Proofreading is an essential part of the book publishing process, a step which can make or break the reputation of both the author and the publishing company they are attached to. If they get it right, awards can be won and further contracts can be signed. Get it wrong, sales can plummet and an authors reputation can suffer. But with the rise of books written by high profile online stars and YouTube success stories, some argue that the correlation between quality and sales seems to have disappeared. This has led me to ask the question, has proofreading been cast aside in pursuit of quick book sales?

A couple of years ago, I would have been the prime market for books written by online stars. To an extent now, I still am. Yes, I'm more choosy about what I buy and at what price, but if I see something I genuinely want to read, I will buy it. Tyler Oakley's autobiography Binge was honestly one of the best non-fiction books I read in 2015. Me being selective about these books has to do with one thing and one thing only. The quality of the book.

The past month has seen the publication of some long anticipated YouTube titles, most notably Tanya Burr's cookery book Tanya Bakes, and Carrie Hope Fletcher's debut novel On The Other Side. Both online content creators have a huge following, most of whom keenly anticipate the release of their publications, so its not surprising that both books have sold a huge amount of copies. However, in some cases fans have left melancholy reviews that all point towards the same issue: they wish the publishers had spent more time editing and proof-reading the authors work.

Shortly after it's publication, fans (like those above) noticed that vital ingredient information was missing from Tanya Bakes and called for Penguin books to right the situation. Tanya Burr also echoed this, tweeting out apologies and amendments to those who asked her for recipe advice. Penguin Books responded with an apology, access to correct online recipes for those who needed them, and a promise to replace fan's copies with correct editions if they wanted them. You can see the full apology here. Reviews (that can be found on on Amazon) for Carrie Hope Fletcher's novel On The Other Side also received similar comments from fans, who argued that closer editing and further proofreading from the publisher  would have made for a much easier read. I thoroughly agree with these comments; the novel overall is an enjoyable and original read, but could benefit from a little more editing. I particularly found there to be some awkward wording and sentences as long as a five line paragraph, which could have easily been altered to the story's advantage.

With this evidence in front of me, I can't help but wonder if proofreading has been cast aside by some publishers in exchange for a quick publishing date that would ultimately lead to a boost in sales. Perhaps, like one reviewer of Tanya Bakes says, publishing companies are more focused on getting YouTube books out there before a YouTuber's popularity wavers. Closer proofreading and editing is therefore sometimes overlooked for the sake of sales. 

I asked Kelly Bishop, proud owner of book blog Bright Book and Creative Writing undergraduate, for her take on this issue:

"I think that whilst it's the job of the editor to scan books for errors, 'quick' publishing really prevents them from doing this well and in an attempt to get books out quick, mistakes are often missed. I think this happens with all books sometimes, but I've noticed, in a few books that I've picked up from the [YouTube] genre and skimmed through, a fair few mistakes that make me almost unwilling to buy it."

Whilst publishing errors can be disappointing for readers, they will no doubt have a negative affect upon authors. They are, after all, being given the opportunity to achieve their dreams and create something to be proud of. If the publishing is not quite up to scratch, is it truly the authors fault? With more exciting YouTube publications by Zoe Sugg, Joe Sugg, and Hannah Hart (to name but a few) soon to be released, I hope that recent issues have placed proofreading firmly on top of a publisher's agenda once more. Readers and authors alike will surely be left disappointed if this isn't the case.