A
piece in recent New York Times Book Review provoked some letters to the editor. They and the author’s response, in turn, provoked response in my
online writing group. The questions revolved around the role and virtues of
traditional publishing in comparison to the world being formed by the digital
onslaught. I too had some reactions. They slightly amended are below.
The letters and writer's response illustrate the complexity
and crazy-making of the current techno disruption.
1. Amazon is not the Walmart of book publishing. It is
Walmart. It's mission seems to be to sell everything to everybody, and a key
tactic is to sell everything for less so as to own the market share.
Ultimately, that can harm its suppliers.
2. I am grateful to Amazon for its Kindle and CreateSpace
divisions. They’ve helped us publish a novel that otherwise would not be
published. Now it's my job to see if I can find a market. Also, as a reader,
I like having all my stuff in one lightweight, portable place.
3. The sanguine view
of the finer glories of traditional
publishing's value added ---"promotion and development" is quaint.
4. A contention that the real climb in e-bookssales is due
to "one-time conversion of great titles from publishers’ backlists. .
. reprints" is "illusory"
misses the point. When Sony and Phillips introduced CDs (in '82 I think) the
great majority of purchases were by boomers who could afford the equipment and
were eager to rebuild and recreate their music libraries. It was a backlist
experience. Equipment prices went down.CDs went universal.
5. The real battle being waged now is over who and what
shapes standard business practices and thereby controls the market. With every
shift and tumble in book publishing, authors have been the collateral damage. This
period is no different, except. . .
6. The notion of what constitutes a brand represents a
modicum of hope. Authors have a greater opportunity to be seen as brands than
publishers. That's not to say, every author a Proctor & Gamble. But with somewhat favorable payment
arrangements, the current new publishing model could work work well.
7. Remenber when Barnes & Noble was the villain?
No comments:
Post a Comment