Sock puppetry

I thought the hoo-ha about this had died down, but came across it on a forum the other day.

For those who don't know (lucky you) it's the creation of false identities, on line, to argue with on forums, or twitter, or put lovely comments on your blog so you can look really popular. Some months ago a writer admitted on radio to using countless sock puppets to develop an internet storm about his books - and there was general agreement that this was cheating.

It still goes on, apparently. (You yawning already?). Which leaves me wondering - why? Am I missing something? Should I, too, have an alter ego who drops by the blog on a regular basis and tells me how clever and witty I am?

Whether I should or not, I'm not going to. I have enough trouble keeping the person I am in order without creating a separate persona. It feels too much like hard work. For instance, when commenting on your own blog, do you write something witty and wonderful and risk someone clicking on the link - and then finding it's you all the time? Or write something tedious and make it look as if you have a following of plonkers? And if you review your own book do you eulogise about its wonderfulness, or remind people of the wonky bit on page 74 that you were secretly hoping nobody would notice? No - it's all far too complicated for me.

But - is it cheating? Really? When it's so easy, and I understand it's common? We beaver away at our own little blogs, and love it when there's a gathering of comments. Everyone must love us. Or does it simply perpetuate an illusion that online popularity matters - when it is really the love of friends and family that keep the world turning, not the number of comments on a blog.

Or am I simply naive?

We can't all be 'best-selling writers'

Next time you're in a bookshop, scan the shelves and count just how many 'best selling authors' or 'Number one best sellers' or 'prizewinning writers' there are.

Some are genuine - we can all check books in line for major prizes. But I wonder about the book claiming to be longlisted in a competition held by an obscure seaside town. And as for 'New York Times Bestseller' - how can we check that? Or did someone buy 100 copies of his or her own book in a day and earned it that way?

If you're a twitterer, or dip into Facebook from time to time - have a look at a profile or ten. Every second author is 'prizewinning' or 'best-selling' ...

It's impossible. For every book that is a 'best-seller' there has to be thousands (or more) that do fairly well but don't rock the boat. For every 'prizewinner' are all the writers who are also-rans. I don't blame anyone not including 'submitted to the Outer Mongolian prize for genre fiction but didn't get anywhere' in gold letters above the title. Or leaving off 'made it into the top 100 on Amazon for half an hour.'

How do you react to this? I respond by not believing anyone who claims any status or award (unless it's one of the big ones). It smacks of self-aggrandisement and I want to sit these writers down and remind them that they eat and sleep like the rest of us. They've written the best book they could - it's enough to be proud of that.

Or maybe they are being disingenuous - they are the best-selling writer in their family? Or their town? Or have won a prize in the short-stories-about-a-slug contest?

Pah, they write and hope and are elated one minute and disappointed the next, just like the rest of us.

(Though you might like to know that I'm the best-selling travel writer in the street where I live ...)