E-Grammarian

The internet is full of snarky grammarians:

The Grammar Vandal
The Grammar Blog: Mocking Poor Grammar
Motivated Grammar: Prescriptivism Must Die
The Grammarphobia Blog

But I'm going to out-snark them all.

FREEconomics?

Yes, I know. There are too many puns in the world of economics. This is what literary types resort to when we write about subjects far outside the realm of our expertise. The worst is, I can't even take credit for this particular punishment. (I'm stalling.)

Chris Anderson, editor of Wired and author of Free, wrote this article last year about why the cost of information and digital resources should be free. Music, books, newspapers, games--all should be, nay, will inevitably be, freely available to anyone with a computer and an internet connection. His argument is compelling and sensational and you should all read the article, if not the whole book. Although you can spend almost thirty dollars on his book at Amazon, Anderson lives us to the premise of his argument and offers his book, in its entirety, free on Scribd.

If, however, you're skeptical, you can read Malcolm Gladwell's rebuttal. Gladwell challenges all of the premises of Anderson's argument and, frankly, cuts it to shreds.

However, I can't help but be amazed that I found all this information--articles, reviews, the book itself--without paying a dime. The two economists/philosophers/erudite scholars can debate this until one or neither is proved right, but, as a lay person, I can't help but believe Anderson's prediction.

It seems to be a reflection of my generation's sense of entitlement to digital content. First it was music--sure, Napster may be a relic, but if you want free music, there are still plenty of options--now it's everything from iPhone apps to software to phone calls. The music industry, at least, has backpedaled. The iTunes store now offers individual song downloads for 99 cents. Many iPhone apps are also 99 cents.

The thing is, the difference between free and 99 cents is huge. In all my years as an Apple user, I have never paid for a song, a podcast, or an app. I have taken advantage of their free downloads, but this has never been incentive enough to pay for any of these things. Anderson's argument rests on his belief that a profitable relationship can be generated by giving away free products to consumers. This is a two step process: they give something away for free so that we will feel compelled to purchase something else.

In one model, he's correct. Assuming iTunes does begin giving everything away for free--the program itself has always been free--Apple will still make money from selling its computers, iPods, and iPhones. But how can this apply to book publishing?

Anderson practices one model: he offers his book for free online but still offers a paper version, to be sold for money, on Amazon. This action seems to be emphasizing that what you are paying for is paper and ink, not the information itself. Still, the book is selling well--over 6,000 copies sold since its release earlier this month. And, of course, with every book he sells and every download he gives away, his name recognition and fame grow, as does his marketability. If it's not one thing it's another.

Harry Potter and the Unsentimentor

Transitioning to Digital?

This recent article from Slate, by Jack Shafer, highlights some of the growing tension occurring within the publishing world over how to cope with the growing popularity of e-books. On the one hand, the sales of digital material are increasing, even doubling or tripling, with time. However, when we compare the numbers we see jumps from three books a month to six books a month--hardly pension-securing. But still, with the emerging popularity of the Amazon's Kindle and the promise of an even better e-reader, digital releases are a big issue for Berrett-Koehler.

One of the biggest problems, as highlighted by the article, is pricing:

"Amazon and the others insist on selling most e-books for about $9.99, which pleases the publishers when the e-book retail price is close to that of the paper edition...The publishers dislike the rigidity of the e-book price, however, when the hardcover lists for $27.95 and Amazon sells it at a loss for $9.99."

Publishers are afraid that such a discrepancy in pricing will encourage readers to buy the much cheaper e-book, dramatically cutting into their profits. They're also afraid that by pricing every e-book similarly, Amazon is effectively capping the pricing potential for every new book. Just as no one is willing to pay more than $.99 for a song download, people will become accustomed to paying $9.99 for a book download.

Jack Shafer predicts that as publishers fight to increase the prices of e-books, readers will simply turn to the e-legacy of pirating and bootlegging. Why even pay $9.99 when you can safely steal Grisham's latest title from Napster's nerdy cousin site?

E-Community Building

Check out CV Harquail's blog Authentic Organizations which discusses the effectiveness of certain companies and practices with an emphasis on "aligning identity, action, and purpose." She has a lot of great things to say about this blog and about Berrett-Koehler. It's also a very thoughtful and interesting blog in general--definitely worth reading.

Why, in spite of everything, this job is fantastic

Rejection Still Sounds Harsh

Last week I wrote a post about rejecting (often unsolicited) incoming book proposals and manuscripts. I tried to explain what makes a proposal successful or not--by Berrett-Koehler's standards. However, I think an equally important part of BK's reaction to the "slush pile" is how we inform the author of our decision.

The most common response from a publisher to an author whose work will not be published is nothing. My own father, a published Berrett-Koehler author, can attest to this. Many publishers don't even send out a form letter informing the writer of their decision. It's one of the most trying aspects of becoming a published writer. It's more than constant rejection. It's being absolutely ignored.



That's why Berrett-Koehler makes it a policy to personally respond to each proposal. Because I am the one who first reviews them I am also the person in charge of responding to them. Most of the time, this takes the form of a personal phone call. I call every author and give them reasons for our decision. I invite them to ask questions, call me back, do whatever they feel will help them. When possible, I give constructive advice which sometimes includes a referral to another publisher or an agent.

I've talked to my boss, Jeevan Sivasubramaniam, about the merits of this method. Certainly it would be easier to send a form letter (or no letter at all) but that kind of action doesn't fit into the Berrett-Koehler mission of community building. In his own words, responding personally "is just the right thing to do." It's easy to forget that behind each proposal is a person who worked really really hard to prepare that document. It's important to respect that.

In another light, it's also good for business. Sure, the only exchange is communication, but the authors I speak to will remember Berrett-Koehler. Sad as it may seem, this small gesture is a mark of distinction in the publishing world.