Many authors have a host of sponsorships for projects–ways that others have contributed toward the writing of the manuscript. Ads are a specific form of sponsorship that not only wants its name displayed, but hopes to garner some notice or action on the part of the viewer (usually some purchase or usage).

For a long time, publishers used to post on any blank pages at the back their own ads for similar, prior books. Eventually, authors asserted in their agreements the right to review these ads (in case the author didn’t agree with the book advertised) and the practice ended.

Tim

I think that sponsorships (direct and indirect) will continue.

But that is not where you are going, I guess.

About why advertising in books and magazines: The advertiser wants to reach a demographic to establish a brand. Since you have no control over the time of consumption of the ad in relation to the sales opportunity for the product, advertising in magazines is necessarily branding. This means you want to make yourself known to people who are potential buyers (or who you want to be potential buyers). Advertisements is just one way, product placement is another (regardless of the medium). Problem with books is that they are a one-off, not a regular demographic, so you can not really make an estimate about how many readers the advertiser will reach (which is what they pay for). Makes you wonder why they do not sell ads in the SECOND edition, because then you know the book has taken off, and people would buy it regardless…

It is not at all unusual for books to be paid for publications, but the name of the publisher and the author may work as some kind of guarnatee that there is no editorial control, which is the crucial thing – also to attract the demographic of interest. Selling sponsored editions is nothing unusual (in Sweden, there were several publishing houses making a good living out of this, when I was working there). And of course, it already happened with textbooks for universities (www.freeloadpress.com/ ). The question is how small the number can be made to be profitable (print is the expense – will be interesting to see how Kindle and print-on-demand changes this) – and how you could sell to another company, when you put Google in the title….

By the way, Ian Fleming was using the brands of products which were associated with luxury and sleekness to establish the character of James Bond. Once done, that led to others being willing to associate their brands with the character (think mobile phones, which did not exist when Bond started….)

Hope this helps.
//Johan

I sold a single, four-color ad on the inside back cover of a book (Landed: The expatriate’s guide to buying and renovating property in Hong Kong / http://www.landed.hk) that I self-published.

The ad appeared only in the first print run, and the real estate agency that bought the ad also received an allotment of books that they gave to clients and prospects.

The real estate agency had no editorial control or input. Unlike Rick Smolan’s work, however, they were mentioned in the text, along with their competitors.

Before I sold the ad, I was concerned about how people would react. The book is now in its second printing, and I have not had any complaints from readers, my distributor or from public and university libraries, which have also bought copies.

Selling an ad made it economically feasible for me to write and publish my first book — on a decidedly niche subject — and I would do it again.

I’d be happy to answer any questions that your readers might have. (My email address can be found at http://www.landed.hk)

I was amused by your comment http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/08/03/sponsors-for-my-book/#comment-380182 because that is my nightmare for all future media. Nobody will ever be safe again from consumerism.

I interviewed a Piute medicine man from near Reno, Nevada. He pointed out that when he was born in the late 1920s, he and his peers needed to know the names and uses of over 500 plants, they had to learn their way around hundreds of square miles of land without maps. Instead his grandchildren know perhaps fewer than 50 plants, but they can identify several hundred brands and corporate logos. I felt a lot of sympathy for his sadness over the human race’s disconnection from the real world as he called it (versus the man-made, artificial world).

Don’t want ads? Then you don’t want any professionally supported media. You want media that will charge people high rates for content, exactly counter to the dynamics of the link economy.

Cant and claptrap.

reading your post, I had the same doubts in mind as the other fellow commenter from Germany. I used to manage a discount bookstore where we sold paperbacks for less than a Euro. Still, customers who had bought the same book twice frequently wanted to exchange them. Because they couldn’t stand the thought of throwing away a book. I can see the idea working in a very limited section of the market, but especially for your type of book – no way, especially not in Germany.

Another point is the longevitiy of books. Nothing looks more out of touch than old advertising. Which companies knows what their marketing strategy will be in five years? why put an ad in something that might be around as long? the only advertising in German books, which were aimed at a wider audience, is for state issued bonds – because they last for 20+ years, just as the book.

I do like the idea of providing bookmarks with ads, however this isn’t a particularly new concept.

Which brings up another question. Who has the customer profile info, you or Amazon? Or both?

Then, you have a whole other set of ads for the “buy in the bookstore” crowd, where you can’t tell beforehand, outside of broad demographics, who is buying your book.

One final thought, Kindle/ebooks will be making this whole process a lot more dynamic.

maybe your ads in books modell might work in the US. I am sure there are other countries it would most likely not work, since books are treated very differently in different cultures.

Correct me if I am wrong, but from my observation paperbacks in the US are often treated as “read once and throw away products”. They are usually printed on very thin and rather low quality paper and after you read a book you sort of have “used it up”.

In Germany i. e. – which is the 2nd largest book market in the world – paperbacks are treated just like hardcover books. Printed on thick quality paper, stored on the shelf in your living-room. (Did you know that people here unconciously equate the thickness of a book to its value? That is why publishers print paperbacks on extra thick paper – to make them look more valuable). So, most people see books as something very personal and valuable – which makes them less price sensitive. A lot of people would not want such a personal item spoiled by ads – which is a reason why most experiments in these directions which where undertaken in the past have failed.

In conclusion in Germany I only see limited space for ads in books – that is where the price of the book is the central argument (Maybe very expensive ones like scientific publications that students have so by during college or, in opposite, very cheap ones where people do not really care what they read).

If you do wanna offer a book with ads you definately have to offer a second (and slightly more expensive) version without ads. The risk of alienating passionate readers with ads in what many would consider “a save haven” in a ad spoiled world would be way to big. Offering two versions of one paperback would nevertheless create a problem in logistics (maybe not at Amazon but in traditional book stores and chains where most books are still sold today).

I think any publishing company would take a high risk if it tried to get their loyal readers to get used to ads in books.

Apparently Weldon gave Bulgari three times the contracted number of product placements. Her comment: “Just explain to me why it is more contemptible to be paid by an Italian jewellery firm than by HarperCollins? It’s still money.”

I’ve not read it, but judging by the comments on Amazon, it was pretty well received. Makes me feel a little seasick, though…

But then there’s this: the publisher’s name is already all over the book. The book is already branded. A writer’s work has already been tempered and tampered with, for better or worse. In a way, each non-self-published book is already “sponsored.”

Some writers have marvelous relationships with their publishing houses. Others feel compromised. They’ve had to make concessions to get the “brand” (and distribution) on their book. To become published. To get the perceived legitimacy that a publisher offers.

I’m not really prepared to defend this; just a thought.