Quick guide: Marketing

[darthmongoose]

Yeah, agree. I think there's this tendency for people to express a sentiment like:

"Diversity marketing doesn't work any more 'cause look at how Disney vaguely hinted that LeFeu is gay by having him dance with a man at one point in that live action Beauty and the Beast movie! EVERY film has gay characters now so it's not a big deal!"

While missing that like... a weak token gesture in one movie (that can be easily removed so it can be sold to countries that don't like it) really isn't the same as experiencing well-made media where somebody like you is the hero and it's told in a way that feels real, authentic and respectful.

Sure, we have a few decent series and movies now about queer characters, but it's still nothing compared to the absolute feast of content a cishet audience has in every genre. I devoured Gideon the Ninth because I was so excited to read something that's a dark Fantasy with rich worldbuilding like Gormenghast or Warhammer 40k... but about queer women. It was the first and only time I'd ever seen that! I imagine it's the same for PoC too. It's not that a South Asian can't enjoy Iron Man (my partner loves Iron Man) it's just that I saw their face light up at that bit in Moon Night where the Egyptian Lady got to be an awesome superhero, and whenever the south asian cultural stuff came up in Ms Marvel. Somebody they could relate to got to be a superhero, and it was so much bigger than like... some poorly researched or stereotyped side character being in the background for a few frames.

There are millions of people out there who yeah, might have seen one comic in one genre starring somebody like them, but haven't seen... just literally every other genre of that and might like to, and millions more who might actually enjoy a glimpse into another culture or at least wouldn't be put off by it. Don't get scared to promote to the people who'd be most excited for a rare work catering to them just because cishet white media is so over-saturated that works can only be marketed based on things like brand or author name recognition, elevator pitch, or publisher endorsement and creators of that stuff want to force those rules on everyone else 'cause they think it's unfair or whatever. In the end, if you're building an audience, you're building an audience; there's no wrong way to do it.

[RobertBMarks]

You're really insistent that selling based on offering diversity doesn't pay, but I'm not entirely sure the evidence is there to back you up on this one.

That's not really what I'm saying, though - I'm saying that selling ONLY based on offering diversity doesn't get best results. You are correct that I tend to think in terms of larger markets, and I am a traditionalist, it's true. But...if you actually take a close look at what you're doing, I think you're going to find that you're following what I outlined here, believe it or not.

I know you're a published writer out there in the print world, but here on Tapas, you have less than 50 subs in two and a half months of updating, in spite of being a professional-level writer, which is... I'm sorry, but honestly, that's pretty poor performance for somebody of your level, and I'm not sure you're in a place to advise people about marketing, even if your advice on writing craft is very good.

Well, context is important. I've been a non-fiction writer for most of my career due to my fiction career being destroyed by the Lord of the Rings glut back around 2002. I have next to no social media presence to work with (I'm a very private person, and having to change my cell phone number due to my abuser harassing me on it while forgetting to update the double-factor authentication has permanently locked me out of any Facebook presence thanks to Facebook being, well, Facebook), and my novel concept is incredibly niche. And yet...my numbers are about average for a novel here despite these problems. So, you may see underperformance in comparison to a webcomic with a less niche concept, but I'm watching my fiction readership rebuild for the first time in 20 years, and I'm pretty damned stoked about that.

Now, onto this:

Have you considered that a lot of webnovel and webcomic readers are from audiences print under-serves and that they're hungry for content about characters they can relate to? 'Cause I got a massive boost in readership by making it clear that my work contains queer characters, and the audience went wild when it was revealed a major character in my series is autistic.

I don't doubt that it helped you find that audience. Here's the thing, though...this is your blurb:

Rekki has always dreamed of being a magical knight and giving demons the smackdown, but when Excalibur is drawn and this simple childhood wish comes true, her adult life as a celebrated monster-slaying hero throws her into a complex world of politics that tears a rift between her and her best friend.

Errant is a colourful action comic about power, responsibility, justice, love and friendship with LGBTQIA+ themes, big magical monster fights and lots of relationship drama.

So, here's the thing: you've done everything on my list. You've identified your primary selling point ("her adult life as a celebrated monster-slaying hero throws her into a complex world of politics that tears a rift between her and her best friend."), you've told us who the protagonist is ("Rekki has always dreamed of being a magical knight and giving demons the smackdown, but when Excalibur is drawn and this simple childhood wish comes true"), and your secondary selling points are clear. You outline your main themes ("Errant is a colourful action comic about power, responsibility, justice, love and friendship"), and all of this is done BEFORE you ever mention diversity issues. The reader thus knows that there's a great story to be had here, and some diverse characters on top of that.

I identified three forms of PR seppuku: Forgetting to tell the reader what the book is about, being toxic, and leading with diversity issues, and you avoided every single one. Furthermore, I said that to sell a character from a marginalized group, you have to sell the whole character, and not just their skin colour, sexuality, etc., and you do that perfectly for Rekki.

(Compare this to the recent PR for The Rings of Power, where one of the actors who plays a black elf was mainly just talking about the fact that his character was black...and we learn NOTHING else about the character: https://ew.com/tv/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-rings-of-power-cover-story/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=entertainmentweekly_ew%20&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_content=%20link&utm_term=20220802)

So, you might take issue with how I've worded this, and that's fine. There's plenty of people who have a knee jerk reaction to a character of colour showing up that amounts to "Black person! WOKENESS!", and they drive me crazy too - I'm a centrist...I take issues with both sides of the political spectrum. I can understand why you might be concerned. However, I do have to point out that the concepts I'm outlining are solid...and you're using them to succeed.

[DiegoPalacios]

Remember to tell the potential reader what your book is about. A great example of how not to do this is the marketing for a Netflix series called First Kill. This was a show about vampires and detailed vampire politics, during which the two protagonists, a vampire and a vampire hunter, fall in love. Netflix decided that the most important thing to tell everybody about was that the two protagonists were female and that it was a lesbian love story. They focused on this to such an extent that they basically forgot to tell anybody that vampires were involved. As a result, the show failed to gain an audience.

I agree that dismissing all the plot points and focussing almost exclusively on diversity in the marketing undersells the premise. People will notice the lesbians, but if they only mentions their lesbianism and dismissing other aspects that can make their romance interesting (or the vampire politics), they will be underselling their product.

Avoid being toxic with your readers. Never, EVER attack your readers or potential readers. Regardless of the separation between author and work, readers will judge your book based on your actions. If they look you up and see that you're mainly known on social media for calling people who don't like your work racists, they'll write you (and your book) off regardless of whether you were right or wrong. Now, it should be said that everybody makes mistakes (hell, I've made a mistake of this nature on these very forums with somebody who got under my skin) - if you do make a mistake of this nature, take responsibility for it and move on.

Guilt tripping folks into liking one's work will not attract readers. And while some may feel the need of calling out users online for their behavior, this can be a double edged weapon, specially if the author is heavily involved in debating controversial topics.

Never lead with emphasizing diversity. The problem with diversity marketing here is three-fold: First, it doesn't set your book apart - almost everybody has diverse casts of characters these days...so you need to focus on what everybody else DOESN'T have. Second, the toxicity of those who committed PR seppuku while calling fans of long-standing properties racist has poisoned the well - for most readers, diversity marketing is now associated with that toxicity, and leading with statements about the diversity of your characters associates you and your work with that toxicity. And, third, diversity in and of itself appeals to a woke/activist audience, but this is very small in comparison to the audience who likes, for example, adventure stories - so, by focusing on diversity first, you're appealing to a small group of potential readers while associating yourself and your book with toxicity to everybody else...it's a no-win scenario.

reminds me of high guardian spice's advertising.......The ultimate PR suicide move.

They could have made a bigger emphasis on the cast, the world, the plot, anything, but the studio made it all about themselves.

Diversity is not a bad thing, and can even help, but it can't be one's ONLY selling point.

[DiegoPalacios]

Ms. Marvel also have other elements like a likeable cast and a story about a superhero with comming of age elements. Learning more about Kamala's culture is cool, but that is not the ONLY selling point.

The problem in marketing happens when diversity is used as a pandering gimmick and people forget to communicate what their story is about.

[NickRowler]

I like diversity in stories. I don't think I am a woke person but then again what does the term even mean? I feel like people call everything woke nowadays.

[DiegoPalacios]

i think it comes to those who use diversity as a crutch and dismissing other characterization, marketing and sttorytelling elements.

Diversity is like salt in a dish. It makes the food tastier, but people will not eat a dish that is only salt.

Just like that, diversity can make a story better, but if the story is solid it will not be ALL there is to the story.

[NickRowler]

When I looked up the definition of woke, it was a post-Civil Rights movement term used among Black people to tell each other to stay aware of social issues. I guess with the mindset that even though the Civil Rights movement is over, that doesn't mean racism is gone.

OK, so why are people calling Baymax woke???

It just feels like a word that had important meaning which people turned into a political buzzword for anything they don't like.

[DiegoPalacios]

It just feels like a word that had important meaning which people turned into a political buzzword for anything they don't like.

yeah, woke is often used as a buzzword to dismiss content or people as virtue signalers/folks who wanna play savior, just like sometimes diversity is used as one to try to sell stuff.....

OK, so why are people calling Baymax woke???

completely confused about this too.

[RobertBMarks]

...Ngl, and I really don't mean any offense by this, but all this railing against 'diversity' is starting to feel like...I mean it's kinda giving off "damn, who hurt you" vibes. ^^; If this were a topic titled "The Problem with Diversity Marketing" it might be less uncomfortable to read, y'know, knowing that's the focus. And if you'd really like to talk in-depth about that, maybe you should make one. Because as it is, my mental dogwhistle alarms are going off and it's hard to ignore them...

Sadly, I am an abuse survivor, so there is a pretty heartbreaking answer to the "damn, who hurt you" thing (and no, I'm not going to go into any further details). It's not directly related to this. It does, however, keep me off of a lot of social media, because the normalization of abusiveness makes things like Twitter REALLY bad places for somebody like me to be, and it makes me pretty aware of when somebody in a PR department starts gaslighting the public (because I've had my share of gaslighting inflicted on me).

The thing is that you're not wrong - diversity has become something that causes a knee-jerk reaction on both sides of the aisle. But, I don't think it's enough to just say "here's the problem with how it is being done," even though you are right that I wrote this quick guide because I saw one more piece of PR seppuku and I had just had enough - you have to say how to do it right. You have to walk people through how to think out their selling points and prioritize them. There are people here telling stories about amazing, diverse characters, and the last thing they need is to be dismissed as woke trash when they try to bring their work to the greater public (and make no mistake, I hope they will bring their work to the greater public some day).

(Hell, I'm a Russian Jew - I'm from a marginalized group, one that even the woke hate, and I can count on one hand the number of Biblical epics I've seen about the Old Testament that felt like they could have come from my religion - Noah and Gods and Kings...that's all that comes to mind. Everybody else Christianizes God. So, I know what it's like to see people supposedly represent you and get it wrong.)

The subject can't be talked about unless somebody...well...TALKS about it. And yeah, there are people who are going to have knee-jerk reactions, and who can blame them? You've got one side calling out anybody who objects as a racist, and the other calling out anybody who isn't a white heterosexual character as woke. There's no winning.

I stand by everything I wrote in this - and I will clarify, novellists, please DO talk about your diverse characters! But don't reduce them in your marketing to their skin colour or sexuality - they're so much more than that, and the full tapestry of who they are is what readers will fall in love with and want to see. DO talk about the diversity of your cast and your themes, but don't forget that they are part of a larger picture, and not even the most important part. Sell ALL the important aspects of your work, not just a tiny sliver.

I think heads don't roll anymore because no one actually cares. ^^; As we learned with the Batwoman movie fiasco, apparently making a movie and not even releasing it can bring in more profit than a potential lukewarm reception.

I'm pretty sure they didn't make any money off that - they booked at least a $100 million loss from what I understand. That said, there's actually a really interesting video about why the PR has become this bad by a former network executive. The short version is that new university graduates cost a lot less than experienced professionals with years of proven experience, and a bunch of places like Amazon and Disney started hiring people right out of university to do PR who didn't really know what they were doing. The video is right here:

[RobertBMarks]

It just feels like a word that had important meaning which people turned into a political buzzword for anything they don't like.

From what I've been able to gather, the road to where we are now with the word has a few more steps. I can't claim complete accuracy with this timeline - it's just based on what I've observed as a Canadian looking at the American political and pop culture scene from the outside.

It was co-opted at one point by the activist left and for a while came to refer to anybody who was ware of social issues, rather than just those in a particular group (such as the African-American community). The meaning was still fairly benign at that point. But, there were two moments that seemed to really radicalize the two sides of the political aisle, and those were the election of Barrack Obama for the American right, and the election of Donald Trump for the American left.

I think it would be wrong to depict these as inciting incidents. The real inciting incident, as far as I can tell, was the 2008 Financial Crisis. What seemed to happen after that was that the discontent with the system manifested in a radicalization on the right (mainly the Tea Party) along with pushback forcing the other side farther left, and then the election of Donald Trump just pushed the left the rest of the way. And, by the time Trump was elected, this had started manifesting in a full blown culture war. I've spent a lot of my career covering pop culture, and there was a distinct increase in hostility after 2008.

(And even Donald Trump really seemed to me to be more of a molotov cocktail thrown at Washington than an actual serious attempt to elect a workable president. Watching the Republican primaries was FASCINATING - the Republicans did NOT want that man as their candidate, and I remember a couple of articles about the RNC considering changing their primaries rules so that Trump wouldn't win. This was a massive populist "F--- you!" sent to the people in power.)

So, there has been this entrenchment of the two sides that I've seen over the last 14 years, and the way this has manifested on the activist left (and I am using this term to differentiate it from the rest of the left) has been this tendency towards championing things like diversity in a way that is reductionist to the point of absurdity (all black people = victims, all white people = oppressors, etc.) frequently not associated with any actual concrete action, and attempting to silence anybody who dissents (which is now known as cancel culture). The word "woke" has come to be associated with this.

(The far right is pretty nuts too, just in case anybody is worried that I'm picking sides, but the question is the development of the word "woke" into the negative connotations that it has right now, which means talking about what happened on the far left.)

Speaking personally, I gave up on serious pop culture commentary a couple of years ago because of the toxicity. I'd been involved in it to some degree or another since 2000, when I wrote one of the first online video games issues columns in the English language. There was a time when a female Counterstrike player came out and talked about her experience with sexism in the online community, and the general reaction from the community could be summarized as "I had no idea - thank you for sharing this!" That is unimaginable today. I don't actually know if a true marketplace of ideas in the discourse is possible anymore - nobody seems to want to build bridges. Back during the "Puppy wars" I saw members of the supposedly morally upright science fiction community making unironic voter suppression comments that would have been on the wrong side of the civil rights struggle - it was horrifying.

The thing is that OUTSIDE of the discourse, most of the actual population are not members of the far left or far right - they're moderates. One can only hope that one day they regain their voice, but there's a lot of fear out there of cancellation, which I think is one of the reasons this has gone on as long and gotten as bad as it has.

So, sorry to be a downer, but that's what I saw looking in from Canada as a centrist.

[NickRowler]

Don't know why you are ranting about American politics, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat or anything. Not sure why telling people who like diversity in media or lesbian vampire shows that they are "too woke" has anything to do with that stuff.

If I wrote a story about a trans person to be read by other transpeople and allies, would that make me woke?

[DiegoPalacios]

If I wrote a story about a trans person to be read by other transpeople and allies, would that make me woke?

Here you are hitting an interesting point......audience.

Different stories have different targets in mind, what appeals to a certain group may alienate others. And while some audiences have common interests with other niches, that's not always the case.

Seeking an audience with whom your story can resonate is often a solid strategy that can lead to a profitable and loyal following when it's done in a genuine manner. (and if the niche is big enough to pay the bills)

Here the key word is being genuine, not like Disney's clumsy half assed attempts of the thousands "first gay X"

[IndigoShirtProd]

I wanted to ask this earlier after reading through this thread, but decided against it thinking it wasn't a fair question. I have to ask, in this general advice thread about marking, why did you specifically bring up using inclusivity and diversity as a way to market. It just seems like an, to be fair, not entirely unrelated by marginally removed, opinion tacked on to "uncontroversial" advice. Why not just talk about how to market media in one thread and then discuss your issues with diversity marketing in a different thread? It just kind of distracts from what the supposed point of the thread was. I wanted to read some advice about marketing, not have to get into the geopolitical aspects of why I've mentioned the race of a character when I talk about on social media, but that's how I felt walking into this thread.

[RobertBMarks]

Don't know why you are ranting about American politics, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat or anything. Not sure why telling people who like diversity in media or lesbian vampire shows that they are "too woke" has anything to do with that stuff.

Well, you wanted to know why the word changed into something with negative connotations - that's the road I saw, and it went through American politics and the culture wars they caused. I physically can't chart that path without talking about them. My view was from the outside looking in - somebody from the United States might have a different view.

If I wrote a story about a trans person to be read by other transpeople and allies, would that make me woke?

Damned if I know without actually reading the story.

If it was a story in which the protagonist is nothing more than a caricature whose main point of characterization is their sexuality, and every single other character is a caricature whose characterization is based solely on their skin colour or sexuality, with next to no exploration of their lives or the complexities of the issues they face, then I would say that falls under the negative connotation of "woke" that right now exists (and, I imagine the people you were writing it for wouldn't enjoy it much either - something I've noticed about the works that meet that negative connotation is that the only people they please are the far left activists).

And if it's not that, I don't see how it could meet the definition of the negative connotation of "woke".

But that's just me and what I've been able to ferret out about it. I've seen a number of characters and stories that I wouldn't define as "negative connotation of woke" in a hundred years condemned for being just that.

[NickRowler]

Why would you (someone who is not trans) need to be the one who decides if my story that I wrote as a transperson about a transperson for transpeople is OK by your standards to be classified not by a negative term?

Same goes for media made by black people or anyone outside your identity. It's such a fucked up way to look at media. That is why all this woke labeling makes no sense to me.

[sable40k]

Not sure I have much to add in terms of marketing -- I agree with the general idea of making sure the story and its hooks have the spotlight. I'm just impressed that you're tackling an issue that inspires a LOT of instant polarization, but with a fairly even keel.

IIRC you do a bunch of reviews on the Discord too, right? Wish you luck rebuilding your audience

[RobertBMarks]

Why not just talk about how to market media in one thread and then discuss your issues with diversity marketing in a different thread?

Well, you probably won't like the answer, but because at this point they're linked, for better or worse.

Here's how this should work (and how, 10 years ago, it would have worked) - I'd have talked about identifying your selling points, how to priortize and order them, and left it at that. No discussion of how to avoid PR seppuku, no discussion of diversity marketing one way or the other. And then, I'd end by saying that if you want to see good examples in action, look at Disney, and Marvel, and CBS, and the BBC, and so on..

You might be starting to see the problem here. Every single exemplar that comes to mind to give seems to be in a race to find the fastest way to alienate their own fanbases. There's a massive negative example that stands as the elephant in the room, and it has to get addressed somehow. I honestly don't like having to do it, but I'm also REALLY tired of watching it play out, and if just one person reads this, goes on to get big, and DOESN'T make these mistakes, I'll call it a win.

[RobertBMarks]

Why would you (someone who is not trans) need to be the one who decides if my story that I wrote as a transperson about a transperson for transpeople is OK by your standards to be classified not by a negative term?

Because YOU literally asked ME "If I wrote a story about a trans person to be read by other transpeople and allies, would that make me woke?"

If you don't think that I am qualified to give you an answer, then don't ask me the question. I'll answer any question as best I can, and I can't promise I'll be right every time, but I'll always try my best - particularly in a matter as complex and controversial as this - but asking somebody a question like that and then complaining that they're not qualified to give you an answer is a pretty dick move.

And I would point out just how much uncertainty was baked into my answer...as well as the fact that I only ventured to talk about the story, and not the person writing it.

[DiegoPalacios]

I think the main reason people reacted as they did during this topic, is because many folks here make content that genuinely appeals to said audiences these big companies clumsily tried to aim to.

I guess you probably didn't want to put them in the same sack as Disney, Marvel, etc........but without a clarification, a misunderstanding was kinda bound to happen.

[IndigoShirtProd]

Well, you probably won't like the answer, but because at this point they're linked, for better or worse.

Yeah, I realize they are. You said diversity marketing, I got that much.

I honestly don't like having to do it

You don't have to, you owe no one the grace of advice on the topic. It seems like you just wanted to. I was just thinking it seems like the type of discussion that would thrive more if it wasn't attached to general marketing advice. There's plenty that could be said about the topic all on it's own.

a misunderstanding was kinda bound to happen.

I don't think there's much to misunderstand here, I just found it off putting when I wanted to read about general marketing and advice about it, and instead faced a discussion about marketing based on "superficial" traits of characters. Though, the fault is on my part; I assumed the discussion would go into the technical aspects of marketing not the philosophical or political.