2025 Publishing Trends You Can’t Ignore: My Top 5 Predictions

[@PhoenixCrown]

Love your perspectives! 6:20 Does anyone really want to read a story written by AI? The way I view it is this: "There's nothing new under the sun," meaning (almost) everything has been done before. So why do I enjoy reading "the same story" repeatedly? I've read A LOT of fantasy, and I'm currently reading Wizard's First Rule, which is from the 90s, Tolkien derivative etc. and... wait for it... AWESOME! In my opinion, the reason we keep reading "the same story" is because they are all inherently unique by virtue of every person being unique. Every story is told through the lens of the author and therefore will have a different take, style, voice, perspective, lesson, promise, delivery etc. If we allow AI to create what we define as "art," it is a regurgitation or amalgamation of great things other people created. Until "AI" is actual AI as we used to define it, meaning a sentient form of life that deserves as much respect as a human being, count me out. I'm not interested in a machine repurposing labors of love that took people years of their life to create and creating some mockery of it in 5 minutes. And when that happens, well, we may have Skynet to deal with.

[@ShaneStapler]

@@PhoenixCrown Real

[@justinfikestorycastle]

Indeed! I don’t want to go too far down that specific rabbit hole but I have a LOT of thoughts about how I think AI will impact writing and publishing, so I’m planning a separate video to talk about it in more depth. Like you said and I tried to touch on briefly I think for many of us it’s already clarifying why we read stories in the first place and what is important to us about them, etc.

[@AJShiningThreads]

AI might kill the clean "windowpane" prose style exemplified by Sanderson, much like how photography transformed portraiture and ushered in Impressionism. When the mechanical perfection of photography made realism redundant, painters turned inward, focusing on light, emotion, and texture. Likewise, as AI excels at crisp, functional prose, writers may lean into mood, subtext, and ambiguity-styles that resist easy replication.

[@justinfikestorycastle]

It’s funny I just filmed a video yesterday diving into exactly this topic. Short version is that’s my take exactly 👍

[@Jonathan-eb5zi]

As long as it’s comprehensible and not purple, great. Sanderson’s stylistic hallmark is a complete lack of style whatsoever. His is the exemplar of bland, industrial prose. If AI forces writers to be better than that, I’m all for it.

[@Cyberlucy]

Thank you! This is extremely helpful

[@justinfikestorycastle]

Awesome to hear! Which trend did you find most helpful to think about?

[@Kesedrith]

Traditional publishing is, indeed, going to have to come up with "something." After taking a class in editing and publishing and reading several essays by industry insiders, I still remember two of them saying that trad publishers are going to start getting hit with the question: what are you bringing to the table? What are you going to do for me that warrants your taking 80% of sales? Marketing? Most authors are still going to have to do most, if not all, of that themselves anyway. Getting into libraries and bookstores? Again, if you've taken the time and effort to produce a good book, you can do that on your own. (Don't say you can't. I'm part of a writer's group that is managing to do just that, including national chain bookstores. It is possible for self-publishers.) Distribution?...Seriously, what do trad publishers bring to the table that warrants them getting 80% of the take, especially when you add in that you'll likely have to have an agent who's going to take about 15% of the 20% that you get. I'm no longer seeing that it makes sense at all to go with trad.

[@justinfikestorycastle]

Exactly this. Traditional is currently still the primary (only?) avenue for those top few 1% household name type of authors in each genre, but for the other 99% the economics just make less and less sense. It would be different if traditional consistently offered heavy marketing and basically guaranteed sales, but given that most authors are expected to essentially row their own boat or be tossed aside for “poor performance” it’s hard to justify putting in all that effort for such an inequitable royalty share.

[@ShaneStapler]

great vid

[@justinfikestorycastle]

Thanks! I’m glad you liked it

[@ShaneStapler]

@justinfikestorycastle tracked down farshore 1-3 box set and im excited to read :) thanks for the vids and all the hard work

[@justinfikestorycastle]

That’s awesome! Happy reading and I hope you love the story

[@friendlybrilliant4902]

I only read paper. It may be a "1984" thing. I trust print beter than online editions.

[@justinfikestorycastle]

I know many people who feel the same 👍

[@aaronaragon7838]

Erica "Fear Of Flying" Jong lamented the dearth of readers. She offered that we need more readers than writers fighting for a shrinking market. What are the readership trends in the USA today?

[@endo4682]

Agree on self publishing becoming more viable, but the industry has always been slow to innovate

[@anitaberendsen9525]

I miss the censure of the totalitare we f

[@cgreen6099]

Until I actually OWN an ebook you won’t see me ‘BUYING’ them.

[@harish123az]

What do you think buying them means? You have borrowing through kindle unlimited which you need to return, but if you actually buy an ebook it stays on your device forever unless you delete it yourself and it stays offline on your device So what exactly are you saying here?

[@justinfikestorycastle]

Do you mean the kindle unlimited program? Because you do own ebooks that you buy directly, although it’s totally fair to prefer reading physical books for other reasons

[@cgreen6099]

@@justinfikestorycastle Lol no you really don’t. Sorry but you don’t own them. You lease the right to have them. Just like a library.

[@carneliancaryatid]

@@cgreen6099 Actually, you do...at times. For example, authors regularly give away ebooks outside of online stores to entice readers to try their work. Readers own those. Even though many carry licensing language, the truth is that if you want to give that book away, you can, just like a paperback. The thing that worries authors and publishers the most is that it's much, much easier to copy and distribute ebooks illegally than it is to copy and distribute physical books illegally; that's why they indulge in legal restrictions on distribution (licensing). No one wants to have their ebooks pirated, and that's who licensing agreements are directed at, not honest readers who simply want to share or give away a book they paid for. Your cavalier attitude completely overlooks the problems authors and publishers have in trying to dampen the effects of digital piracy. Authors deserve to be paid for their work, just like anyone else. Buy physical books if you want; that's totally up to you. But don't dog on authors for trying to protect their livelihood.

[@cliveadams7629]

​@cgreen6099 You can in fact own your Kindle books. Use Epubor Ultimate (about £70 for a lifetime licence with ongoing updates) to strip DRM and export as PDF or EPUB book which you can read on any reader. I put my Kindle purchases onto my reMarkable so I can annotate as I read. Techincally I guess it's illegal but I don't distribute them to anyone else so I feel I'm well within my rights. Also means that if I have a problem with Amazon and lose my account I still have all my books just as I would if I had bought the paper versions.

[@timmyholland8510]

Many publishers are now under the thumb of radical politics and expect alot of mediocre soft Marxism gibberish. It might be easier to find value in reading the Classics, not compromised gibberish.

[@SourGravity]

Ironically you seem like the most radical person here.

[@aaronaragon7838]

Facile take on literature...the US produces no "radicals" as evidenced by the lack of universal healthcare, national jobs program, debt relief/amnesty, animal rights. Get thee in haste to Donnie's coronation...

[@timmyholland8510]

@@SourGravity What do you think is radical? In Liberal Media everything not their extreme view is extremists, no matter how reasonable or true. Sometimes they are biased against the traditional, though traditional created freedom of speech.