I've read several "in the know" folks from across the Internet, and none of them agree, so I put it to you: what is the "proper" methodology to use to report (on page one of a manuscript) the word count of the book?
Type 1 people say "number of pages of manuscript multiplied by 250, rounded up to nearest thousand."
Type 2 people say "use what your word processor says, rounded up to the nearest thousand."
Here's the problem: word processors (MS Word 2007 among them) are wrong. Often times being off by more than 20%. This stems from the idea that the program simply doesn't know what a word is. Yes, I know...that's dumb...but that's the answer.
As a result, I'm a "Type 1" person. Sure, it's an overestimation of the actual word count (but not by much.) But still...I have to ask, and I did--which one is "correct"?
I'm sticking with Type 1--if it's good enough for Louisa Burton, it's good enough for me.