The new economy of book publishing

[SFG75]

Thomas Friedman has an excellent editorial in the New York Times about the coming techno-wave that will hit the book publishing world. As corporations perfect electronic books, the paper and pulp version will whither away and be as rare as records.

According to a report in The Times, the buzz at this year’s BookExpo America was all about electronic books. Now, e-books have been the coming, but somehow not yet arrived, thing for a very long time. (There’s an old Brazilian joke: “Brazil is the country of the future — and always will be.” E-books have been like that.) But we may finally have reached the point at which e-books are about to become a widely used alternative to paper and ink.

How will this affect the publishing business? Right now, publishers make as much from a Kindle download as they do from the sale of a physical book. But the experience of the music industry suggests that this won’t last: once digital downloads of books become standard, it will be hard for publishers to keep charging traditional prices.

Indeed, if e-books become the norm, the publishing industry as we know it may wither away. Books may end up serving mainly as promotional material for authors’ other activities, such as live readings with paid admission. Well, if it was good enough for Charles Dickens, I guess it’s good enough for me.

Any thoughts? While I love books and I think other folks here do too, the vast majority of folks who aren't library or book die-hards, will make this come about, while the "real" booklovers will have to lament a bygone era. Perhaps we'll live underground with huge volumes of books and wear masks or something.

 

[sparkchaser]

That's only true if everyone owns a computer or e-book reader. Clearly that's not the case now and will not be for a very long time. As long as there are third world nations and poor people, there's always going to be a demand for paper books.

Besides, they'll never take my books away!

 

[beer good]

This again? And as far as I can tell, there's nothing new in that article that hasn't been said a thousand times over the last few years.

Basically, the Kindle’s lightness and reflective display mean that it offers a reading experience almost comparable to that of reading a traditional book.

The day I trade my books in for something that's almost as good you've my permission to call the men in white to come and take me away. Give me a better product or quit bugging me.

Books may end up serving mainly as promotional material for authors’ other activities, such as live readings with paid admission.

Anyone want to sit down for a 96-hour reading of Stephen King's latest 800-page novel? Show of hands, please?

But in the long run, we are all the Grateful Dead.

What - fat, stoned and prone to playing 4-hour jams out of tune? Count me out.

 

[Peder]

Predictions like that always send shivers down my spine because I think there is a certain inevitability that some drastic realinement will in fact be in the offing, even if not the exact future that the particular writer predicts. My own ability to estimate the future has been proven wrong so many times that I have no way of counteracting those predicitons in my own mind, so I feel utterly defenseless.

But the harbingers are there, small straws in the wind.

My local Borders has been realigning the mix of books they keep on their shelves -- classics are dwindling, and current popular titles including 'chick-lit' are growing in the shelves labeled 'Literature,' er-hem. I'm sure everyone has seen that much, but it does also mean that my own bookbuying is gradually being shifted toward almost completely electronic, if there is a particular title that I want. And there are such titles, you can surely believe!

Another surprise to me recently has also been the vastly lowered prices for laptop computers. I've had a home computer for a long time, shelling out a few thousand dollars for my first along time ago(I hesitate to say the real price!) and I have always preferred laptops. They have always been more expensive and for a while stabilized at about $1000. To now see computers -- and laptops at that! -- at half that price tells me that things have really been changing while I haven't been looking. I almost feel like running out and buying two!

Finally, I was almost literally staggered a few years back when I saw a corner for vinyls at the Virgin Book and Music store in Manhattan. I never thought I would see them again ever, except as antiques.

And don't even mention I-pods and other handhelds to me. I'm totally ignorant.

So the future will happen -- don't ask me how it will look -- but maybe the current devotées of vinyl recordings are a pre-cognition of us bound-book lovers of tomorrow.
/shiver/
And maybe it is no accident that I have just started Canticle for Leibowitz, which is prodding my stodgy brain with awful images of the future. Maybe 1984 wouldn't be so bad, if I could just be plugged in always to nice audio readings of my favorite books (and music).

 

[ewomack]

It will happen.

It's just too dang cheap not to.

I recall when CDs first came out. People said the vinyl iridescent LP would stick around for at least another 10 years. It barely lasted 10 months.

And yes, much hullabaloo has been made over the ebook. And it keeps getting aborted and aborted and aborted. Though Amazon's "Kindle" is by no means a masterwork of DaVincian splendor, it at least presents a somewhat viable medium for reading ebooks. Soon a really cool one will appear and the publishers will push it. They will pull something HUGE such as "NEW HARRY POTTER BOOK AVAILABLE ELECTRONICALLY ONLY!!!!" and everyone will rush to buy it. And BANG!! e-publishing will emerge from its now festering fetus like naked Venus on the half-shell.

Digitization happens in the digital age.

Just yesterday I was in a Border's. Their CD section was bare. Down to the pasties bare. It was a sad sight. The glorious section that once dominated half of the store's upper floor now huddled in a dark corner like the most jittery of dust bunnies. Sad sad sad.

The upside: ebooks may bring about a revolution in publishing. Costs to publish will plummet. A book will no longer require huge resources that require corresponding huge payoffs. Publishers may take more risks. We may see some decent stuff appearing again. Maybe maybe maybe. Cross everything you can. Maybe.

But it will happen. I will miss paper books. Enjoy them while you can.

 

[Canker]

e-books are too freaking expensive to bother with right now. When the books I want to read start showing up as e-books for around $1 or $2 then I may put up with reading them on a computer.

 

[beer good]

It's just too dang cheap not to.

Again: "cheap" is a relative concept. It doesn't matter how cheap something is if people don't see it as valuable - and while I have no great trust in mankind, I don't see a medium which is, by everyone's account, "almost as good" or "somewhat viable" completely replacing a superior one which is (at the moment) cheaper, easier to use, more durable, more flexible, made from renewable resources, requires less energy, requires less maintenance, etc. And even if it does...

I will miss paper books. Enjoy them while you can.

There's about 500 gazillion paper books already out there. It's not like the e-book sellers are going to buy them all up and toss them on the fire. And my bet - 200 years from now, those are the ones that are still going to be around.

 

[Peder]

There's about 500 gazillion paper books already out there. It's not like the e-book sellers are going to buy them all up and toss them on the fire. And my bet - 200 years from now, those are the ones that are still going to be around.

If you make that bet, BG, please don't make it too large.
From a source I can't quite put my finger on right now [but see note], public libraries run by public dollars are feeling the public squeeze on public budgets and are culling their shelves to be more in agreement with public borrowers' desires. The classics? "Some other library's problem, not ours," was more or less the policy stated.
At my library that currently means the encroachement of larger and larger floor space for DVD's. One can hardly see where the books are when one walks in.

Note:. . . Vague recollection has the source of the comment as a conversation I had with my local Borders store manager as she was justifying the absence of classics from her shelves. "We respond to what customers want," she said. "Classics are for the libraries to keep on their shelves, not we on our shelves" was her part of the conversation that I definitely remember. /sigh/

PS And having now reached p224 in Canticle for Leibowitz, where the question has come up in a slightly different form, I can only recommend the book even more highly. I'm almost afraid to read on to the ending.

 

[sparkchaser]

Your comment about classics is interesting Peder. At the local Barnes & Noble, there's a glut of classics and even a Barnes & Noble line of classics.

The e-book may win out but it had better happen after I die.

 

[beer good]

If you make that bet, BG, please don't make it too large.
From a source I can't quite put my finger on right now [but see note], public libraries run by public dollars are feeling the public squeeze on public budgets and are culling their shelves to be more in agreement with public borrowers' desires. The classics? "Some other library's problem, not ours," was more or less the policy stated.
At my library that currently means the encroachement of larger and larger floor space for DVD's. One can hardly see where the books are when one walks in.

20 years ago, my library made room for VHS tapes. 15 years ago, my library cut down on its record collection to make room for CDs; in 2008, their CD and VHS collection has been all but eradicated to make room for DVDs. 5 years from now, the DVD format will be dying if not already dead and they'll have to come up with something new.

I'm holding in my hand - I suppose you'll have to take my word for it - a floppy disk with an essay I wrote back in high school, less than 20 years ago. If I want to read it now, I'll have to visit a museum since my computer doesn't even have a disk drive, let alone a 5'' one, and probably couldn't read the format the files are in anyway. I just tossed all my VHS tapes in the trash because I realised there was no way I was ever watching another movie on VHS. In a couple of years, I suppose my DVD collection will be going the same way in favour of BluRay or whatever the next format is. If I buy a Kindle today, it will be obsolete in 12 months and antiquated in 5 years. In 20 years, I wouldn't be able to read the e-books I could buy for a Kindle today.

Meanwhile, I can take down a book printed 200 years ago from my shelf and read it with no great difficulty. And if I keep it dry and don't abuse it too badly, then 200 years from now my great great etc grandchildren will still be able to read that same book with no more need for technology than a source of light (and perhaps a pair of glasses).

If libraries are stupid enough to throw away a medium that's remained unchanged for a thousand years in favour of something they'll have to replace again and again every 5 years (at considerable cost) that's a shame and I'd suggest taking it up with the city council or whatever you have. But also, library clearance sales yay!

 

[Isabell]

Usually I'm not open to change, but I was given the Kindle as a gift and fought it until it arrived. I had the chance to return it. However, after giving it a few days to play with, I realized that it was something that I wanted to keep and use.

I find myself grabbing the Kindle first to read. Last week I went through my paper library and selling them back to a used bookstore. I won't give up paper altogether, but I will use the Kindle as my primary source for reading. Not all the books I'm interested in are available in Kindle versions yet.

I am still a card carrying member of Barnes and Noble and will continue to make purchases for the kids.

My experience with the Kindle is positive. I find it easy on the eyes just as a traditional book is. I cannot read on the computer for long periods of time because of the backlight, which the Kindle does not have.

Would I say that the Kindle is worth the money? --Yes, I would. Which by the way, has been reduced in price. Not much, but still---it's down to $359.

 

[Peder]

Meanwhile, I can take down a book printed 200 years ago from my shelf and read it with no great difficulty. And if I keep it dry and don't abuse it too badly, then 200 years from now my great great etc grandchildren will still be able to read that same book with no more need for technology than a source of light (and perhaps a pair of glasses).

I'll concede almost all of what you say, but wonder if the publishers and writers 200 years ago were wise enough to have written and printed the books that people 200 years from now will be interested in reading. The Gilgamesh Epic doesn't have such a wide following these days as to sustain an industry. Dickens might not, eventually, nor even Philip Roth either.
Consider the analogy. Computers have long been said to be able to accomplish in, say, a day, or even a minute or a sceond what humans would take, say, a decade or a hundred years to acomplish. It has been heard many times. But only if the persons who put the computer program together were wise enough to have foreseen and programmed every contingency and eventuality that the presumed person was going to come across in that (future) decade or ten.
Unfortunately, I find it equally easy to imagine a sort of ultimate read-and-discard consumer society coming to pass in the realm of books, where books are no longer kept by people. Call me crazy if you will, because partly I think I am, but only partly. Speaking technically, I think it may fit the boundary requirements.

Completely wireless NetBoox, a la an electronified NetFlix, anyone?

Vicar of Wakefield, anyone?

PS The monks of Saint Leibowitz are preparing to save the ancent writings and memorabilia against an impending world-destroying nuclear war.

 

[SFG75]

Usually I'm not open to change, but I was given the Kindle as a gift and fought it until it arrived. I had the chance to return it. However, after giving it a few days to play with, I realized that it was something that I wanted to keep and use.

I find myself grabbing the Kindle first to read. Last week I went through my paper library and selling them back to a used bookstore. I won't give up paper altogether, but I will use the Kindle as my primary source for reading. Not all the books I'm interested in are available in Kindle versions yet.
.

And this is exactly what Friedman mentions in the article. With time, the technology will become more efficient to allow for easier reading and for cheaper purchasing to make e-books take a huge chunk of the reading pie. I haven't used the readers that around yet, but I do have some old Macintosh computers and Apple IIe's in the attic. Comparing that stuff with the laptops, blackberries, and internet-surfing phones of today, and the comparison couldn't be more stark.

 

[Libra]

I love my books, as long as they are available ,I want them. I tried reading on the net but did not enjoy it.

 

[Writer44]

I'm on both sides of the stream here. I've always been a book fanatic (to the point where extra columns are being added to support the shelves). And yet, I have a Kindle and use it to read most every day. For traveling, which I do frequently, the Kindle is a great resource. I tote a hundred books around, can switch between them quickly without taking up two yards of desk, and can clean them all up with a few button pushes.

Publishing is a dinosaur business and doesn't seem to embrace change. At the same time, I can understand some reluctance to get into electronic books. The way people STEAL music and other files, I'm sure the losses will be staggering to the publishing industry, not to mention the writers. My publisher will not issue electronic or even audio rights for this reason. (I might add there are people in some cave somewhere SCANNING books to steal them as this is written. So there is no way around it.)

BeerGood makes an excellent point when he says a printed book is timeless. No electricity, no compatibility issues, no nonsense. For this reason, as the pendulum swings back, the printed word will be ever more valuable. And that's why I keep a library and protect it with every means possible.

 

[dele]

I imagine electronic books are the way of the future. It's hard to imagine right now, but my great-grandmother wouldn't believe her eyes if she saw the world today.

Like all change, I'm apprehensive... I love me books! I've tried reading books on my computer and didn't like the experience. I haven't done any research on kindles so I really can't comment on them, but it always looked great on Star Trek to see people reading from their multi-functional electronic pads. We're 3/4 of the way there with cell phones that double as web browsers and little TVs. Why not books too? It's the way of the future and no one can stand in the way of progress for long. Eventually, someone will come up with something more convenient than the paperback novel. Of course it will never be the same thing, but who know, it may be better.

Now if the world keeps going as is, we're more likely to destroy ourselves and our planet and worrying about things like electronic novels is rather pointless. Hopefully in the aftermath of the destruction there are some educated people with books and a zest for life. Maybe in a few thousand years they'll have this same discussion in a more civilized era.


Hmm, this sounds like the makings of a good sci-fi book.

 

[Peder]

Now if the world keeps going as is, we're more likely to destroy ourselves and our planet and worrying about things like electronic novels is rather pointless. Hopefully in the aftermath of the destruction there are some educated people with books and a zest for life. Maybe in a few thousand years they'll have this same discussion in a more civilized era.


Hmm, this sounds like the makings of a good sci-fi book.

Yes, indeedy! Suggest you try reading Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter M. Miller, Jr., an excellent sci-fi novel with exactly that story line.

 

[dele]

Yes, indeedy! Suggest you try reading Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter M. Miller, Jr., an excellent sci-fi novel with exactly that story line.

Thank you! I'll look it up!

 

[ewomack]

Books printed on modern paper stock are not eternal. The books we have from 200 years ago persevere largely because they were printed on animal parchment or more robust materials. I'd hate to see a typical rag stock Penguin Classics book in 200 years. Like 1950s Barbies, they won't look too good. Nonetheless, some companies, such as the Library of America, do use archival paper and materials, but that's why their prices remain higher. That's one reason I tend to buy hardcovers.

In any case, people preferring paper books will be irrelevant if paper and printing costs continue to rise. Publishing a book electronically is degrees cheaper than publishing in paper form. Just think of the overhead needed for presses, binding, and physical space to crank out 1000s of books. As demonstrated by a few posts here, eBooks can even convince the skeptics to make the switch. And all it will take is a mass marketing effort for the right priced device, enough people to test it and decide "wow, it's not that bad" for the market to shift irreversibly to e. Of course some books will remain. As long as the current generation lingers, people will want tangible books. But they will likely rise in price and become more scarce. I don't think today's youngest generation will have any issue with eBooks. In fact, they may prefer them - they'll wire their reading in through their internet connections, portable IM devices, mp3 players, and cell phones (one device will probably do all of this). So why carry around heavy books when you can have your entire library on a device the size of a credit card? The iPod analogy is too tempting to ignore.

Books will hang around for a while, but once eBooks catch on we'll likely see fewer and fewer new titles available in pulp. Someday we'll have conversations like "Dad, did you ever read 'Frankenstein?'" "Yeah, I read that in paper."

 

[chuephödli]

There is no original piece of writing by any of the classic Roman or Greek writers - ewomack is certainly right, books are anything but eternal. The only reason we even know about those guys is that Arabic scholars copied them. Later, European monks copied those copies in turn. Rather funny, come to think of it.

More to the point, maybe, books as a popular pastime have been around for a couple of centuries at best: people never used to actually read stuff until very recently. I suspect reading books is simply the current way of listening to stories, and as such rather quaint - a majority of the population seems to be quite happy to do without reading books altogether.

50 years from now (you read it here first. Actually, you probably did not), there will not be any paper-based books outside museums (and possibly very exotic cults dedicated to the consumption of processed wood sprayed with ink).

The original way of taking in stories - listening to somebody telling them in person - might even be the way of the future, who knows? The trees at least won't mind.