For example:
If a well-known publishing house takes the risk on a book, even a despised so-called midlist title, readers are at least subliminally aware that an investment of tens of thousands of dollars is at stake, that the author's writing is worth a gamble. While some industry pundits have proclaimed print-on-demand to be the future of publishing, there will always be a positional advantage to the conventional book. It says somebody thought enough of this writing to run off a whole batch. What's more, there are many design features that on-demand printing can't equal.I agree heartily. I also found this point well made:
As a researcher, I'm delighted that there's so much free, or usually advertising-supported, content. But as a writer, I'm concerned that outlets are declining as aspirations are rising. Writing programs seem to specialize in the one genre, the short story, that has suffered most from the decline of general-interest magazines. Few bloggers have made a living from their writing, and many of them seem to have begun with experience or connections in print publishing.
So the whole article is well worth a read. It may require a subscription soon -- so go now!
He mentions newspapers, which got theirs in a great piece by Eric Klinenberg in the current Mother Jones. Again, an eye-opening if not worrisome bit of writing, which is pretty standard for the always interesting magazine. The purposely provocative cover headline is: Who's Killing Newspapers? (It's not the Internet).
I'll try to post more, for anyone keeping score out there.
No comments:
Post a Comment