Writing on the Ether | JaneFriedman.com

author, authors, Jonny Geller, Curtis Brown, An Agent's Manifesto, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, publishing, publisher, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether, curator, curation, Danny Sullivan, CNET

From March 22, 2012
Part of my series of columns on pub­lish­ing, Writ­ing on the Ether, appear­ing Thurs­days at the invi­ta­tion of Jane Fried­man at JaneFriedman.com

 

Climb­ing the walls

No, I’m not talk­ing about the pot deliv­ery that court records are reported to indi­cate was headed for St. Martin’s Press (SMP) from San Diego.

And what timing.

I was just say­ing, here at Karen Wright­ing on the Ether, that if any­body deserves to engi­neer them­selves a lit­tle break these days, it has to be pub­lish­ers. And boom. Here came The Smok­ing Gun with Feds Inter­cept Pot Ship­ments To Pub­lish­ing House.

Great story — Pub­lish­ers Diver­sify? — $70k of mar­i­juana sent to St Martin’s http://t.co/i2m7X2eD
@jonnygeller
jonny geller

I’m glad for the chuckle because all the news here in the Ether­Dome isn’t so fun. This stuff could drive any­body to the ship­ping room to watch for incom­ing express packages.

In fact, it’s a sadly tra­di­tional rift, the gulf between authors and the pub­lish­ers who depend on them for the raw mate­r­ial of their busi­ness. But as with so many things in the indus­try, the dig­i­tal dawn seems to be aggra­vat­ing this strange estrange­ment. Insid­ers are start­ing to call into healthy ques­tion the scorn with which too many in the pub­lish­ing core see their indis­pens­able writers.

Take Jonny Geller at Cur­tis Brown in Lon­don. You know Geller. I Ether­ize a tweet or two from him every week here. His is a nim­ble wit and he’s a one well-placed agent, look at his list. So Geller goes into the The­Book­seller site’s blogs with what he calls An Agent’s Man­i­festo, cap­tur­ing the appre­ci­a­tion of a lot of his indus­try associates.

Geller writes:

It feels like a per­fect storm is brew­ing; pub­lish­ers bat­ten­ing down the hatches, retail­ers at war with one another, e-tailers deac­ti­vat­ing “buy” but­tons as if it’s a game of Call of Duty. One per­son has been for­got­ten in this unholy mael­strom: the author. Remem­ber, we don’t have a job with­out him or her. For those of us still work­ing in the legacy busi­ness of pub­lish­ing books, here’s a reminder of the pri­mary mover in this chain.

  • Geller goes on to call out pub­lish­ing houses for their dis­re­gard of authors’ inti­mate under­stand­ing of their own mate­r­ial and pub­lish­ers’ dis­missal of authors’ con­cerns about “cover, blurb, copy or format.”
  • He chides publishing-core peo­ple who claim they bear the industry’s risks: “Authors risk only their whole life, self-esteem and their babies.”
  • He argues that “authors who are val­ued, under­stood, appre­ci­ated, included, nur­tured and spo­ken to like an adult” can be expected to per­form as prized, long-term colleagues.

Geller talks of hear­ing that agents are marked women and men, likely to be “‘dis­in­ter­me­di­ated’ out of the pic­ture.” I worry, myself, that agents are being squeezed out onto the crum­bling ledges of pub­lish­ing with nobody to catch them but half-cocked clients flushed with DIY sass.

‘When an indus­try fig­ure like @ says “Respect the author.…” ’ @ @ http://t.co/fvwcFUto
@dirtywhitecandy
Roz Mor­ris

 

So impressed with Geller’s piece is author Roz Mor­ris that she has fol­lowed up with an arti­cle of her own, Why do authors get treated so badly? – and then another, related one, Stand up for good self-publishers, at the Authors Elec­tric blog site. What’s more, Mor­ris’ first piece has spawned yet another, Lon­don Crockett’s Don’t blame pub­lish­ers: you’re a com­mod­ity, res­o­nant with sad­ness: “It’s not a world I want, but it’s the world I — and you — live in.”

With Geller, Mor­ris can claim an inside view, in which, she writes, “I’ve com­mis­sioned, copy edited, proof­read, passed for press, trained peo­ple — and run edi­to­r­ial depart­ments.” And she comes out in full agree­ment with Geller, writing:

It is com­mon, behind the scenes, to hear edi­tors talk about authors with undis­guised loathing – not just indi­vid­ual ones who may be dif­fi­cult, but all of them, authors as a breed. There is a cul­ture that authors must not be lis­tened to.

That cul­ture, that tone of per­ceived dis­dain I’ve men­tioned here before, that’s what’s at issue. And it must always be said, of course there are excep­tions. These unpleas­ant rela­tions aren’t the entire story. But they’re a big part of it, or Geller and Mor­ris and oth­ers wouldn’t be tack­ling them.

Pre­cious few pub­lish­ers respond when these painful, ugly fac­tors are dis­cussed. I was so pleased to have a tweet of sup­port from Peter Ginna’s Blooms­bury Press, in response to my tip of the hat to Geller at the DBW Expert Pub­lish­ing Blogs, Authors Among Us: The Prob­lem Writ Larger. That takes nerve. I applaud it.

 

It also takes guts for many an author, Geller’s “pri­mary mover in this chain,” to step for­ward and write some­thing in a com­ment, per­haps risk­ing the anger of unseen, unheard, appar­ently unmoved pub­lish­ing executives.

I plan to revisit this issue and these arti­cles on Sat­ur­day (March 24) at Writer Unboxed — and I hope you’ll join us there. For now, I want to leave the topic some­where near your con­science, and briefly excerpt some of the many com­ments you can read at Mor­ris’ and Geller’s posts.

I’m sure there are plenty of edi­tors out there in the Big 6 who treat their authors well and prob­a­bly don’t get the men­tions they deserve…It can be just as fraught with small presses. I got offered a con­tract from a very respectable small press, but the clauses were so restrictive…I spent 20 years in the trenches of tra­di­tional pub­lish­ing where I was treated as an eas­ily replace­able part…This is what bul­ly­ing is all about. Not all pub­lish­ers are nec­es­sar­ily bul­lies, but the dynam­ics of the sit­u­a­tion and the busi­ness man­date of max­i­miz­ing profit make it almost inevitable that they fall into that role…A future that will belong to the smaller, more nim­ble pub­lish­ers, while the big mono­lithic houses will start to break up…Virtually every­thing about the indus­try screams con­tempt for the actual writ­ers: take the term “slush pile” for example…It breaks my heart that the author is con­sid­ered a pup­pet within publishing…traditional pub­lish­ers who treat their authors with con­tempt deserve to find them­selves with­out qual­ity writers…As a jour­nal­ist for 23 years it’s been my expe­ri­ence that the worst writ­ers make the most annoy­ing and nar­cis­sis­tic clients. Maybe it’s NOT always the publishers—but the writ­ers’ “fault”?…It’s a pity more pub­lish­ers can’t see authors as part­ners in a ven­ture – we’re doing the early-stage risk invest­ment, they’re putting in cash as enablers…Most books are lucky to break even, and that gives pub­lish­ers the con­fi­dent belief that they are doing authors a favour by tak­ing a chance on their book…I seem to have been bang­ing on for years about the need for writ­ers to treat them­selves as pro­fes­sion­als rather than hum­ble sup­pli­cants. If we don’t, nobody else will. But it’s good to hear an agent say­ing the same thing. Good for him.

In other news, St. Mar­tins will no longer refer to pric­ing on its books as ‘list price’ but instead will refer to their ‘street value’.
@DonLinn
Don Linn

Click to read this week’s full Writ­ing on the Ether col­umn at JaneFriedman.com.

About Porter Ander­son

Porter Ander­son, BA, MA, MFA, is a Fel­low with the National Crit­ics Insti­tute and has done spe­cial read­ings in the psy­chol­ogy of the arts at the Uni­ver­sity of Bath, UK. As a jour­nal­ist, he has worked with three net­works of CNN (CNN USA, CNN Inter­na­tional, CNN.com) and was on the lead devel­op­ment team for CNN.com Live. He also has worked on The Vil­lage Voice, Dal­las Times Her­ald, D Mag­a­zine, Sara­sota Herald-Tribune and other out­lets. He writes the weekly (Thurs­days) WRITING ON THE ETHER col­umn at JaneFriedman.com and (Mon­days) ETHER FOR AUTHORS col­umn at PublishingPerspectives.com. Ander­son also is a reg­u­lar con­trib­u­tor to WriterUnboxed.com and to Dig­i­tal Book World’s (DigiBookWorld.com) Expert Pub­lish­ing Blog. He has been posted by the United Nations to Rome (P-5, laissez-passer) for the World Food Pro­gramme, and served as Exec­u­tive Pro­ducer to INDEX: Design to Improve Life in Copen­hagen. He is based in Tampa and his pri­mary medium is Twit­ter. Fol­low him @Porter_Anderson

Writing on the Ether | JaneFriedman.com

Amazon, author, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, publisher, Tools of Change, ToC, #toccon, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether, agency pricing, Apple, Big Six, EU, European Union, AAP, copyright, Kindle Single, curator, curation, Maria Popova, Curator's Code

By Porter Ander­son | @Porter_Anderson

 

From March 15, 2012
Part of my series of columns on pub­lish­ing, Writ­ing on the Ether, appear­ing Thurs­days at the invi­ta­tion of Jane Fried­man at JaneFriedman.com

 

Beware the Ides of March

The noble Bru­tus hath told you
Cae­sar was ambitious.

But, of course, today, the 17th Earl of Oxford would have Marc Antony say:

Cae­sar was disruptive.

We like that word now, don’t we? Dis­rup­tive. Oh, yes, we do. Not for noth­ing did Gayle Feld­man, cov­er­ing the Amer­i­can Asso­ci­a­tion of Pub­lish­ers for The­Book­seller quote one pub­lish­ing exec­u­tive say­ing, “things are going to get ugly” as the US Depart­ment of Jus­tice cir­cles with warn­ings of a col­lu­sion suit.

Give me excess of it, that, sur­feit­ing,
The appetite may sicken, and so die.

Whoa, wrong play. How dis­rup­tive of me. See?

This mor­tal house I’ll ruin,
Do Cae­sar what he can.

Right Antony, wrong script. Dis­rup­tive. Actu­ally, the library didn’t have the ebook edi­tion of JC, damn it, so I ended up with A&C, so sue me. No, sue the DOJ. No, sue the authors, isn’t it time we made it all their fault again?

But look where sadly the poor wretch comes read­ing, and on an evil Kin­dle, that whore­son jackanapes.

Speak­ing of whom, has any­one seen these two together??

In a cer­tain light…at a cer­tain angle…in the fog of War with Seattle…when minox­i­dil fails… “Halt! Who goes there?” “Ship it!” … “We’ll ship it free!” …I’m just sayin’. Disruption.

Meet me on the steps of the Sen­ate, Brute. I’m in.

Cae­sar, beware the Ides of March… a day for all the world’s auto­crats, despots and grandees to pon­der the con­se­quences of their deeds.
@SalmanRushdie
Salman Rushdie

 

Dis­rup­tion at #sxsw: The 4G human hotspots

Home­less Hotspots is a very real — and very earnest — ini­tia­tive, imported to Austin for this week’s South by South­west Inter­ac­tive fes­ti­val by BBH Labs, the skunkworks-y inno­va­tion unit of the mar­ket­ing firm Bar­tle Bogle Hegarty.

Amazon, author, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, publisher, Tools of Change, ToC, #toccon, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether, agency pricing, Apple, Big Six, EU, European Union, AAP, copyright, Kindle Single, curator, curation, Maria Popova, Curator's Code

BBH Labs logo

Hav­ing read Megan Gar­ber when she was still at Nie­man Jour­nal­ism Lab, I was glad to find her at The Atlantic, writ­ing up the strangest story com­ing out of confab-choked Austin. In Wi-Fi Hotspots Made of Home­less Peo­ple: Not as Hor­ri­ble as They Seem, Gar­ber explains how a so-called “char­i­ta­ble exper­i­ment” from BBH Labs of the mar­ket­ing firm Bar­tle Bogle Hegarty was set up:

Par­tic­i­pants in the pro­gram carry MiFi devices with 4G con­nec­tiv­ity. “Intro­duce your­self,” BBH explains, “then log on to their 4G net­work via your phone or tablet for a quick high-quality con­nec­tion. You pay what you want (ide­ally via the Pay­Pal link on the site so we can track finances), and what­ever you give goes directly to the per­son that just sold you access.”

I loved Guy LeCharles Gonzalez’s reac­tion in his piece on it, “A hobo is my WiFi hotspot.”

When I first saw this … I was like WHAT THE HOLY F**K?!?! Then I fol­lowed a few links, got some back­ground, read the orga­niz­ers’ ratio­nale, calmed down a bit, and am now… com­pletely flustered.

I’m still “flus­tered,” what a strangely apt word here, and that’s after a cou­ple of days of read­ing widely on the matter.

Back­lash over Home­less Hotspot pro­gram at #SXSW means fewer options to help the home­less, says @http://t.co/yhAbg3Oa
@mashable
Pete Cash­more

 

Gon­za­lez links to the producers-on-the-defensive. Their own explana­tory Home­less Hotspots: a char­i­ta­ble exper­i­ment at SXSWi includes sev­eral points gen­uinely worth noting:

+ We are not sell­ing any­thing. There is no brand involved. There is no com­mer­cial ben­e­fit whatsoever.

+ This is a test pro­gram that was always sched­uled to end today (there’s no 2-week pay­ment cycle)

+ Each of the Hotspot Man­agers keeps all of the money they earn. The more they sell their own access, the more they as indi­vid­u­als make.

And such a Texas-size range of responses, too.

Think about all the com­pa­nies involved in one way or another in SXSW who did absolutely noth­ing at all for Austin’s home­less pop­u­la­tion. How much con­dem­na­tion did they get? None. BBH’s stunt here offends our sense of human dig­nity, but the real offense is that peo­ple were lan­guish­ing in such poor con­di­tions that they would find this to be an attrac­tive job offer.

That’s Matthew Ygle­sias at Slate’s Mon­ey­Box blog, in SXSW’s Human Hotspot Prob­lem.

Warped. Con­ve­nience dressed up as char­ity: the SXSW home­less man wi-fi hotspot http://t.co/LEOtTjzr (via @, @, @)
@DigitalDanHouse
Dan Franklin

 

By con­trast, I’ll leave you with Tim Car­mody at Wired in The Damn­ing Back­story Behind ‘Home­less Hotspots’ at SXSW. He raises some badly “flus­ter­ing” ques­tions that just don’t get eas­ily answered.

This is my worry: the home­less turned not just into walk­ing, talk­ing hotspots, but walk­ing, talk­ing bill­boards for a pro­gram that doesn’t care any­thing at all about them or their future, so long as it can score a point or two about dig­i­tal dis­rup­tion of old media par­a­digms. So long as it can prove that the real prob­lem with home­less­ness is that it doesn’t pro­vide a service.

Here’s a sure­fire way to get unasked to talk on the radio about some­thing: say “I won’t say it’s wrong, but I’d say it’s problematic.”
@tcarmody
Tim Car­mody

 

Ama­zon Sin­gles: Humans on the hot seat

I’m going to name my first child Ama­zon. I’m incred­i­bly grate­ful to them. There’s no other way to put it but that work­ing with Ama­zon totally changed my life for the better.”

Not only is author and bassist Mishka Shubaly talk­ing openly about his esti­mated $129,544.82 in Ama­zon Sin­gles royalties…not only is he under­stand­ably happy about how good the whole gig has been for him…but he’s also been allowed by Ama­zon Kin­dle Sin­gles Edi­tor David Blum to reveal his sales fig­ures. One of his three Sin­gles, Are You Lone­some Tonight?, has racked up 60,567 copies.

Amazon, author, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, publisher, Tools of Change, ToC, #toccon, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether, agency pricing, Apple, Big Six, EU, European Union, AAP, copyright, Kindle Single, curator, curation, Maria Popova, Curator's Code, paidContent, Laura Hazard Owen

Table: paid­Con­tent

The per­son who brings us this and a lot more infor­ma­tion is some­body Eth­er­nauts know well. Not a week goes by when I don’t quote one or another bit of copy from Laura Haz­ard Owen at paid­Con­tent. This week, she hit it out of the park.

Her two-parter on Ama­zon Sin­gles — Exclu­sive: Ama­zon Has Sold Over Two Mil­lion Kin­dle Sin­gles and Exclu­sive: How Much Do Kin­dle Sin­gles Authors Make? – is, for my money, the most reveal­ing of Ama­zon per­son­nel and of some num­bers (Ama­zon num­bers!) we’ve had yet. Have I read all things Ama­zon­ian? No. But of what I’ve read, this trumps the pile, not just for num­bers but for the frank, straight-ahead com­men­tary the com­pany per­mit­ted. Take care to note, Ama­zon specif­i­cally allowed these writ­ers to break their con­fi­den­tial­ity agree­ments. Even if grudg­ingly, you have to admit, this was cool.

@ It was great to see some REAL data and some hon­est voices on it too!
@eoinpurcell
Eoin Pur­cell

 

For my money, read­ing Tony Award win­ner Frank Gilroy’s com­ments alone is a high. This is the play­wright of “The Sub­ject Was Roses.” And I’m link­ing you there to the IMDB list­ing because — ready for it? — Ama­zon doesn’t carry a copy of his Pulitzer Prize–win­ning script. You can get the Samuel French edi­tion through other sell­ers. But maybe Blum will be good enough to see if Ama­zon wouldn’t like to offer that impor­tant script, itself, say, to high­light Gilroy’s upcom­ing sec­ond Single?

Dis­clo­sure: David Blum was Edi­tor in Chief with the Vil­lage Voice. I was a the­ater colum­nist and critic for Ross Wet­zs­teon at the Voice for sev­eral years, shortly after Euripi­des pre­miered Medea.

Ama­zon has sold more than 2 mil­lion Kin­dle Sin­gles. http://t.co/jIRjzI8G (Don’t ignore the short-form con­tent oppor­tu­nity!) #TOC­con
@jwikert
Joe Wik­ert

 

Check out some of the can­dor here. This is author Oliver Broudy, who has two Sin­gles out and reports some $65,241.16 in roy­al­ties to date from them:

Dave Blum lost sig­nif­i­cant money on the sec­ond sin­gle because of the advance that he gave me, which I needed because the book required some travel. But he still signed me up for a third with the same advance. The loss they sus­tained on my last sin­gle is noth­ing to them, noth­ing. They don’t care. They’re try­ing to develop an edi­to­r­ial brand here, and this is the price they’re will­ing to pay, much as they’re will­ing to take a loss on e-books because they want to sell Kin­dles. There’s def­i­nitely a lit­er­ary cul­ture within the Kin­dle Sin­gles pro­gram, and that’s a very good thing. Once they have total mar­ket sat­u­ra­tion, then pro­mot­ing this kind of lit­er­ary cul­ture may cease to be a pri­or­ity, but that remains to be seen.

Pre­dictably, some peo­ple focused on the over­all num­bers of the 14-month-old Sin­gles pro­gram. It wouldn’t do to be too impressed by any­thing Ama­zon­ian, of course.

Michael Cader at Pub­lish­ers Lunch, for exam­ple, gen­tly pooh-poohed the num­bers over­all, in Beyond the Biggest Authors, Ama­zon Admits “Sin­gles” Sales Are Quite Low.

The six best­selling Kin­dle Sin­gles titles are in fact all non-exclusive works from estab­lished authors: Lee Child, Stephen King, David Bal­dacci, Dean Koontz.…Two exclu­sive works from estab­lished authors, Karin Slaugh­ter and Jodi Picoult, occupy the next two slots, and seem to account for another 250,000 units (or) more, while the remain­ing 4 titles on the top 10 list look to com­prise another 200,000 units or so. (This) leaves the bulk of the Kin­dle Sin­gles list–155 titles–racking up sales of around a mil­lion units, or an aver­age of 6,500 units each (good for $6,500 to $19,500 in gross sales). And that’s with sig­nif­i­cant site pro­mo­tion and their own ded­i­cated best­seller list.

this arti­cle might be inter­est­ing for my author friends! http://t.co/6BYXDKvf
@TheNeoComGroup
Michael Phillips

 

Right. And authors may find more to appre­ci­ate than early sales fig­ures here, par­tic­u­larly in the hon­est com­ments of author Will Bunch saying:

One thing I learned the first time around: Amazon’s not a tra­di­tional pub­lish­ing com­pany so they don’t really have proof­read­ers. I’m a ter­ri­ble proof­reader myself, and after the first one, ‘Octo­ber 1, 2011,’ we had to go in after a cou­ple of days and fix a fair num­ber of mis­takes. The sec­ond time, I made sure other peo­ple read behind me and proof­read it for me.

Gra­cious, telling com­ments, both glow­ing and cau­tion­ary. Real chat, made pos­si­bly by Seattle’s will­ing­ness to give Owen this kind of access. I con­grat­u­late Owen on “obtain­ing some gen­eral sta­tis­tics,” as Cader refers to them, yes, and some highly spe­cific insights that we sim­ply haven’t had on this oper­a­tion. Owen’s conclusion:

Kin­dle Sin­gles allows Ama­zon to draw in authors who deem the pro­gram low-risk because it’s not in con­flict with other pub­lisher rela­tion­ships they may have. Those authors may then stick around, espe­cially if they believe that doing a full-length project with Ama­zon has the poten­tial to be as lucra­tive as Kin­dle Sin­gles have been for many of them.

@ Exactly! That’s what the “only $1.12m” snark misses; it’s new money for con­tent that wouldn’t have been pubbed previously.
@glecharles
Guy L. Gonzalez

Click to read this week’s full Writ­ing on the Ether col­umn at JaneFriedman.com.

About Porter Ander­son

Porter Ander­son, BA, MA, MFA, is a Fel­low with the National Crit­ics Insti­tute and has done spe­cial read­ings in the psy­chol­ogy of the arts at the Uni­ver­sity of Bath, UK. As a jour­nal­ist, he has worked with three net­works of CNN (CNN USA, CNN Inter­na­tional, CNN.com) and was on the lead devel­op­ment team for CNN.com Live. He also has worked on The Vil­lage Voice, Dal­las Times Her­ald, D Mag­a­zine, Sara­sota Herald-Tribune and other out­lets. He writes the weekly (Thurs­days) WRITING ON THE ETHER col­umn at JaneFriedman.com and (Mon­days) ETHER FOR AUTHORS col­umn at PublishingPerspectives.com. Ander­son also is a reg­u­lar con­trib­u­tor to WriterUnboxed.com and to Dig­i­tal Book World’s (DigiBookWorld.com) Expert Pub­lish­ing Blog. He has been posted by the United Nations to Rome (P-5, laissez-passer) for the World Food Pro­gramme, and served as Exec­u­tive Pro­ducer to INDEX: Design to Improve Life in Copen­hagen. He is based in Tampa and his pri­mary medium is Twit­ter. Fol­low him @Porter_Anderson

Extra Ether | JaneFriedman.com

#DBW12, #toccon, #WDC12, Amazon, author, AWP, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, Tools of Change, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether, agency pricing, AppleBy Porter Ander­son | @Porter_Anderson

From March 12, 2012

Part of my series of columns on pub­lish­ing, Writ­ing on the Ether, appear­ing Thurs­days through the kind (and brave) benev­o­lence of Jane Fried­man at JaneFriedman.com

Writ­ings on Agency Pricing

A dizzy­ing amount of copy is hit­ting the fan of the pub­lish­ing com­mu­nity about the U.S. Depart­ment of Justice’s (DOJ) inves­ti­ga­tion of “agency pricing.”

This post is an off-day Writ­ing on the Ether col­lec­tion of selected writ­ings on a poten­tially a key moment in the dig­i­tal evo­lu­tion of the industry.

Most of what’s being writ­ten is opin­ion, of course. While much of it is sin­cerely observed and well-intended, the scope of the issues involved can make the debate sound shrill.

Some say that agency has engen­dered com­pe­ti­tion dur­ing Amazon’s rise, buy­ing time for Barnes & Noble and oth­ers to gain trac­tion in the mar­ket. Oth­ers point to fail­ing inde­pen­dent online book­selling efforts and a huge influx of low-priced content.

This is a time when the “mash-up” — a con­geries to your lit­er­ary friends — is not help­ful. We need calm, ordered com­ment to work through com­plex issues, espe­cially when com­mer­cial and legal ele­ments meet the pos­si­bil­ity of eth­i­cal impli­ca­tions. “All’s fair” is too easy a throwaway.

Reserv­ing judg­ment is a keenly viable option in times of upheaval. It often sep­a­rates pub­lish­ing pro­fes­sion­als from knee-jerking fops. Don’t let any­one push you with “What do you think?” Tell them you’re watch­ing, wait­ing and learning.

WSJ reports the Depart­ment of Jus­tice is ready to sue Apple and five big pub­lish­ers on agency model pric­ing. http://t.co/yStYE8vv
@sarahw
Sarah Wein­man

 

Get­ting started

It was on Thurs­day we learned of the DOJ’s warn­ing of a poten­tial law­suit involv­ing ebook pric­ing and five of the Big Six pub­lish­ers, plus Apple. Thomas Catan and Jef­frey A. Tra­cht­en­berg had the story in the Wall Street Jour­nal: U.S. Warns Apple, Pub­lish­ers.

I rec­om­mend you start by look­ing one day ear­lier at Jeff John Roberts’ March 7 piece at paid­Con­tent: The E-book Inves­ti­ga­tions: Are Pub­lish­ers And Apple Break­ing The Law? There, Roberts — paidContent’s lead reporter on this story — looks at threat­ened class-action law­suits, a great many of them, on the same issue. He explains the ques­tion of legal­ity in the con­cept of a man­u­fac­turer impos­ing prices. It’s a help­ful pre­lude to the next day’s news that the DOJ, itself, might sue, fol­low­ing its own probe and that of Euro­pean Union investigators.

Note that in their New York Times writeup, Gov­ern­ment Pres­sur­ing Pub­lish­ers to Adjust Pric­ing Pol­icy on E-Books, Julie Bosman and Edward Wyatt men­tioned an unnamed pub­lish­ing exec­u­tive, say­ing the DOJ was inter­ested “aug­ment­ing” the cur­rent agency sys­tem rather than toss­ing it.

Nat­u­rally, some observers see sport in pre­dict­ing whether agency prices might sur­vive the chal­lenge. In that regard, it’s help­ful to read Mathew Ingram’s piece at GigaOM, defin­i­tively head­lined: DoJ warn­ing means one thing: E-book prices are com­ing down. A part of what you get here is Steve Jobs’ appar­ently explicit role in the advent of agency pric­ing, as indi­cated in a para­graph in Wal­ter Isaacson’s book on the late Apple chief. The point to pick up here, as Ingram writes it, is this:

What­ever hap­pens, it seems likely that pub­lish­ers will either choose to mod­ify the agency-pricing model vol­un­tar­ily or be forced to do so. And the out­come of that process, at least in the long term, is likely to be lower e-book prices.

“Agency” is not syn­ony­mous with “higher prices” http://t.co/EMWygSWM #in
@brianoleary
Brian O’Leary

 

Who’s sorry now?

There are mem­bers of our com­mu­nity who will have argued loudly for or against agency pric­ing at the time it was put into place in 2010. For some, what went around is com­ing around.

At this point, how­ever, those past posi­tions are less use­ful than a lean for­ward. And that makes it use­ful to turn, for a ratio­nal start­ing point, to Mike Shatzkin.

In If the gov­ern­ment makes agency go away, Shatzkin is care­ful to note that right-headed observers “make no ‘agency is dead’ declaration(s).” We don’t know the out­come yet of the DOJ’s present actions, no mat­ter how cer­tain one zeal­ous ana­lyst or another may sound.

Shatzkin then steps you through the effects he thinks key stake­hold­ers might expe­ri­ence if agency is struck down. He includes smaller pub­lish­ers and authors in his analy­sis. On authors:

Over time, the biggest losers here will be the authors. The inde­pen­dent authors will feel the pain first. Agency pric­ing cre­ates a zone of pric­ing they can occupy with­out much com­pe­ti­tion from branded mer­chan­dise. When the known authors are only avail­able at $9.99 and up, the fledg­ling at $0.99-$2.99 looks very attrac­tive and worth a try. End­ing agency will have the “desired” effect of bring­ing all ebook prices down. As the big book prices are reduced, the abil­ity of the unknowns to use price as a dis­cov­ery tool will dimin­ish as well. In the short run, it will be the inde­pen­dent authors who will pay the biggest price of all.

Bosman, Wyatt, and Shatzkin on Apple, Pubs, and DOJ (in two con­ve­nient links):http://t.co/rDD90uVahttp://t.co/mm5GveUx
@paulbogaards
Paul Bogaards

 

James Scott Bell, in some­thing of a pep-talk response, Jock­ey­ing for Posi­tion in the Muddy Pub­lish­ing Future, takes a respect­ful but game stance on Shatzkin, writ­ing from the authors’ camp:

We didn’t cre­ate the Big Six or Ama­zon. But we will use them just like they use us. We will make strate­gic deci­sions, as they do. It’s called doing busi­ness, and writ­ers are bet­ter posi­tioned than ever to do it in cre­ative ways.

Then Scott goes on to iden­tify one emo­tional strain in the debate, with the sure­footed grace you might expect of an accom­plished writer who knows what his fel­lows need to hear:

Even if some of the big pub­lish­ers fall off their horses, we writ­ers will still be in the race. Even if book­store shelf space con­tin­ues to dry up, we writ­ers will still be com­ing at you.

Because we are cre­at­ing sto­ries, which is what peo­ple want and need in this crazy world. We are weav­ing dreams, get­ting under your skin, keep­ing you up at night, mak­ing you laugh and cry and maybe some­times throw our books across the room. We are sto­ry­tellers. And we are not going away no mat­ter how hard it rains.

RT @: in which @ and I debate the ques­tion: Who should set e-book prices, Ama­zon or pub­lish­ers? http://t.co/p1o75ajX
@JulietaLionetti
Juli­eta Lionetti

 

In the more cere­bral delib­er­a­tions of jour­nal­ism, Laura Haz­ard Owen and Mathew Ingram have done a week­end point-counterpoint piece. (Nei­ther calls the other an “igno­rant slut,” which might have been fun — do you know the ref­er­ence I’m mak­ing?) Their piece is head­lined E-Book Smack­down: Who Should Con­trol Pricing—Publishers Or Amazon?

What’s good about this one is that nei­ther per­son smacks the other down, nei­ther side “wins.” Both Ingram and Owen get in some good points, and the con­ver­sa­tional tone and struc­ture of the arti­cle is a nice break from the many pul­pit pieces com­ing from oth­ers. A snippet:

Ingram: Who has done the most to make it easy for new authors to reach an audi­ence, tra­di­tional pub­lish­ers or Ama­zon? I would argue that it is Ama­zon by a land­slide, thanks to the Kin­dle plat­form and related features—many of which pro­vide writ­ers with a far greater share of the pro­ceeds from their work than any tra­di­tional pub­lisher has ever dreamed of paying.

And

Owen: Not if those authors want to reach print read­ers. Around 80 per­cent of book sales are still print; bricks-and-mortar book­stores are still a major source of dis­cov­ery of new titles (the number-one source, in fact, for kids’ books).

Scott Turow: Wrong About Every­thing http://t.co/nx2Zplfj via @Which is sad because I love Turow’s nov­els. But I agree w/David.
@KristineRusch
KristineKathryn­R­usch

 

No uncer­tain terms

Pos­si­bly the staunchest defense of the agency-pricing model has come from Scott Turow, writ­ing as pres­i­dent of the Author’s Guild in Let­ter from Scott Turow: Grim News:

We have no way of know­ing whether pub­lish­ers col­luded in adopt­ing the agency model for e-book pric­ing. We do know that col­lu­sion wasn’t nec­es­sary: given the chance, any ratio­nal pub­lisher would have leapt at Apple’s offer and clung to it like a life raft. Ama­zon was using e-book dis­count­ing to destroy book­selling, mak­ing it uneco­nomic for phys­i­cal book­stores to keep their doors open.

@ I do won­der if he con­sulted any mem­bers before writ­ing this let­ter. It would be cool to get their voices in.
@laurahazardowen
Laura Haz­ard Owen

Click to read this week’s full Writ­ing on the Ether col­umn at JaneFriedman.com.

About Porter Ander­son

Porter Ander­son, BA, MA, MFA, is a Fel­low with the National Crit­ics Insti­tute and has done spe­cial read­ings in the psy­chol­ogy of the arts at the Uni­ver­sity of Bath, UK. As a jour­nal­ist, he has worked with three net­works of CNN (CNN USA, CNN Inter­na­tional, CNN.com) and was on the lead devel­op­ment team for CNN.com Live. He also has worked on The Vil­lage Voice, Dal­las Times Her­ald, D Mag­a­zine, Sara­sota Herald-Tribune and other out­lets. He writes the weekly (Thurs­days) WRITING ON THE ETHER col­umn at JaneFriedman.com and (Mon­days) ETHER FOR AUTHORS col­umn at PublishingPerspectives.com. Ander­son also is a reg­u­lar con­trib­u­tor to WriterUnboxed.com and to Dig­i­tal Book World’s (DigiBookWorld.com) Expert Pub­lish­ing Blog. He has been posted by the United Nations to Rome (P-5, laissez-passer) for the World Food Pro­gramme, and served as Exec­u­tive Pro­ducer to INDEX: Design to Improve Life in Copen­hagen. He is based in Tampa and his pri­mary medium is Twit­ter. Fol­low him @Porter_Anderson

Writing on the Ether | JaneFriedman.com

#DBW12, #toccon, #WDC12, Amazon, author, AWP, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, Tools of Change, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether

By Porter Ander­son | @Porter_Anderson

 

From March 8, 2012
Part of my series of columns on pub­lish­ing, Writ­ing on the Ether, appear­ing Thurs­days through the kind (and brave) benev­o­lence of Jane Fried­man at JaneFriedman.com

 

Over­ture: If music be the food of love

Before we begin to gnash our teeth over indus­try and insult this week, I’m pleased to offer you an embed­ded stream from Q2 Music. That’s the 24-hour NPR–affil­i­ated  contemporary-classical ser­vice I’m always gassing about on Twit­ter.

Music may have noth­ing to do with your work, I real­ize. No prob­lem. And this music, most of it cre­ated by the world’s top liv­ing com­posers, may put your muse right through the windshield.

But I hope you’ll con­sider hit­ting play while you’re here today — catch an echo of the Ether in spaces that lie light years beyond our words. Today’s pro­gram­ming includes a playlist curated for Q2 by David Byrne (2pET), open­ing a three-week Amer­i­can Mav­er­icks festival.

And Q2 is always there, always ahead of there, actu­ally: The fear­less and rel­e­vant music you crave. Free tunes. Most of which you couldn’t hum to save your life.

And now, dear Eth­er­naut, shall we tear our hair together?

U.S. warns Apple, pub­lish­ers that it plans to sue them on e-book pric­ing, alleg­ing col­lu­sion: http://t.co/IBs0gNCf
@DavidCarnoy
David Carnoy

 

eBooks: Are authors priced out of the market?

The future is going to be filled with ama­teurs, and the truly tal­ented and per­sis­tent will make a great liv­ing. But the days of jour­ney­man writ­ers who make a good liv­ing by the word — over.

That’s Godin to authors: You have no right to make money any­more. Thank you, Seth.

These domi­noes of mer­ci­less wis­dom fall in an inter­view at Dig­i­tal Book World picked up by Mathew Ingram of GigaOM. Here’s Ingram:

The cru­cial prin­ci­ple at work (is) …your real com­pe­ti­tion isn’t the book or news out­let that is bet­ter than you; it’s the one that is good enough for a major­ity of your audi­ence. …Maybe those vam­pire books by Amanda Hock­ing or the detec­tive nov­els from million-selling author John Locke aren’t as good as yours, but for hun­dreds of thou­sands of week­end read­ers they are prob­a­bly good enough.

Heart sink­ing yet? I should have offered you a drink, not music.

In the ongo­ing debate about how to price ebooks prop­erly, it can seem that the author — whose per­sonal invest­ment and effort usu­ally tops every­one else’s — is being over­looked, swat­ted aside.  And Ingram, as right as he is, does noth­ing to soothe the sav­age breast:

Godin’s point isn’t that you can’t make money; it’s that you have to think dif­fer­ently about how to accom­plish that task.

For obvi­ous rea­sons, this arti­cle kind of makes my blood boil. http://t.co/YQahjNx6 Writ­ers, you have NO RIGHT to be paid for your work!
@RachelleGardner
Rachelle Gard­ner

 

Let’s get past Seth (where is the duct tape?) and hun­ker with Ed Nawotka at Pub­lish­ing Per­spec­tives, where he’s ask­ing the com­par­a­tively hand­some ques­tion, What’s More Fairly Priced at 99 Cents, Non­fic­tion or a Novel?

#DBW12, #toccon, #WDC12, Amazon, author, AWP, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, Tools of Change, writer, writing, Porter Anderson, Writing on the Ether

Matt Gart­land / WinningEdits.com

Nawotka begins by not­ing that in many non­fic­tion books, “a sin­gle chap­ter or two sup­ports the whole enter­prise.” That’s a nice way of say­ing there’s one idea and 250 pages. Nawotka goes on:

To me, sell­ing a “dig­i­tal short” non­fic­tion piece for 99 cents or even $2.99 is a much more valid com­mer­cial trans­ac­tion than buy­ing a fic­tion title for the same price, espe­cially if it is vet­ted and edited by a proper publisher.

And your lit­tle man­i­festo, too, Seth. (Sorry, I don’t know what came over me. It’s all this vio­lent mod­ern music, that damned Q2.) Nawotka soars on:

To me, fic­tion — prop­erly vet­ted and edited fic­tion — is some­thing that should go for more. It’s often a far big­ger invest­ment in a writer’s time than a magazine-length non­fic­tion piece.

Splen­did fel­low, this Nawotka, isn’t he?

As for the 99-cent nov­els, well any­one in their right mind would tell you that it is purely mar­ket­ing. My bet would be that very few nov­el­ists hon­estly want to see their books sold so cheaply (yes, it works for some, but it remains to be seen if you can build a long-term career on such foundations).

And how softly Nawotka has landed me at another of the bet­ter reads to be over­looked by most peo­ple lately.

In the recently released sec­ond part of Brian O’Leary and Hugh McGuire’s Press­books project, Book: A Futurist’s Man­i­festo, Kas­sia Krozser’s A Reader’s Bill of Rights estab­lishes with com­mit­ted vivac­ity the alliance of author and reader.

I am here to say it is the pub­lish­ers who are doing their own prod­uct the most harm. Every time a pub­lisher allows a print book or ebook to be released with poor edit­ing, poor proof­read­ing, and poor qual­ity, the value of books in gen­eral dimin­ishes in the mind of read­ers. We deserve bet­ter.

Krozser is pretty splen­did, her­self, you see. And I hope you’ll spend some time this week­end with her excel­lent essay, as well as oth­ers in O’Leary and McGuire’s grow­ing book. It can be read free (not “for free,” damn it) online.

@ accord­ing to @, it’s a cana­dian term for platy­pus. also, anal­ogy for dig­i­tal publishing.
@booksquare
Kas­sia Krozser


But there’s one point I’ve put to Krozser after read­ing her essay, and she’s been gen­er­ous in com­ing back to me on it.

I’ve explained to her that I’ve had reser­va­tions about her dis­cus­sion of ebook pric­ing when she con­cludes, “ebooks cost too damn much.” I’ve won­dered if she had taken into account the fact that noth­ing about the author’s com­mit­ment changes for an ebook.

In this  dig­i­tal rev­o­lu­tion, the one ele­ment not dig­i­tized? — is the author. She or he must still go through the years of night­mar­ish work; the divorce when the neglected fam­ily falls apart; the cus­tody bat­tles; the for­fei­ture of all social life, up-to-date cloth­ing, and men­tal health. Just take a good look at the next author you see.

Krozser answers:

First and fore­most, I am a writer. I am an author. I am a pub­lisher. I am that weird per­son who is torn between the “oh yeah” of angry authors and very real real­i­ties faced by any­one who goes into pub­lish­ing as a business…So. I do not believe that, bar­ring the rare JK Rowl­ing, there is ever a way to fully com­pen­sate an author for the price of his/her cre­ative labor.

Well, then, how do we rec­on­cile the Reader’s Bill of Rights with what Mar­garet Atwood terms the “cheese sand­wich” that every writer must have to keep churn­ing out the sto­ries? Basi­cally, Krozser answers, we don’t.

There is absolutely no cor­re­la­tion among advances paid or sales or price or buzz or any­thing and tal­ent. If there were, Paris Hilton would not have received a dime from a pub­lisher. Pub­lish­ing is, first and fore­most, a busi­ness. Yes, it some­times pre­tends to be a cre­ative indus­try — espe­cially when it comes to the dis­con­nect between advances and actual sales — but the bot­tom line is very much the goal (well, that and exec­u­tive bonuses).

Just had email from friend (not in book busi­ness) ask­ing for my opin­ion on one of today’s sto­ries about publishing.…
@Ginger_Clark
Gin­ger Clark

My response “do you want an eye­roll at the inac­cu­ra­cies, or an actual thought­ful response? I can do both.” I can do both. Barely.
@Ginger_Clark
Gin­ger Clark

I’ve asked Krozser what’s wrong with the $9.99 that Ama­zon made its orig­i­nal, gen­eral Kin­dle book price? Is an author’s life’s work truly not worth ten US bucks?

For tra­di­tion­ally pub­lished authors, there is an agree-upon fair pric­ing struc­ture, so authors are being paid for their work. How­ever, pub­lish­ers con­tinue to cor­re­late print and ebooks, with­out regard to the lim­i­ta­tions of the lat­ter. Peo­ple seemed happy with a $9.99 ebook that didn’t come with the same rights and mate­r­ial as the $23.99 hard­cover. They are less tol­er­ant of a higher-priced ebook that is incom­plete or poorly treated by the publisher.

And so what of the self-publishing authors who seem bent on bound­ing from 99 cents to $2.99 to free-giveaway promotions?Aren’t they dri­ving down the whole mar­ket?

For self-published authors, they aren’t really dri­ving the cost of the mar­ket down as much as they are dri­ving their own worth down. It’s pretty clear that read­ers are hap­pily pay­ing higher prices for qual­ity books, though there is a tol­er­ance point. I can­not say if these authors feel their pric­ing is worth it to them — I guess some will offer up an emphatic yes. Me? I disagree.

So when I look at the author as the one step in the pro­duc­tion chain not dig­i­tized — for whom noth­ing is stream­lined other than a lit­tle word-processing soft­ware and thank God for Drop­box — maybe I’m not look­ing at some­one for­got­ten, but at some­one who eas­ily can become self-defeating in a mar­ket­place of opportunism.

I want Krozser to play us out here:

Being a writer is a cre­ative endeavor. Being an author is a busi­ness. The authors who price them­selves at .99 are, in my opin­ion, bad busi­ness peo­ple. They are bank­ing on the gen­eral cheap­ness of human­ity. They are hop­ing they’ll win because peo­ple will buy their books in droves.

This is bad busi­ness because the roy­al­ties are lower. This is bad busi­ness because we (the read­ers) equate cheap with lower qual­ity. This is bad busi­ness because, well, it tells the world what you really think of your work prod­uct, your  tal­ent, your worth. This leads to a mar­ket­place flooded with crappy sto­ries, and these authors are going to be increas­ingly lost in the mire.

I look for­ward to the day when I never have to read another Seth Godin ‘expert’ quote on pub­lish­ing again.
@DonLinn
Don Linn

Click to read this week’s full Writ­ing on the Ether col­umn at JaneFriedman.com.

About Porter Ander­son

Porter Ander­son, BA, MA, MFA, is a Fel­low with the National Crit­ics Insti­tute and has done spe­cial read­ings in the psy­chol­ogy of the arts at the Uni­ver­sity of Bath, UK. As a jour­nal­ist, he has worked with three net­works of CNN (CNN USA, CNN Inter­na­tional, CNN.com) and was on the lead devel­op­ment team for CNN.com Live. He also has worked on The Vil­lage Voice, Dal­las Times Her­ald, D Mag­a­zine, Sara­sota Herald-Tribune and other out­lets. He writes the weekly (Thurs­days) WRITING ON THE ETHER col­umn at JaneFriedman.com and (Mon­days) ETHER FOR AUTHORS col­umn at PublishingPerspectives.com. Ander­son also is a reg­u­lar con­trib­u­tor to WriterUnboxed.com and to Dig­i­tal Book World’s (DigiBookWorld.com) Expert Pub­lish­ing Blog. He has been posted by the United Nations to Rome (P-5, laissez-passer) for the World Food Pro­gramme, and served as Exec­u­tive Pro­ducer to INDEX: Design to Improve Life in Copen­hagen. He is based in Tampa and his pri­mary medium is Twit­ter. Fol­low him @Porter_Anderson

Writing on the Ether | JaneFriedman.com

#DBW12, #toccon, #WDC12, Amazon, author, AWP, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, Tools of Change, writer, writing

By Porter Ander­son | @Porter_Anderson

 

From March 1, 2012
Part of my series of columns on pub­lish­ing, Writ­ing on the Ether, appear­ing Thurs­days through the kind (and brave) benev­o­lence of Jane Fried­man at JaneFriedman.com

 

AWP: Lit­er­a­ture and long lines

Once more into the breeches, I swear, I’m reminded of a pageant as AWP arrives today for its sit-down engage­ment in Chicago.

The con­fer­ence tweet-storm, of course, already is windier than the city, and you can fol­low it at hash­tag #AWP12. Or – to spare your Twit­ter client dash­board – you can watch the tweets auto-refresh on my site’s “Con­fab­World” home­page, PorterAnderson.com

The Asso­ci­a­tion of Writ­ers and Writ­ing Pro­grams seems to progress in tableaux, like an old Paul Green out­door drama. Every­body takes up their posi­tions at podium and panel for 75 min­utes, up to 23 ses­sions at a time. And then, as if the lights on stage had been doused and the music had come up, every­body changes room and ses­sion – not cos­tume, nor­mally, but who knows? — and is dis­cov­ered in a new 75-minute set­ting, the next scene in the pageant-wagon’s progress down Michi­gan Avenue, as it were.

Just fought over a cab with a young woman–guess who got the cab-left her scream­ing on 71st and 3rd
@tategeorge
esther new­berg
That tweet just now from @ is what you want in an agent.
@Ginger_Clark
Gin­ger Clark

 

The event has an under­stand­ably dis­jointed air to it, too, because the con­fer­ence is so big – with more than 9,000 atten­dees last year and a sold-out sign this year – that it’s staged in the vast con­ven­tion facil­i­ties of both the Hilton Chicago and the Palmer House. There are some 550 pub­lish­ers, presses, and jour­nals in its Book­fair alone.

There’s a third major venue this time, the beau­ti­ful if hardly inti­mate Audi­to­rium The­atre at Roo­sevelt Uni­ver­sity. Its size – where are the Rock­ettes when we need them? — is required to seat the ple­nary for Mar­garet Atwood’s much antic­i­pated keynote.

i don’t really want to get that drunk at #awp12 because i can’t be friendly/chatty when i’m hungover.
@carriemurph
Car­rie Murphy

 

And because one chal­lenge of this writ­ing con­fer­ence is bring­ing together the schol­arly inter­ests of its campus-based pro­gram, it might be worth a quick list­ing of some of the more business-of-writing ses­sion on offer this time. By no means com­pre­hen­sive, here is just a selec­tive look for writ­ers whose goals include going beyond the glo­ries of the page to the real­i­ties of the stage in today’s dig­i­tally trans­formed pub­lish­ing world. (The codes at the begin­ning of each ses­sion title are those assigned each ses­sion by the hard­work­ing AWP staff. Use those to search out a ses­sion and find its day, time, and location.)

On my way to #awp12 won­der­ing why we can’t gather some­place more trop­i­cal, farther–much–from O’Hare. & I have a mid­dle seat. *whimpering*
@tracy_seeley
Tracy See­ley

 

R175. The Tech-Empowered Writer: Embrace New Media, Exper­i­ment, and Earn. 1:30CT Thurs­day, March 1.A spe­cial note here to point out that this key panel includes Ether host Jane Fried­man; Christina Katz (you know her as @thewritermama, author of The Writer’s Work­out); San Francisco-based author Seth Har­wood; and Georgia-based author and edi­tor Robert Lee Brewer. I highly rec­om­mend this one, it’s #PorterEn­dorsed – here’s a spe­cial pre­view of the ses­sion from Fried­man, no flight to O’Hare required.

In list­ing some other ses­sions that relate to less-pedagogical, more industry-directed top­ics, I can’t offer endorse­ments, but can tell you that the descrip­tions of what’s to be cov­ered are hit­ting some of the right notes.

  • R113. New Media for New (and Old) Authors and Writers
  • R161. Behind the Scenes of Imple­ment­ing a Suc­cess­ful iPad and Tablet Pub­lish­ing System
  • R171. Pret­ty­ing Up the Baby: Pub­lish­ing Cre­ative Non­fic­tion in a Chal­leng­ing Market
  • R221. What about Blog?: How Blog­ging Can Pro­pel Your Career and Pol­ish Your Craft
  • R234. Only Connect—How to Cre­ate New Oppor­tu­ni­ties through Networking
  • F119. Lit­er­a­ture and the Inter­net in 2012
  • F164. Robert Gover: A Life of Rad­i­cal Realism
  • F193. Work­ing Process: Edi­tor and Writer
  • F241. The Literati: Decon­struct­ing Pub­lish­ing Myths for Writers
  • S103. Con­nect­ing with Read­ers via Your Web­site and Social Media
  • S158. The Art of Col­lab­o­ra­tion: Writ­ers, Artists, and Edi­tors on Mar­ry­ing Visual Art and Text
  • S236. Why Inde­pen­dent Pub­lish­ers Mat­ter / Inde­pen­dent Pub­lish­ers and the Chang­ing Industry
if #awp12 is the offi­cial AWP hash­tag (via @) what should the offi­cial NOT at AWP hash­tag be?
@paperhaus
Car­olyn Kellogg

My pre­view of AWP is here, if you’d like to know more, at Dan Blank’s We Grow Media.

#AWP12 is off to an aus­pi­cious start: one of my char­ac­ters just sat two seats down from me at the gate.…
@CatherineElcik
Cather­ine Elcik

 

Pub­lish­ing: Open sor­cery (& let­ting the authors in)

It may be that tra­di­tional pub­lish­ers have less to fear from the dig­i­tal rev­o­lu­tion than they think. Per­haps they should embrace it.

That’s author Anthony Horowitz in a talk writ­ten up by the Guardian and head­lined Do we still need pub­lish­ers? There’s some admirable can­dor here, as when Horowitz talks of his pub­lisher Orion putting out “my Sher­lock Holmes novel, The Mouse of Slick [actu­ally, The House of Silk] with no fewer than 35 proof-reading errors.”

Every­where,” says Horowitz, “pub­lish­ers are being squeezed out.”

But I have become con­vinced that writ­ers feel — I said feel — eas­ily as “squeezed out,” if not more so, than tra­di­tional pub­lish­ers do.

And I’d like to offer for your con­sid­er­a­tion, a more for­mal call for industry-class con­fer­ences for writ­ers than I’ve made in the past.

#DBW12, #toccon, #WDC12, Amazon, author, AWP, B&N, Barnes and Noble, book, confab, conference, critic, criticism, critique, DBW, Digital Book World, e-book, e-reader, ebook, ereader, Jane Friedman, publishing, Tools of Change, writer, writing

Piazza Navona, Roma Photo: James Cook

You’ll find my post on the sub­ject, Open Sor­cery: Let­ting the Authors In, at the new Dig­i­tal Book World Expert Pub­lish­ing Blog, my first entry there.

And let me know what you think. I’m enor­mously ping-able on Twit­ter at @Porter_Anderson and, of course, our com­ments area is your com­ments area.

I also touch on this mate­r­ial in the wide-ranging inter­view Matt Gart­land did with me, Cur­ing Author Igno­rance, out this week at Win­ning Edits. (And for a good time, check the many wise com­ments of our col­leagues on my week­end post about the author’s online per­sona for Writer Unboxed, “Social Media: Wish­ing You Were You.” Don Maass was in par­tic­u­larly wry form.)

A lot of what I’m say­ing in the DBW piece isn’t far from Horowitz’s con­clu­sion when he looks at pub­lish­ers and at authors today — in their strained and fre­quently estranged sit­u­a­tion — and says:

Are we in inten­sive care? I don’t know. But if we are, I’m strangely relieved that we’re there together.

Tax infor­ma­tion gath­ered , com­piled and sent to accoun­tant. I need a cocktail.
@DonLinn
Don Linn
@ Can you write off the cost of that drink? :-)
@jwikert
Joe Wik­ert

 

Click to read this week’s full Writ­ing on the Ether col­umn at JaneFriedman.com.

 

 

About Porter Ander­son

Porter Ander­son, BA, MA, MFA, is a Fel­low with the National Crit­ics Insti­tute and has done spe­cial read­ings in the psy­chol­ogy of the arts at the Uni­ver­sity of Bath, UK. As a jour­nal­ist, he has worked with three net­works of CNN (CNN USA, CNN Inter­na­tional, CNN.com) and was on the lead devel­op­ment team for CNN.com Live. He also has worked on The Vil­lage Voice, Dal­las Times Her­ald, D Mag­a­zine, Sara­sota Herald-Tribune and other out­lets. He writes the weekly (Thurs­days) WRITING ON THE ETHER col­umn at JaneFriedman.com and (Mon­days) ETHER FOR AUTHORS col­umn at PublishingPerspectives.com. Ander­son also is a reg­u­lar con­trib­u­tor to WriterUnboxed.com and to Dig­i­tal Book World’s (DigiBookWorld.com) Expert Pub­lish­ing Blog. He has been posted by the United Nations to Rome (P-5, laissez-passer) for the World Food Pro­gramme, and served as Exec­u­tive Pro­ducer to INDEX: Design to Improve Life in Copen­hagen. He is based in Tampa and his pri­mary medium is Twit­ter. Fol­low him @Porter_Anderson