If you’re going to have Twitter and Facebook and a blog and Pinterest and whatever else, then I think you have an obligation to give them equal attention.
Ok, maybe not an obligation. But I think it’s smart not to set one or the other up and then neglect it.
This was triggered by a particular author who announced a book deal they’d signed (their first) on Facebook, but never bothered to blog about it. Well, what if, like me, you only follow people on their blogs? I, if I were a fan of this author, would now not know that they had a book deal because they didn’t consider it worth announcing on their blog.
That’s foolish.
No, it’s not you. This is not anyone that follows this blog. (As far as I know.)
Basically, my point is, if you’re going to use social media, use it well.
(Oh, and it seems Pinterest is not as special as Twitter or Facebook, because spellcheck still flags it as a spelling error…)
M.H. Lee 
Interestingly Pinterest allegedly has better conversion than Twitter and G+ put together, so should be more special; but then my spell-checker does not suggest “and” if I type “anf” by accident, so I have little faith in their understanding of the way humans think or act.
I agree that major events should be mentioned on each account (especially given how easy it is to automate reposting, or hit a share button) – unless the accounts have specific policies, in which case it is polite to have a notice on, for example, your blog saying it is for essays and directing people who want forthcoming signings, &c. to your Facebook page.
My solution is to just have this blog…not a successful approach, granted. But simple at least. Haha.
You’re right–most of the sharing across platforms can be automated, so why not do it?
The counter argument to fully automating across platforms is that it can look like link-spam if it is all you do.
Good point.