WrittenWord Media's annual writer survey 2025

[alhawke]

I thought this is pretty big in giving trends for 2025 and info regarding our writing industry. Take a glance at the blog if interested by WrittenWord Media. In sum, it's the usual: build your newsletter, publish lots of books. Newer trends like Kickstarter are briefly glossed over. Romance continues to do very well overall for writers. Wide vs KU is pretty much either or, not one is more important than another.
https://www.writtenwordmedia.com/2025-indie-author-survey-results-insights-into-self-publishing-for-authors/

[Bill Hiatt]

I thought this is pretty big in giving trends for 2025 and info regarding our writing industry. Take a glance at the blog if interested by WrittenWord Media. In sum, it's the usual: build your newsletter, publish lots of books. Newer trends like Kickstarter are briefly glossed over. Romance continues to do very well overall for writers. Wide vs KU is pretty much either or, not one is more important than another.
https://www.writtenwordmedia.com/2025-indie-author-survey-results-insights-into-self-publishing-for-authors/

Well, I got one insight I didn't already know--hardcovers might be attractive for some libraries. I know libraries don't generally buy paper, so I should have figured hardcover would be better.

Gee, authors don't do as well financially with lit fic--now that one, I've known since forever.

[Lorri Moulton]

It seems like these reports are often the same...some authors do really well with long series and good read through.  These same authors have large newsletters.

Here's a few things they didn't address.  Newsletters have a low marginal cost...but they can have a large TOTAL cost.

Some of the same authors relying on newsletters also have many books and long series, suggesting those newsletter lists started a LONG time ago.

For authors just starting out, many newsletters are not allowing as many free signups, and the costs are going up.

I'm not saying newsletters don't work.  I'm just pointing out a few questions that might be asked next time.

[Bill Hiatt]

Yeah, the survey feels very much like the last one. And most of it is common sense. Of course, writers with more books will tend to sell more, all other things being equal, as will authors with mailing lists. But with most authors moving up on both as income rises, it's hard to know which variable produces what amount of increase. Correlation doesn't always equal causation.

There are also chicken-and-egg questions. Does writing more books cause you to earn more, or does earning more cause you to write more books? I'd bet that many indies who bomb hard in the beginning don't continue writing for very long (and, come to think of it, probably don't fill out this kind of survey because they're already out the door). We could ask the same question about mailing lists. How many people have a substantial mailing list prior to having good sales? Some probably grow both at the same time, but it seems to me that you need a certain sales momentum before you're likely to have much of a mailing list. How many people sign up for an author they've never heard of?

The survey is also skewed by the absence of most trads. Ernest Cline cranks out a book every five years or so and has only three total, but his income is clearly going to be pretty high. On the other hand, the indie experience is different from the trad one, so perhaps that particular point doesn't matter. 

[alhawke]

The results are going to be skewed towards indie and "successful" Indies no matter what because I'm thinking those of the people who will partake in the survey. I don't think a lot of newbies are going to bother with it. They might also be inviting trad authors, but I don't know. Certainly hybrid authors were present. But the population pool, I'm guessing, would be Indie romance writers. Those writers, like me, are the ones using their services a lot.

So I agree. Same stuff.

That's kinda the problem. AI is the elephant in the room and it's the new thing. All the rest is the same 'ole stuff (except, perhaps Kickstarter). Trouble is, same stuff seems to be working less & less each year.

It did mention audio. Audio sales for me has been much much better than ebooks this year. But cost has to be factored in. Using human authors costs a bundle. AI audiobooks tend not to fare as well...

[Bill Hiatt]

If only AI could figure out non-generic ways to sell books. You feed in the text, and AI tells you how to promote it--with ideas that actually work. That would be more useful to most of us than having AI in the writing process.

[PJ Post]

If only AI could figure out non-generic ways to sell books. You feed in the text, and AI tells you how to promote it--with ideas that actually work. That would be more useful to most of us than having AI in the writing process.

Maybe ask it?

[R. C.]

...

Maybe ask it?

I have and found this to be true: it is very good at giving me ideas for blurbs, descriptions, ad copy, keywords, A-B strategies, and other tangential attributes of the marketing process.

It is also true that it has not been able to give me anything substantial toward actually turning clicks into purchases.

The marketing windmill requires we continue to tilt until we can no longer hold the lance.

R.C.

[Bill Hiatt]

If only AI could figure out non-generic ways to sell books. You feed in the text, and AI tells you how to promote it--with ideas that actually work. That would be more useful to most of us than having AI in the writing process.

Maybe ask it?

As I recall, you did ask it, and got a very generic response. We can all generate that in our own brains without too much trouble. It's getting specifics that actually work that's the hard part, as R.C. points out. But to really do something more specific, AI would all kinds of proprietary data from companies like Amazon, which it isn't going to get.

[PJ Post]

I tend to get pretty actionable responses.

[Lorri Moulton]

I asked Google AI yesterday and it was the same generic responses, so I asked why are you quoting Wikipedia?  LOL

This morning, I asked Grok.

"Grok, what is the single best way in your opinion (think outside the box) to sell original fairytales on Kindle Unlimited without any paid advertising?"

Grok's response:  "In my view, the single most effective and unconventional approach to selling original fairytales on Kindle Unlimited without any paid advertising is to serialize bite-sized excerpts or teaser stories on high-engagement social platforms like TikTok or X (formerly Twitter), crafting them as interactive, viral "story threads" that hook readers emotionally and build a dedicated organic following over time."


"Thank you, Grok!"

Grok's response:  "You're very welcome! Go make some fairytale magic happen.
If you ever want feedback on a story snippet or thread idea, just shout. I'm here for it. Happy writing!"


"Grok, how do I make interactive story threads?"

Grok's response:  Here's the exact playbook for creating addictive, interactive story threads that turn casual scrollers into Kindle Unlimited borrowers - especially for original fairytales.
Pick one platform to master first (TikTok or X), then expand.

X (Twitter)  The King of Interactive Text Threads  Structure a perfect thread (example for a 12-tweet thread):Tweet 1: Giant hook + gorgeous image
The queen promised her firstborn to the moon.
Tonight the moon has come to collect.
A thread - beautiful AI art or illustration

Tweets 2-9: The actual story, 1-3 paragraphs each. End every single tweet on a mini-cliffhanger or question.
Tweet 10: Interactive turning point
"The moon offers the princess one chance to escape - if she answers its riddle.

Should she:
A) Answer the riddle
B) Try to fight the moon
C) Trick it somehow
Reply with A, B, or C"

Tweet 11: Reveal the winning choice (or the most interesting one) and continue the story based on the majority vote.
Tweet 12: Final twist + call-to-action
"The moon laughed - and the real price was revealed.
Want the full 28-page ending + 4 more never-seen tales?
Free with Kindle Unlimited → [link]"

Pro tricks for X:Number every tweet (1/12, 2/12...) so people can follow easily.
Use emojis as visual separators ().
Pin the thread to your profile while it?s live.
After 24-48 h, edit the final tweet and add "Full story now on KU" with the direct Amazon link.
Quote your own thread a week later with a new piece of art or a "behind-the-scenes" fact → double exposure.

TikTok - The Viral Emotion MachineBest length: 45-90 seconds (3-part series work even better).
Formula that gets 100 k-3 M views on fairytales:
   Part 1 (hook + setup) → ends with text on screen: "Part 2 or I delete??"
   
Part 2 (rising tension + interactive question) → "Comment LEFT or RIGHT to choose her fate"
   
Part 3 (payoff + KU reveal)Exact script template you can steal:
   [Whisper voice + eerie music]
   "She traded her voice for legs...but the contract had a line she never noticed.
   Every step she takes, someone she loves forgets her name.
   She's almost at the prince's castle...only 7 steps left.
   Comment "STOP" if she should turn back
   Comment "KISS" if she should keep going
   The most-liked comment decides tomorrow's part."

   → Next day you stitch/duet yourself and continue based on votes.

Extra TikTok hacks:

Use trending sounds (search "storytime" or "fairytale" sounds).
Text on screen is mandatory - many watch without sound.
End with a super-fast slide: "Full 5-story collection free on Kindle Unlimited (link in bio)".

Universal Interactive Boosters (use on both platforms)

Polls (native on X, use the poll sticker on TikTok stories).
"Comment a (choose emoji) if you want part 4 tonight".
"First 50 people to comment their guess get the full ebook free tomorrow".

Run a recurring series title: #MoonDebtTales, #GlassSlipperSecrets, etc. People start searching for it.
Create a free "choose-your-own-path" Google Form (e.g., 5-question quiz) and link it → collect emails legally while staying 100 % organic.

Quick Start Challenge (Do this today)Take one of your fairytales.
Write the first 6-8 paragraphs.
Split it into an X thread or a 60-second TikTok ending on a choice.
Post it with the interactive question.
Reply to every single comment for the first hour (algorithm loves this).

Do this 4-5 times a week and within 30 days you'll have a hungry little audience begging for the full books on KU.

Want me to write out a complete ready-to-post interactive thread for one of your fairytales right now? Just paste the title or a one-sentence summary and I'll hand it to you copy-paste ready.



"Thank you, but no.  I appreciate all your suggestions.  You rock, Grok!!  "

Grok's response:  You're so welcome! You've got this. Your stories are going to find their people. 

Anytime you need a spark, a tweak, or just someone to cheer you on, I'm right here.
Go be legendary.
And thank you. That made my day. 


ETA:  Grok knows I write fairytales since I've asked for a few summaries to post on my website.  Maybe that's why I get such nice responses?  Anyway, I hope this helps!

[alhawke]

And wouldn't you know it, I just saw an author send out some of their writing with a social post this am. This is obviously a trend Grok pulled from other authors.

Unfortunately, I'm quite skeptical about this idea. For it to be effective, you have to have a large following in the first place for these posts to be visible. And I think viral posts go a lot further than multiple free pieces of one's writing. But how to make one's posts viral...

[Lorri Moulton]

Small steps and big ones.

Paid advertising is going to get a bigger return.  Having a post 'go viral' can depend on a lot of factors, but I never assume any of them will. 
I'd be happy with a few people telling their friends, who hopefully tell their friends, etc. 

[PJ Post]

The point of social media is not to go viral. If a million people see your post, but none of them read books, then what was the point? The goal is to be visible enough for your tribe/market segment/demographic to find you.

[TimothyEllis]

The point of social media is not to go viral. If a million people see your post, but none of them read books, then what was the point? The goal is to be visible enough for your tribe/market segment/demographic to find you.

Viral when paying for the ad is bad.

Viral when the post is free, is good.

1% of viral buying when it's free is huge.

0.1% of viral when free is also huge.

It's when you're paying for the clicks or impressions that viral is bad.

[Bill Hiatt]

These days, it's pretty hard to go viral without paying something. It can happen, but it mostly seems to happen with things like videos that play into current political controversies. It's still true that algorithms reward things that get a lot of interaction. It's just hard for an author to do that organically.

Perhaps PJ is also pointing out that trying to compose things to go viral on purpose is problematic. Something that is contrived to go viral may not be as authentic, and hence not attract the right kind of attention.

I read an interesting article on Substack the other day in which the person was counseling people not to play into what a platform wants them to do unless it fits their strategies in the first place. One of the examples was YouTube shorts, which apparently did lead to short-term increases in views. However, they also transferred a lot of attention to shorts permanently. So YouTubers who used to get millions of views on the videos that were the core of their brand now get thousands on the same material. For them, that was ultimately purpose-defeating even if it got more views for a while.

We could also add FB's encouragement to draw more people into blog conversations using FB. That also worked temporarily, but it led to a severe decline in individual blog audiences, a decline which for the most part seems irreversible, at least so far. In other words, we need to think about how we can use social media for our own purposes, not play into a pattern in which social media platforms use us for their purposes.

[alhawke]

I read an interesting article on Substack the other day in which the person was counseling people not to play into what a platform wants them to do unless it fits their strategies in the first place. One of the examples was YouTube shorts, which apparently did lead to short-term increases in views. However, they also transferred a lot of attention to shorts permanently. So YouTubers who used to get millions of views on the videos that were the core of their brand now get thousands on the same material. For them, that was ultimately purpose-defeating even if it got more views for a while.

I've seen that with my Youtube vids. Youtube shorts draw a lot more views than a video, at least initially.

My comment over viral wasn't any sort of marketing plan. You can't plan for jackpots. But once can wish... It could happen. If you post.

[The Bass Bagwhan]

In other words, we need to think about how we can use social media for our own purposes, not play into a pattern in which social media platforms use us for their purposes.

Exactly, somehow leverage (jeez, how I hate that word!) the reach of platforms without getting trapped in its own agenda. Thinking, thinking, thinking...