree with the genius room/Pete/the other expert," was one of the sentences most often spoken on the show. What some kind of similar show needs is conflict. It is fascinating to see competent people analyze whatever they are analysing, but having their views challenged is even better. And more entertaining.

While Pete did challenge some of the experts, I still think the show felt consensus-seeking overall. Granted, on most of the submissions we made, it would probably be hard not to reach a consensus. And it obviously wouldn't help the writers to hear some artificial defence of their work. So I have no idea how you get more conflict into these kinds of shows.

 

[Vagabond Heart]

"I agree with the genius room/Pete/the other expert," was one of the sentences most often spoken on the show. What some kind of similar show needs is conflict. It is fascinating to see competent people analyze whatever they are analysing, but having their views challenged is even better. And more entertaining.

While Pete did challenge some of the experts, I still think the show felt consensus-seeking overall. Granted, on most of the submissions we made, it would probably be hard not to reach a consensus. And it obviously wouldn't help the writers to hear some artificial defence of their work. So I have no idea how you get more conflict into these kinds of shows.

Although I see your point, I'd like to raise the opposite thought for your consideration.

The point of Pop-ups was to get accurate feedback on one's submission, so that it could be adjusted, as necessary, before submitting to agents/publishers, etc.

If almost everyone had the same gut reaction to the submission - well, that was incredibly useful information for the author. It meant we all thought the same thing when we read it. I don't believe it was consensus-seeking: I think a consensus was often arrived at for very good reasons (ie. we could all see what the work needed and what was bringing it down).

I reckon it would have been incredibly confusing for the submitters (and, therefore, really unhelpful) if everyone had entirely different views about their work. How would they know who to believe?

So I would humbly suggest that if a show is about giving useful and workable information to upcoming authors, then conflict is the last thing they need.

 

[AgentPete]

"I agree with the genius room/Pete/the other expert," was one of the sentences most often spoken on the show. What some kind of similar show needs is conflict. It is fascinating to see competent people analyze whatever they are analysing, but having their views challenged is even better. And more entertaining.

While Pete did challenge some of the experts, I still think the show felt consensus-seeking overall. Granted, on most of the submissions we made, it would probably be hard not to reach a consensus. And it obviously wouldn't help the writers to hear some artificial defence of their work. So I have no idea how you get more conflict into these kinds of shows.

Yes, I was always aware of that.

We could have gone full “Simon Cowell”, and that was an option from the outset. It would have definitely kicked the numbers up. However, it would have been pretty destructive to writers. Can you imagine how horrible it might have been…?

Frankly, I like writers too much to have done that.

I did get a bit snarky sometimes if the submission was offensive (rare) or just lazy (more common). But hopefully didn’t ruin any writing careers

 

[KateESal]

Rather than conflict and competition, why not do something that aims at the makeover suggested by @Pamela Jo?

Instead of Pop-Up Submissions, we open a query clinic (the US version just trips off the tongue more easily!) and each week we take a submission (or a few consecutive submissions to split it into bite-sized YouTube chunks) and aim to lick it into the kind of shape that will see it become deal-ready. Peter offers his agent expertise and the genii weigh in with their opinions, plus a guest of some sort.

(I do this occasionally with a student's essay...have the other students rework it between them to produce an A-grade result. I approach it like a make-over show, with all the students' expertise hyperbolically introduced etc. to make them laugh. It's an engaging format!)

Then every so often, we do a follow up and if there's been progress, we report it - perhaps ask the author to record a short vid telling us how they got 5 full MS requests, or found an agent, or a publishing deal, or self-published (and we see the results of that) etc....thus completing (or extending) the narrative arc.

most self-publishers wilfully ignore the imperative to produce compelling prose.

Not sure about this! I think self-publishers are generally well aware of this imperative, but some are unaware of how to do it (and may not even realise their prose is NOT compelling), others are too impatient and publish before the MS is really ready, while others are too lazy or too complacent to do the necessary work when it comes to revising and editing their work.

I would say the serious self-publishers want to gather readers and know this can't be done if you don't produce compelling prose! The super-serious ones employ professional editors to work with them on the MS before going ahead with publication.

As a self-publisher myself, the advice on Pop-Ups has been invaluable and I wouldn't have had the confidence to go ahead with publication without it!

 

[Hannah F]

Yes, I was always aware of that.

We could have gone full “Simon Cowell”, and that was an option from the outset. It would have definitely kicked the numbers up. However, it would have been pretty destructive to writers. Can you imagine how horrible it might have been…?

Frankly, I like writers too much to have done that.

I did get a bit snarky sometimes if the submission was offensive (rare) or just lazy (more common). But hopefully didn’t ruin any writing careers

I would have cried.

 

[Hannah F]

Rather than conflict and competition, why not do something that aims at the makeover suggested by @Pamela Jo?

Instead of Pop-Up Submissions, we open a query clinic (the US version just trips off the tongue more easily!) and each week we take a submission (or a few consecutive submissions to split it into bite-sized YouTube chunks) and aim to lick it into the kind of shape that will see it become deal-ready. Peter offers his agent expertise and the genii weigh in with their opinions, plus a guest of some sort.

I like this idea too. (A bit like a live version of our critique lab).

Then every so often, we do a follow up and if there's been progress, we report it - perhaps ask the author to record a short vid telling us how they got 5 full MS requests, or found an agent, or a publishing deal, or self-published (and we see the results of that) etc....thus completing (or extending) the narrative arc.

Totally! I think this was the one thing that was missing from pop-ups: we never got to know what happened next. And there's one thing that aspiring authors like: the nothing-and-then-success stories. If it can happen to Ashley, Lesley and Jo, well it might just happen to me too . . .

One reason a self-publisher might put an unready book out there is that they don't know what they don't know. The same goes for people querying agents. It's too son, but they haven't the knowledge or experience to know it's too soon. Pop Ups or this proposed query clinic is such a good method towards enlightenment.

 

[Ed Simnett]

Some comps (on YouTube)- figures are subscriber, not view counts.

100K+
Writing with Jenna Moreci (best selling author)
iWriterly (actually writer Meg Latorre's vehicle, but a strong community focus)
The Creative Penn (author Joanna Penn's channel)
Author Level Up (author Michael La Ronn's channel)
Kindlepreneur - more focused on the nuts and bolts of self publishing

10-20K
Alyssa Matesic (a freelance editor and self proclaimed industry expert)
BookEnds Literary Agency
Word Nerds (vlog of a writers group that meets every Sunday night)

Sub 10K
Litopia
Piers Blofeld
Jericho writers
Curtis Brown Creative

This suggests that the biggest communities are typically around authors who are sharing craft. Industry insider stuff can work, but I can't find a 100K sub example, except one very focused on how to make money with ebooks, which isn't really a writing channel. Word Nerds seems like the closest to the format people are gravitating towards, but that only just gets over the 10K subs (with nearly 2000 published videos and appears to be no longer active). That sounds worrying like turning Huddles into content, which might work at one level, but destroys the intent of Huddles.

My guess is that for the mass audience the idea of learning how Lee Child or whoever did it, and hoping for one quick trick, is more appealing than being told by someone who I have never heard of about how an industry that crushes dreams actually works, and how much work you need to do to git gud. Of course a "best selling author" is also going to want to get and keep fans, and if you are writing one book every 6-12 months there is only so much content about your books, so more generic "how tos" will feed the content beast to keep your numbers up?

Sources: What I was aware of, Youtube search and The Top 10+ Writing YouTube Channels (2023)

 

[Pamela Jo]

I like this idea too. (A bit like a live version of our critique lab).

Totally! I think this was the one thing that was missing from pop-ups: we never got to know what happened next. And there's one thing that aspiring authors like: the nothing-and-then-success stories. If it can happen to Ashley, Lesley and Jo, well it might just happen to me too . . .

One reason a self-publisher might put an unready book out there is that they don't know what they don't know. The same goes for people querying agents. It's too son, but they haven't the knowledge or experience to know it's too soon. Pop Ups or this proposed query clinic is such a good method towards enlightenment.

What I have seen in the submission guidelines of every agency is, "Don't submit until your 3rd rewrite, get a non friend or family to beta read ="FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DONT DUMP IT ON US TO FIX FOR YOU!"

I think this is really getting somewhere. This could also be the early beginnings of a cooperative of writers wanting to self-publish and pool resources.

 

[CarolMS]

For the year prior to my joining Litopia, I watched Pop-Up Submissions every week--I looked forward to it--from beginning to end because I found it entertaining as well as offering insightful and useful information about writing and publishing. But the submission critiques weren't what drew me, since I've been watching (or listening to) agent critiques of people's query letters and/or first pages on a variety of websites and podcasts that regularly offer them for quite some time. And frankly, until I was able to read the subs before the show, I usually couldn't follow their presentation during the show well enough to get much from them anyway; I don't know why, but I'm slow at tracking the story reading and trying to formulate thoughts about it, plus write notes, all at once (and suspect I'm not alone). Thankfully, the genius chat and guests' comments filled me in, and the presentation was fun. I actually liked the format, though I thought 5 submissions was too many (most other programs do only one or two each program). I didn't mind the length of the program, though, as long as the banter was lively and varied (though the subs weren't always of much interest). Most critique programs I've watched or listened to last about an hour, sometimes even a bit longer, and include author interviews, panels of agents and editors, etc. plus the submission critiques (limited), often with an interactive live participation of the author whose submission is being discussed.

Most programs including such critiques focus on query letters and first pages, not necessarily blurbs (which in the U.S. would be the jacket copy, or maybe testimonials). People submitting to Pop-Ups seemed to either think they were submitting jacket copy OR copy for an agent's review. If the focus is on self-publishing, which might distinguish it from other similar critique programs, the blurb purely as a marketing tool (versus for an agent's review) could be really useful. Maybe some kinds of ad copy, too, such as for Facebook, TikTok, or whatever (BookBub's "partner" blog might generate some good ideas for this kind of thing, since they do posts with many examples). Focusing on only first pages, blurbs meant for use as jacket copy or Amazon content, and other ad copy ideas, as well as discussions (with special guests) of other book marketing and promotion, book launch ideas, etc. would be especially useful to those seeking to self-publish. I'm not sure if I'm offering any new ideas here, but those are some of my thoughts to share.

 

[Adrian Bagley]

Instead of Pop-Up Submissions, we open a query clinic (the US version just trips off the tongue more easily!) and each week we take a submission (or a few consecutive submissions to split it into bite-sized YouTube chunks) and aim to lick it into the kind of shape that will see it become deal-ready. Peter offers his agent expertise and the genii weigh in with their opinions, plus a guest of some sort.

I really like this. It's not that it's better than pop-ups, but it does sound like it could fulfil a similar function while attracting more viewers. It's cuddlier.

Most programs including such critiques focus on query letters and first pages, not necessarily blurbs

It's a US v UK thing - over here the covering letter includes cover blurb rather than a pitch.

Focusing on only first pages, blurbs meant for use as jacket copy or Amazon content, and other ad copy ideas, as well as discussions (with special guests) of other book marketing and promotion, book launch ideas, etc. would be especially useful to those seeking to self-publish.

I think so too. The UK format is particularly helpful to self-publishers.

 

[wes_radman]

This might be of interest- a discussion (from a music focused YT guy) of high profile Youtubers quitting:

All this may have been said already but…..

Having a YouTube channel myself, it can be difficult to find a niche that can get and retain traction.

The biggest benefit, that I still ignore, since I do it just for fun. Is micro-specificity! You have to drill down into a sub-genre, then the sub-genre of that sub-genre and then maybe one more time.

The general rule is build your following in a niche and then expand slowly as your audience allows. Things can go viral, but beyond that to sustain an audience you need to cater your content. For example, if I wanted to do a writer specific channel, I may do many small channels focusing on genre specific wants and needs and then explore sub-genres that would help new writers, like character development, blocking out plot lines, or writing in tenses. Once you create a following there then your audience will ask you to expand.

 

[CarolMS]

It's a US v UK thing - over here the covering letter includes cover blurb rather than a pitch.

Right. It is a US v UK thing. What authors are asked to submit, and how they do it, is somewhat different, too.

 

[Pamela Jo]

All this may have been said already but…..

Having a YouTube channel myself, it can be difficult to find a niche that can get and retain traction.

The biggest benefit, that I still ignore, since I do it just for fun. Is micro-specificity! You have to drill down into a sub-genre, then the sub-genre of that sub-genre and then maybe one more time.

The general rule is build your following in a niche and then expand slowly as your audience allows. Things can go viral, but beyond that to sustain an audience you need to cater your content. For example, if I wanted to do a writer specific channel, I may do many small channels focusing on genre specific wants and needs and then explore sub-genres that would help new writers, like character development, blocking out plot lines, or writing in tenses. Once you create a following there then your audience will ask you to expand.

The early You-tubers became millionaires mostly because there was no competition. The trick now is to find the next new thing and get on before it becomes overweighted.