Why Quiet Books Are Not Failing And How Steve Kidd Is Bringing Them Back to Life

San Francisco Post Staff on February 25, 2026

For many authors, the most discouraging moment does not come during the writing process. It comes months after launch, when the excitement fades, rankings slip, and the book that once felt full of promise quietly disappears from view. Steve Kidd believes this moment is not a failure. He sees it as a pause.

Steve works with authors whose books have gone quiet, sometimes weeks after launch and sometimes decades later. His message is simple but disruptive. Books do not expire. Visibility does.

According to Steve, the publishing world has trained authors to think in terms of deadlines. Launch day becomes the finish line, not the starting point. When a book does not explode immediately, many writers assume the opportunity has passed. Steve challenges that belief head-on. Readers do not check publication dates, and algorithms do not care how long a book has been sitting on a shelf. They respond to relevance, clarity, and presence. When an author shows up again, the book can, too.

Visibility Is About Humans, Not Genres

One of the most surprising aspects of Steve’s work is that he does not separate fiction and nonfiction authors. In his view, visibility is not genre-based. It is human-based.

Algorithms reward activity. Readers reward connection. Whether the book is a novel or a business guide, the mechanics are the same. What changes is how the author talks about the story or its value. The system itself does not need to be reinvented for each category. What matters is whether the author consistently reconnects with the people the book was written for.

This approach removes a major mental barrier for writers who feel boxed in by industry rules. Steve reframes visibility as a shared experience between author and reader rather than a marketing tactic.

The Role Social Media Actually Plays

Social media is often misunderstood in the publishing world. Steve does not treat it as the engine of success. He sees it as the spark.

A few posts alone will not revive a book. What social platforms do well is reintroduce curiosity. They remind the market that the author exists and that the book still has something to say. That awareness creates movement, but the real work happens through consistency and genuine engagement.

In Steve’s words, social media starts the fire, but connection is what keeps it burning. When authors show up with clarity and intention, readers respond. Conversations restart. Reviews return. The algorithm begins to pay attention again, not out of nostalgia, but because the signal has returned.

Measuring Success Beyond Sales

Sales matter, but Steve does not treat them as the deepest indicator of success. For him, visibility comes down to two people. The author and the reader.

He looks for signs of real connection. Does the author feel seen for who they are and what they carry? Does the reader feel reached rather than targeted? When that relationship forms, everything else tends to follow naturally. Reviews increase. Referrals happen. New opportunities appear.

Sales often rise as a result, but Steve sees them as symptoms, not the root cause. The real win is when the author and the reader finally meet in a meaningful way.

The Missed Opportunity After Launch

The most overlooked window in publishing is the period after a book is released. Many authors stop once the launch ends, believing the hard part is over. Steve argues that this is where the real momentum begins.

Media opportunities, speaking invitations, interviews, partnerships, and community growth do not usually arrive before a book is out. They happen because the book exists and the author keeps showing up. A book gives an author permission to enter conversations in a way that feels natural and welcomed.

When authors treat launch day as a celebration rather than a beginning, they miss the rewards of sustained presence.

Proof That Revival Is Possible

Steve has seen books revived at both ends of the timeline. Some were published decades ago. Others stalled immediately after release.

One author came to him after years of silence, her book quietly collecting dust. With the right setup and consistent visibility, that same book reached number one on the bestseller list within days and opened doors to podcast appearances and live events she never expected.

In another case, a brand new book launched and sank quickly, ranking far outside its category. With no changes to the content, only visibility and optimization, the book climbed into the top rankings. Nothing else shifted. The book did not fail. It simply went quiet.

Steve’s takeaway is clear. A quiet book is not dead. It is waiting to be carried back into the conversation.

The Mindset Shift That Changes Everything

Before any system works, Steve focuses on mindset. The first shift he encourages is moving from promotion to relationship. Authors stop asking how to sell and start asking how to connect with the humans their book was written for.

The second shift is redefining what a bestseller means. Steve sees it as a credential, not a finish line. It signals readiness for bigger conversations and larger rooms.

The final shift is presence over perfection. Visibility does not reward waiting. It rewards showing up.

When those three shifts click, authors stop chasing attention and start building resonance.

Why Personal Branding Carries the Book

Readers do not follow books alone. They follow people. For a book to live beyond launch, the reader has to understand who the author is, what they stand for, and who they serve.

Steve emphasizes clarity over aesthetics. Personal branding is not about polish or ego. It is about being recognizable and remembered. When the brand is clear, the book no longer carries the weight alone.

The Advice Steve Gives Every Author

If Steve could offer one piece of guidance before any launch, it would be this. Treat launch day as the beginning.

Bestseller status is not the victory lap. It is the starting signal. Authors who continue to show up with consistency and intention give their books a chance to grow, evolve, and create impact long after release day fades.

Quiet does not mean finished. It simply means it is time to speak again.

Why California Brands Are Rethinking Textile Destruction

San Francisco Post Staff on February 25, 2026

California’s Responsible Textile Recovery framework is reshaping how companies handle end-of-life textiles. Under SB 707, brands can no longer rely on broad recycling claims or informal disposal arrangements. They will be required to document exactly where textiles go and whether those pathways meet circular recovery standards.

For many organizations, this represents more than a compliance update. It marks a structural shift in how textile waste is categorized, tracked, and verified. Traditional recycling methods often down-cycle textiles into rags, insulation, or low-value industrial materials. While these approaches may reduce landfill volume, they may not meet SB 707’s definition of circularity and might not qualify toward recovery targets when enforcement begins in 2028.

This distinction is critical. Under the new framework, diversion alone may no longer be enough. Brands must demonstrate that materials are reintroduced into productive use in a manner consistent with circular economy principles. That means documented textile-to-textile recovery, not just material displacement into secondary markets.

As a result, compliance, sustainability, procurement, and risk management teams are being encouraged to collaborate more closely than ever before. Textile disposal is no longer treated as a back-end operational function. It is increasingly viewed as a board-level compliance issue with financial, reputational, and regulatory implications.

Beyond regulatory compliance, companies face another growing concern: recirculation risk. When uniforms, samples, excess inventory, or defective merchandise are not destroyed properly, they may reappear on resale platforms, in gray markets, or worn by individuals falsely representing affiliation with a brand. This exposes organizations to reputational harm, fraud risk, internal security concerns, and potential legal liabilities.

Many brands historically relied on third-party recyclers without full visibility into final disposition. In an environment where ESG scrutiny is intensifying and enforcement timelines are clear, assumptions may no longer be defensible. Organizations are now asking more detailed questions: Where exactly do materials go? Is there documented proof of destruction? Does the recovery method align with statutory definitions of circularity?

Vespene Recycling was developed to address both regulatory compliance and brand protection concerns. The Nevada-based facility specializes in certified textile destruction, using industrial shredding processes designed to render branded goods permanently unwearable. This helps ensure that products are fully removed from circulation and cannot be resold, repurposed informally, or misused.

What differentiates Vespene’s approach is traceability. Each project includes a documented chain-of-custody from pickup through final disposition, along with certificates of destruction suitable for audits, internal control verification, and regulatory reporting. For compliance teams, this level of documentation transforms disposal from an assumption-based process into a defensible control mechanism.

Traceability is becoming increasingly important as regulatory scrutiny grows. Under SB 707, organizations will need to demonstrate measurable progress toward recovery targets. Vague sustainability language or generalized recycling claims may not withstand regulatory review. Documented processes, verifiable pathways, and auditable records will define compliance.

When brands pursue circular recovery objectives, shredded material can be directed into a verified textile-to-textile recycling pathway through The New Denim Project in Guatemala. Unlike traditional down-cycling, this process produces new fabric, supporting true material regeneration rather than degradation. Importantly, the pathway includes documentation aligned with SB 707 recovery requirements and broader ESG reporting standards.

The shift toward documented destruction and circular recovery also reflects broader market pressures. Investors are increasingly evaluating sustainability disclosures. Consumers are scrutinizing green claims. Regulators are signaling stronger enforcement across environmental reporting categories. In this context, disposal practices that once seemed adequate now present reputational exposure.

California has historically led environmental regulatory trends that later expand nationally. Brands operating within the state recognize that SB 707 may signal broader changes across other jurisdictions. Proactively strengthening textile disposal practices today may reduce future compliance disruption elsewhere.

As enforcement approaches, companies are reassessing legacy disposal arrangements that relied on limited oversight. The emerging consensus is clear: certified destruction paired with documented circular recovery offers the most reliable strategy for meeting regulatory obligations while protecting brand integrity.

Textile waste is no longer simply a sustainability talking point. It is becoming a measurable compliance category with defined standards and enforcement timelines. Organizations that adapt early may be better positioned to manage risk, demonstrate accountability, and align with evolving circular economy expectations.

In California’s new regulatory landscape, the question is no longer whether textiles are diverted from landfill. The question is whether brands can demonstrate, with documentation and transparency, exactly what happens next.

California Bill Aims to Secure Home Insurance for Fire-Safe Homes

San Francisco Staff 2 on February 25, 2026

A new legislative proposal in California, SB 1076, aims to provide insurance access to homeowners who have made significant upgrades to protect their properties from wildfires. Authored by State Senator Sasha Renée Pérez, the bill—known as the Insurance Coverage for Fire‑Safe Homes Act—seeks to address growing concerns that homeowners who have invested in fire-resistant measures face insurance denials or high premiums. The bill ensures that those who harden their homes against wildfires will be able to secure or maintain their insurance coverage.

California is no stranger to devastating wildfires, and many homeowners who rebuild their properties to the highest fire safety standards are still denied insurance coverage. This new bill is designed to prevent insurers from refusing to cover homes that meet fire mitigation guidelines, offering reassurance to homeowners and promoting resilience in high-risk areas.

Defining Fire-Safe Standards and Homeowner Requirements

Under SB 1076, insurance companies would be required to offer and renew policies for homes that comply with specific wildfire safety measures. These measures include home hardening—such as fire-resistant roofs, ember-resistant vents, and cleared defensible space around the property—and other state-mandated guidelines. By aligning insurance coverage with fire mitigation practices, the bill ensures that homeowners investing in wildfire prevention are not penalized with the denial of coverage.

The California Insurance Commissioner will be responsible for establishing these specific fire safety standards. These standards will be aligned with existing fire safety guidelines and programs such as the Safer From Wildfires initiative, which includes home hardening, defensible space, and fire-resilient landscaping practices. Meeting these fire-safe criteria will help ensure that homeowners who take proactive steps to protect their homes will not be left without insurance.

Enforcement and Penalties for Non-Compliance

One key aspect of SB 1076 is its enforcement provisions. If insurers fail to offer or renew coverage for homes that meet the fire-safe standards, they may face substantial penalties. The California Insurance Commissioner is granted the authority to bar non-compliant insurers from offering home and auto insurance in the state for up to five years. This provision is designed to deter selective coverage practices and ensure consistency across the insurance industry.

By introducing such a measure, SB 1076 aims to promote fairness and eliminate the risk that certain homeowners will be left without coverage, despite having taken the necessary steps to make their homes more resilient to wildfires. Insurers who refuse to abide by the bill’s requirements could be excluded from one of the largest insurance markets in the country, providing a strong incentive to comply.

Support from Wildfire Survivors and Advocacy Groups

The bill has received significant support from wildfire survivors and advocacy organizations, including the Eaton Fire Survivors Network and Consumer Watchdog. These groups have long argued that homeowners who rebuild to meet fire-safe standards often face insurance denials or price hikes, despite their efforts to make their homes safer. Advocates assert that this legislation will help mitigate the risk of insurance companies withdrawing coverage after homes are rebuilt to meet fire safety standards.

Homeowners who have invested in fire-resistant upgrades often struggle to secure coverage, particularly in wildfire-prone areas like California’s Bay Area. Advocates argue that linking insurance access to fire mitigation measures ensures that homeowners are not penalized for their efforts to protect their properties. By mandating that insurance companies offer policies to these homeowners, SB 1076 provides a critical pathway for continued protection.

Impact on Housing Market and Real Estate Dynamics in the Bay Area

The proposed bill could have significant implications for California’s housing market, particularly in the Bay Area, where high housing costs intersect with increased wildfire risks. Bay Area homeowners, who are often required to make expensive fire mitigation improvements, will likely benefit from SB 1076, as the bill ensures they retain access to insurance, regardless of the wildfire risk in their area.

Experts anticipate that the bill may have a broader impact on the real estate market as well. Properties that meet the fire-safe standards may become more attractive to buyers, as they will be eligible for insurance coverage, even in fire-prone regions. Buyers may prioritize homes that meet these fire-safety criteria, knowing that securing affordable insurance coverage will be more accessible.

Additionally, by offering insurance coverage to homes with fire-resistant upgrades, the bill provides a safety net for property owners who may otherwise be left vulnerable to the rising costs of insurance in high-risk regions.

Challenges and Concerns Raised by the Insurance Industry

Despite the support from wildfire survivors and advocacy groups, SB 1076 has faced criticism from the insurance industry. Some insurers are concerned that the bill could exacerbate the already strained California insurance market by increasing the burden on companies that are already facing challenges due to wildfire risk. Industry representatives argue that mandating coverage for fire-safe homes, without addressing broader issues such as insurance pricing and underwriting, could lead to higher costs for policyholders across the state.

Moreover, insurers warn that the bill could lead to fewer companies willing to operate in California, potentially reducing the number of insurance options available to consumers. The possibility of insurers pulling out of the market, or reducing coverage options, remains a significant concern as the bill moves through the legislative process.

However, proponents of the bill argue that it strikes a necessary balance by encouraging homeowners to take proactive steps to mitigate wildfire risks while ensuring that those who invest in fire-safe measures are not penalized by insurers. Advocates also emphasize that the long-term benefits of improved resilience to wildfires outweigh the short-term challenges for insurers.

Day: February 25, 2026