Transitions in the publishing industry: We were here before – five hundred years ago, actually

I remember reading a book called The Cloister and the Hearth many years ago. It gives a fairly good picture of life at the time when the Middle Ages were giving way to the Renaissance.

In a passage that stood out for me, manuscript copier Gerard discovers that movable type is rapidly spreading through Europe.

He is terrified, as he sees that his profession is a sunset industry.

Of course, duchesses and such like would still want illuminated manuscripts . But these manuscripts would only be art objects, as an antique typewriter is today.

The bread-and-butter of that guy’s industry – the fact that manuscripts had to be copied out in longhand and often artfully decorated – was gone.

Now, did that mean that publishing folded? Quite the opposite – movable type made literacy a far more important value than it had ever been before. Literacy created a huge new public for books. Suddenly duchesses were not so important any more. Eventually, “illiterate” became a term of abuse instead of a description of the normal state of the populace.

The question for those who must support ourselves is, where is the money? From what I can tell, there is still a market for information services, but one must focus increasingly on helping specialty markets sort information.

I remember the days, 50 years ago, when we all gathered round the TV to watch CBC or CTV News. We watched them because they were the only news services available. We read the London Free Press because it was the only paper sold on the street.

Today I can read the South China Morning Post or the Sydney Herald, and watch news from all over on line. As the population ages, more and more people who are familiar with Internet use will be on line.

Why will many people need guidance about what to spend their time on? Time is the quantity that is limited today, not information.

And until the Time Machine is invented, time is going to stay limited.

Denyse O’Leary is co-author of The Spiritual Brain.

Outlook for publishing in 2010: Heading south for the winter – to Antarctica

In my view, things will only get worse for the print publishing industry. For one thing, it’s perceived to be on the wrong side of the environment issue. I realize things are more complex than that – computers pollute too. But, true or not, it’s not the public perception.

I sometimes see an ad around town inviting me to notice that yesterday’s news turns into trays for what looks like at least two dozen eggs.

Sure, but … if every copy of the Toronto Star turned into a tray for two dozen eggs, there wouldn’t be enough chickens in the world to lay all the eggs. And that’s only one paper.

All this merriment aside, the world is moving on line, and the urgent problem for writers – in my view – is how to commercialize the Internet in a way that works for writers.

Otherwise, the results will be disastrous – the Internet will be dominated by infomercials and propaganda. Not responsible journalism.

Finally, I bore everyone with this message – not a solution, just a short term hint: If you really do write significant amounts of material freelance and have not yet signed up with Access Copyright, get the heck over to their site and do it now. In the same way, if you are a published author, sign up for Public Lending Right during the period when they accept applications. They explain that.

People get varying amounts from PLR, depending on how many of their books are in libraries. But how do you know – absent a big, undoable research project – whether your books are in Canada’s thousands of libraries?

Happy surprise, PLR has people who are paid to find that stuff out, so you needn’t bother. You might get a nice surprise, and not necessarily on your birthday.

Denyse O’Leary is co-author of The Spiritual Brain.

Say it again, Sam – but this time with a different focus and to different people

Recently, on a journalists’ discussion list the question arose about whether a writer can re-sell a story. Not the identical story, obviously, if the publication bought all rights. But reselling the material packaged in a different way (repurposing) is another matter.

I have found repurposing copy relatively easy if I follow a colleague’s rule of not throwing sand in the client’s corn flakes, which means providing the same copy to a competitor.

Here is an illustration: One can write a piece for a dairy industry trade mag on an industry marketing plan for quality low-fat cheese.

Then turn around and sell the material, repackaged for consumers, to a weight watchers’ mag.

Then write a piece for a coach mag on the value of quality low fat cheese in the athlete’s training diet.

Maybe it could later form part of an article for a family physicians’ mag, on motivating the patient to stick with a weight loss program (= lower calorie foods do NOT necessarily taste awful).

There is little overlap between these four groups. And all four will feel benefited by an interesting article on quality low-fat cheese.

Thus I have not found ethics violations to be an issue if one avoids the perception of working for the “other side.” A solution is to market to those mags whose interests are similar to but not competitive with those of the initial publication.

Denyse O’Leary is co-author of The Spiritual Brain.

The poor can oppress you as much as the rich …

Here I wrote about the CanWest bankruptcy and its significance to writing:

Recently, almost the entire CanWest newspaper chain was put up for sale after filing for bankruptcy. This echoes a theme many of us have recently been heard to harp on at our Write! Canada conferences.

Basically, here is my take, as the local writing business teacher: The old media cannot pay you a decent wage for your work because they don’t have the money. That’s all you need to know.

I hear endless conspirazoid theorizing on how editors oppress writers. But after a lifetime in writing, I have learned this: When people have the money they buy what they want and they pay what it costs to get the job done the way they want it done in their own environment and at their own convenience.

When they don’t have the money … all sorts of nonsense starts up.

Denyse O’Leary is co-author of The Spiritual Brain.

News media: Free book for free labour?

On a journalists’ blog recently, a question arose about a Canadian newspaper – which shall remain nameless – that was giving out a free book for the prize-winning travel article. And that’s it. A free book.

My own comments were:

1. Re giving books instead of money: Any retail business that has very little money will try to give inventory instead of money – if they already own the inventory and cannot return it to anyone for money. Chances are, a public relations firm sent the book to the paper.

So there it is on a shelf. But that book could be spun into a free article. Hmmm, making it into a contest means there could be several free articles … not bad for one little book.

2. No one should pay any attention to claims that a writer should be pleased just to be published because it helps one’s reputation.

My local handyman doesn’t think like that, you better believe. He has a good reputation and has served me well. But he lives on money, not reputation. So do we all.

It is true that I manage a “free book” contest for blog commenters, but the situation is quite different. Commenters do not make a living from commenting. It is equivalent to offering a free book for “Best Letter to the Editor of the Month.”

Yes, newspapers are in bad shape, but this is getting a tad ridiculous.

Denyse O’Leary is co-author of The Spiritual Brain.

Intellectual freedom in Canada: News roundup

I put up some links at one of my blogs to intellectual freedom issues in Canada that impact our ability to cover the news.

Intellectual freedom in Canada: Think together, stink together … or sink together? Zerb vs. Blazing? All I know is, I don ‘t want anyone censoring either paper, in the interests of “human rights”, “multiculturalism,” “diversity,” “fairness,” or “localism.” I prefer to read and decide for myself.

Intellectual freedom in Canada: McMaster University sues American journalist for reporting links to al Qaeda – meanwhile, McMaster jihadi is sentenced to 12 years

Intellectual freedom in Canada: It’s what they don’t want you to read that you had better read (Freedom to Read Week coming up)

Further quick notes

Denyse O’Leary is co-author of The Spiritual Brain.

Will Google annihilate writers’ livelihoods?

Google’s mission may be thrilling, but it has already demolished entire industries

One of the most perceptive articles I’ve seen recently about the future of writing and publishing was written by columnist Margaret Wente in the Saturday December 5, 2009 Globe and Mail. As an established, well-known, salaried journalist with Canada’s leading Old Media newspaper, Wente says:

Google is the best thing that ever happened to people in the media. It’s also the worst thing. To many of us in newspapers and TV and books and advertising and the rest of the once-glamorous Old Media world, Google looks more like Googzilla. It’s a scary monster that leaves devastation in its wake. No wonder the mood in the Old Media is distinctly elegiac.

Google’s mission is thrilling, idealistic and seemingly benign. It is to make information accessible and free. “The technology empowers you to choose what you want, when you want it,” says Ken Auletta, the New Yorker writer who was in Toronto this week to promote his new book, Googled. The ominous subtitle – The End of the World As We Know It – refers not only to the way that Google is transforming our relationship to information but to the way it’s annihilating the business model of large swaths of the economy.

Thomas Nelson and Harlequin?

In October the hot news was that Thomas Nelson, the sixth largest American trade publisher and the world’s largest Christian publisher (according to Wikipedia), was adding a self-publishing line, in partnership with Author Solutions.

CEO Michael Hyatt said, “For nearly as long as I have been in the publishing industry, the term “self-publishing” has carried with it a certain stigma. Publishers who specialized in it were branded “vanity presses.” We hope to change that perception with the announcement of WestBow Press, a division of Thomas Nelson.” Read the entire announcement here.

A flurry of blogs and comments ensued. Agent Chip MacGregor’s blog post garnered many viewpoints and much discussion. “Some people are angry, thinking Nelson is profiteering… but my feeling is, “They’re a business. OF COURSE they’re profiteering.” I mean, I’m in business to make a profit. That’s what a business does!…That said, I do think there are some issues to think through….” Read more…

Then, in late November, Canadian publishing icon, Harlequin, announced that they were partnering with Author Solutions. Publishers Weekly reports, “Author Solutions has teamed up with Harlequin to form Harlequin Horizons, a new imprint for self-published romance authors.” Read more…

The internet has been buzzing… no, maybe growling is a better word. Editor Nielsen Hayden reports on the reaction from three major U.S. writing organizations.

“Romance Writers of America (RWA) was informed of the new venture between Harlequin Enterprises and ASI Solutions to form Harlequin Horizons, a vanity/subsidy press. Many of you have asked the organization to state its position regarding this new development. As a matter of policy, we do not endorse any publisher’s business model. Our mission is the advancement of the professional interests of career-focused romance writers….”

“….Mystery Writers of America (MWA) is deeply concerned about the troubling conflict-of-interest issues created by these ventures, particularly the potentially misleading way they are marketed to aspiring writers on the Harlequin website….”

“….The Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, Inc. (SFWA) finds it extremely disappointing that Harlequin has chosen to launch an imprint whose sole purpose appears to be the enrichment of the corporate coffers at the expense of aspiring writers. According to their website, “Now with Harlequin Horizons, more writers have the opportunity to enter the market, hone their skills and achieve the goals that burn in their hearts….”

Read the entire article.

And, I can’t imagine that Harlequin authors are happy about being associated with self-publishing….

Oh, wait, I just visited HarlequinHorizons website and within a few seconds I was redirected to Dellarte Press, where, by the way, I cannot find any reference to Harlequin….

~ Denise Budd Rumble

Can writers & musicians make a living in the digital age?

Before he signs a new band to his independent music label, Franz Schuller usually gives aspiring musicians bad news: They’re probably not going to be famous. This bitter pill is briskly followed by another: “Whatever they think they knew about the music industry from what they’ve heard, or read, or seen on television, that really doesn’t exist any more,” says Mr. Schuller. “It’s really, really hard for artists out there now. It’s an insanely huge challenge to actually make a decent living playing music these days. That’s the reality.”

That’s a perceptive quote from today’s Globe and Mail which delves into the problems Canadian indie musicians face while attempting to build careers and make any money in today’s Internet age.

One quickly sees the parallel problems faced by Canadian Christian indie writers (that is, writers not contracted to big American or multinational publishers) in the October 15th article by Karen Pinchin, titled “Bands see Web as friend and foe in quest to make it big.”

A group of international music industry types recently gathered in Victoria, B.C. for the fourth annual Transmission conference for music and technology leaders to debate the current challenges facing musicians. Here’s an excerpt from the article:

Mr. Schuller, singer and guitarist for the Montreal-based punk bandGrimSkunk and founder of indie label Indica Records, was one of Transmission’s attendees. He says technology has had innumerable positive effects on the music industry, ranging from band websites, MySpace pages and Facebook accounts that aid promotion and publicity, to digitized songs that can be easily distributed across international borders.

But he also insists that the music industry needs a fundamental rethink, and suggests the allure of social technologies may eventually prove to be a Trojan horse for aspiring bands.

“For all the massive opportunity that the Internet and mobile phones and devices give us by reaching millions and millions of people, there’s also a gazillion bands. It’s really hard to get noticed or to get anyone’s attention,” says Mr. Schuller. “It’s allowed people with absolutely no business competing in the same space to complicate the careers of people who do have a lot of talent. There’s way, way too much stuff out there.”

Read the rest of the article here. As a writer, what do you think about Schuller’s comments? Are there too many mediocre or poor writers self-publishing books, or posting blogs, or jostling for the attention of agents and editors, to the point that more talented writers can’t get attention? Is the Web  making it impossible for most writers to earn a living at it, unless they’re the lucky few who win the publishing lottery? Is there any way that Canadian indie musicians and writers facing parallel issues could work together on finding solutions?

– Wendy Nelles

What Bookstores Offer That Online Retailers Can’t

It’s hard for any bookstores, especially the smaller ones, to match the prices of online retailers, but you’re paying for services that big box stores and online retailers can’t offer, argues John Stackhouse, Canadian author, commentator, theologian and professor at Regent College in Vancouver.

Stackhouse makes some great points on his recent blog, including:

We pay to have books right there on the shelves to buy now, not in a few days or weeks.

We pay to have books available to pick up, inspect, and decide about purchasing in a way websites can never emulate, no matter what cool features they add.

We pay for the wisdom and taste of professional theological booksellers who pick out the good books from the many, many bad ones. (Anyone up for some serious religious book buying at Barnes & Noble or Borders? At Wal-Mart?)

We pay for staff to advise us on what else might interest us on a topic, and also what might interest Uncle Fred or Cousin Wilma or Nephew Barney or Reverend Betty for a birthday or graduation or study leave or retirement.

We pay for information on why a book is not currently available, and perhaps on other ways of getting it (e.g., from the U.K. when it’s not available over here, particularly if it’s been published under a different title elsewhere).

We pay to be able to return things easily and confidently.

And we pay for the serendipity—not a trivial thing—of coming across books we never knew existed and for which we would never have thought to search on a website.

Stackhouse’s argument that ethical decisions of where to buy need to be based on more than just price parallels the increasing trend of people deliberately choosing to buy locally-grown produce, or fair-trade coffee and chocolate, or supporting family-run businesses rather than big box stores.

But that still represents a small minority of consumers. Will enough people support Christian and theological bookstores so that they survive?

Read Stackhouse’s entire blog post, titled “Good Bookstores: If We Ignore Them, They’ll Go Away” — and be sure to see the comments from booksellers and customers that his blog is generating.

For example, one person comments that it’s common for browsers to ask bookstore staff for information and recommendations and take up a lot of their time, then tell them, “Thanks for your help, I’ll go order that on Amazon!”