Entries tagged with “web” from Tools of Change for Publishing
A Classic from the Archive: Tim O'Reilly interviewed in 1994
Andrew Savikas
October 7, 2009
| Permalink
|
Listen 
Unfortunately I don't remember who pointed me to this (it was a few months ago via Twitter I think), but I came across it while cleaning off my Mac desktop. It's open government maven Carl Malamud interviewing Tim O'Reilly (mp3 link) from a weekly series (something that 10 years later would properly be called a "podcast"), and a lot of what's covered is eerily prescient (especially around the role of the Web in publishing).
Well worth a listen.
(Some other notable names in the interview series include Tim Berners-Lee and Brewster Kahle.)
Politico Expands Content Sharing Service
Mac Slocum
December 3, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Here's a sliver of positivity from the gloomy news business: Politico's content sharing network has added more than 100 clients since launching in September. From Editor & Publisher:
Politico Network, which makes the political news Web site's content available in exchange for advertising placement, launched Sept. 9, according to Beth Frerking, an assistant managing editor.
Newspapers and broadcast outlets utilize the content for their Web sites in exchange for placing advertisements provided by Politico, with revenue shared by both.
Frerking says different content packages are available that provide between five and 15 Politico items per week. The more content the client uses, the less their share of the ad revenue.
"We sell ads for the entire network and the revenue is based on how much you use, either 50%, 40% or 30%," she explained. "Rather than charging you for it, it works like this."
CNN is also getting into the sharing/subscription game via its recently announced wire service, which is positioned as an alternative to the Associated Press wire.
PC Magazine Goes Web Only
Peter Brantley
November 19, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (3)
|
Listen
PC Magazine's January 2009 edition will mark the end of its print run. A reduced staff will focus on the PCMag Digital Network. From paidContent.org:
The magazine, which was started in 1982, has a storied history, but its print base eroded over the years as its core brand of journalism -- news you can use while shopping for computers -- moved online. It cut back from bi-weekly to monthly earlier this year. PCMag, which literally invented the idea of comparative hardware and software reviews, at one time during the '80s averaged about 400 pages an issue, with some issues breaking the 500- and even the 600-page marks, according to this Wikipedia history.
John Gruber of Daring Fireball says this is likely an ever more frequent transition as the recession deepens. Both U.S. News & World Report and the Christian Science Monitor have announced plans in recent weeks to end/reduce print editions.
Edit - 11/20/08 - John Gruber's name was misspelled in the original post.
Guccione: Print Downturn Traces Back to Pre-Internet Era
Mac Slocum
September 18, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Bob Guccione Jr. says the decline in print readership started long before the Internet arrived. From The Huffington Post:
I know the conventional wisdom: that readership is being lost to the speed and efficiency of the Web. But I think the decline of traditional publishing, especially magazines, is more deeply rooted in an arrogance and laziness that goes back 30-plus years. It was once so easy to make money from publishing -- paper, printing and distribution were so cheap and newsstand sales and subscriptions so profitable that advertising revenue was gravy. Then it got more difficult, imperceptibly at first, and gradually more complicated. But, for some reason, whatever other market realities they acknowledged, publishers refused to accept that the perfect magic formula had spoiled.
"Lost" Builds Community through Book Club and Web Games
Mac Slocum
July 14, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Producers of ABC's "Lost" often sneak books into the fabric of episodes so die-hard fans can hunt for clues (or red herrings) in external literary sources. Seeing an opportunity, ABC is launching the official "Lost Book Club" through ABC.com and iTunes. From UPI:
Also available on ABC.com will be a message board to discuss the titles, a synopsis of each book, along with when and how it was referenced in the show, and an introduction by co-creator/executive producer Damon Lindelof and executive producer Carlton Cuse, ABC said.
Two years ago, Hyperion published Bad Twin, a book "written" by one of the passengers on "Lost's" ill-fated flight Oceanic 815 (if you're a fan of the show, you'll recognize the author as the guy who got sucked into the engine moments after 815 crashed).
Response to Bad Twin was tepid, but the universe beyond "Lost" episodes has been successfully mined through a number intricate alternate reality games that reveal clues about the show's secondary mysteries. Speaking as a full-fledged "Lost" junkie myself, I know of a number of folks who spent dozens of hours playing these games.
Book publishers with mythology-laden source material may want to take a note from "Lost," "Harry Potter," "Star Wars" and other series. These franchises create organic affinity communities that thrive on interactivity and story expansion, and they can be fostered through forums, social networks, and real-world meetups at related events. Outside observers and casual viewers may not understand the impulse to dress like Boba Fett or write "Lost" fan fiction, but the ardent enthusiasm of a dedicated community presents opportunities that should not be tossed off.
Open Question: Do You Use Twitter?
Mac Slocum
July 1, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (4)
|
Listen
Mediabistro recently conducted an informal round-up of publishers and authors who use Twitter to publicize titles and interact with readers. Within TOC, we use Twitter (plug: follow us here) to exchange quick bursts of information and story ideas, and we've also found it to be a surprisingly effective beat coverage tool -- breaking stories and new memes often appear on Twitter before they hit the blogosphere and mainstream media outlets.
This anecdotal evidence suggests Twitter is gaining steam in the publishing world, but is that really the case? Are you using Twitter? Have you even heard of Twitter? Please share your thoughts in the comment area.
Borders Goes Solo on New Web Site
Mac Slocum
May 27, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Borders has separated its e-commerce offerings from Amazon and opened its own Web site. From the New York Times:
The new Borders site offers plenty to like, such as the Flash video-based "magic shelf" on the main page that recreates the experience of browsing the tables of new books at the entrance to stores. The site also ties in with the Borders reward card program and the physical book search kiosks in most Borders outlets, and offers video of author book signings and book discussion groups.
The launch of Borders.com comes as the retailer tries to navigate through unsettled conditions. In March, the company hired outside firms to explore business alternatives, including a sale. More recently, Barnes & Noble said it is studying a possible Borders acquisition.
BISG Study: Publishing Experimentation Catching On
Mac Slocum
May 12, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Results from a Book Industry Study Group (BISG) study on publishing experimentation were shared last week at a BISG event. Of particular note: 69 percent of surveyed trade publishers and 77 percent of nontrade publishers said their experiments resulted in new products.
With a majority of respondents already engaged in experimentation, the focus for many now turns to harnessing innovation and ideas. From Publishers Weekly:
[Michael] Shatzkin advised publishers to have a formulized process for encouraging experimentation and companies should put one person in charge of the process. That person, Shatzkin said, shouldn't come from the IT department, but rather should be someone from the publishing side with a background in business who understands the needs of the marketplace.
Some Quotables from OnCopyright 2008
Andrew Savikas
May 8, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (1)
|
Listen
I spent last Thursday at Copyright Clearance Center's OnCopyright 2008, and came away with some great lines from the panelists well worth sharing here.
On a meta-level, one of the recurring themes on the panels was the value of using the work of others as a starting point for creative experimentation, as in a pastiche. So it was fitting to learn from the organizers that they found inspiration at the February TOC Conference, both in terms of speakers and in staging. (The panel title "Technology: Confronting the Tools of Disruption" was another nice nod.)
I've enclosed direct quotes in quotation marks -- the remainder is generally faithful paraphrasing, but may suffer from some transcription abbreviation.
- "Copyright law is not in place to protect business models, it's in place to protect creativity."
- Who controls copyright law? According to a 5th-grade civics class: Congress. According to a cynic: People who care enough to spend money to get Congress to do what they want.
- Intellectual property has nothing to do with what craigslist does, and craigslist has significantly diminished newspapers' ability to create a return on what they do.
The Key to Web Success: Pretend Print Doesn't Exist
Peter Brantley
April 29, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Josh Gordon at Folio explains why pure-play Web businesses are beating established publishers are their own game:
Print people are spoiled. Too often when a magazine launches a web product the editorial focus [is] the same or similar to the positioning as the print product. As for functionality, too often the mission statement is, “To extend the magazine brand onto the Internet.” Big mistake. Your website needs its own editorial focus, and mission. While it should complement your print product it cannot just extend it.
German Wikipedia Coming in Book Form
Mac Slocum
April 23, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Bertelsmann is putting 25,000 German Wikipedia entries into The One-Volume Wikipedia Encyclopedia. From the New York Times:
Bertelsmann says the project should not be judged as a re-creation in book form of what appears online, but rather as an attempt to harness the collective wisdom of Wikipedia’s users.
Arne Klempert, executive director of Wikimedia Germany, says the book is a content experiment:
It is a very good example of the power of free knowledge, so anyone is free to use the content and do interesting things with it. It’s a nice experiment to see if the Wikipedia content is good enough to sell books.
Available in September, the book will have a 20,000-copy press run and sell for 19.95 euros. The Times says Wikimedia Germany will receive one euro per copy sold.
(Via Publishers Weekly)
Industry Questions Raised by "Potter" Encyclopedia Suit
Mac Slocum
April 16, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Updated 4/17/08
Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling testified earlier this week against a publisher that wants to release the unofficial Harry Potter Lexicon, a print adaptation of Steven Vander Ark's popular Potter encyclopedia site.
From the New York Times:
... Ms. Rowling said the proposed Lexicon book flouted her plans to write her own encyclopedia and donate the proceeds to charity. She argues that Mr. Vander Ark’s book could deter fans from buying hers.
The article says the legality of the Lexicon hinges on the originality of the title, but this suit also raises broader theoretical questions that plug into many of the free/open shifts we've recently covered.
For example, if the Lexicon is successfully released and Rowling follows through with her own encyclopedia, will Rowling's concern come true? Will her edition falter because the Lexicon has already claimed the market? Or, will awareness and publicity raised by the Lexicon boost Rowling's title? Going a step further, does Rowling even need awareness at this point? (Probably not ...)
The release of both encyclopedias would also provide a real-world test of official vs. unofficial value. Does an "unofficial" encyclopedia -- even a thorough one -- trump an "official" edition? Or, would Rowling's brand and resources marginalize the unofficial title?
Finally, is there an opportunity in the middle ground (and is there a roadmap for other publishers)? The article notes that Rowling and her publisher have been open to Potter fan sites, but what if that openness extended to a formal path for fan-created Potter material? This could take the form of small print runs for "good bet" titles like Van Ark's Lexicon, and print-on-demand services for marginal/niche topics.
Update (4/17/08): Judge Robert P. Patterson says this disagreement could be solved with creativity. From Publishers Weekly:
Patterson reiterated that he felt this was a case that “could be settled and should be settled,” and that it would only take “a little imagination” to make that happen.
Q&A with WEbook President Sue Heilbronner
Mac Slocum
April 15, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (1)
|
Listen
WEbook is a new Web-based platform that blends traditional writing workshops with Web 2.0 functionality. Authors and groups can use the site to develop manuscripts, novels, screenplays and other publishable content, and if their efforts are well received, the projects are published by WEbook.
In the following Q&A, WEbook president Sue Heilbronner offers further details on the company and its collaborative process.
How did WEbook start?
WEbook is the vision of Itai Kohavi, our founder and CEO. In addition to being a twice successful entrepreneur in the technology space, Itai is a twice-published author. When he "completed" his manuscript of his third project -- certain that it was in good shape -- he sent it to a few sharp friends for their feedback. The critiques he received were superb and comprehensive, but he realized that if he had the reactions and input throughout the writing process, he would have produced a far better written product in far less time. In addition, he would have enjoyed working together with friends and fellow writers. He looked online to see if anyone had created a cooperative publishing tool that would have met his needs. Finding nothing suitable, he conceived of WEbook, doing away with the age-old vision of the lonely author and embarking on a community-sourced content creation environment for book publishing.
Is the platform based on wikis? Blogs? Is it proprietary?
Our platform is proprietary and was built for this purpose. It is based in part on wikis, with additional focus on inline comments, inline ratings, and versioning.
How many people are currently participating in projects?
As of April 9, the day WEbook opened its public beta following the alpha, there are 750 registered users of WEbook. Many of the alpha users were recruited in to the process to help provide valuable feedback on the platform and prove that collaborative authoring works.
How are projects created and managed?
Projects are created by an instigator who has an idea for a new book, collection, story, screenplay, etc. That person, the "Project Leader," has the ability to invite others to participate in the writing, give feedback, or both. She sets exposure level and permissions for the project when she establishes it. The Project Leader is charged with managing the project, but in many cases the work can take on a life of its own, with other writers or reactors moving it ahead at a rapid pace.
Are all projects public?
No. WEbook felt it was extremely important to balance the interests of writers -- who feel very strongly about the ownership and protection of their written work -- with the wish of WEbook to create a vibrant community. WEbook allows a project leader or author to make a project private. In doing so, she can be the only member of the project or elect to invite a few friends. A "private" project can stay that way so long as it stays under 35 people (not coincidentally the size of the largest possible creative writing class). At member number 36, the project is effectively a WEbook public project. Users are made aware of this when their project hits that limit, and there are implications of this decision within the Terms of Use and the rights allocation.
Do authors maintain copyright?
The Terms of Use for WEbook required some really new thinking, as the model doesn't exist anywhere else on the Web, and we needed terms that departed in important ways from copyright law in order to make the process possible. Authors who work on private projects with fewer than 35 people retain rights throughout. Once they hit that 36th member, put their work into the public realm, or submit their work for contention as a published WEbook, WEbook takes a six-month option to publish. If WEbook does indeed publish a book, rights are transferred to WEbook, the publisher. If WEbook does not publish, rights revert to the author. That's the simple version. The WEbook Terms of Use are more detailed. We're also producing a short, snappy video to highlight key issues of this all-important topic.
What is the revenue split with authors?
Authors and substantial contributors receive a total combined royalty of 5 percent of net sales.
How are substantial contributors determined? Is it a quantifiable level (i.e. they posted x number of times)?
We use a formula to determine materiality. It has a few softer inputs beyond quantity, which constitute attempts to create a measure of quality and significance to the ultimate work. This is not fully refined, and we expect this algorithm to be a continually moving process as the site evolves. Ultimately, users will see a measure of how they stack up against the algorithm to give them motivation and transparency. We also are intrigued by the idea of giving authors marketing tools to motivate users to contribute to their projects. This might have royalty implications in the future.
Have you found certain topics that are suited for collaboration?
Our goal is to provide a platform that adapts and grows in the direction the community sets. Our first book is Pandora, a fictional thriller written by 17 authors and 17 other contributors and editors. We believe a novel is the highest challenge for collaborative writing, and we took it with the alpha community to prove the concept and learn how writers could write together in the hardest scenario -- a continuous work of fiction.
That said, we think the majority of the WEbook successes will fall into the category of non-fiction or fiction collections. Topics that resonate most with users and, presumably, with the reading public, will be those that are enhanced in coverage because they have input from a community. So, for example, we have a project on our site related to successes families have achieved at home with kids diagnosed on the Autism spectrum. On a far less serious note, there is a great collection of essays on 101 Things Every Guy Should Know How to Do and The First Year, a collection of harrowing essays from first-year teachers.
How will books be selected for publication?
The community will vote on projects that have been put into contention for publication.
How will voting be managed?
Voting will be done on the site. Ratings already occur there for in-progress works and submissions. You will need to be a member of the community to vote. The bar to join is low, joining is easy, and we feel that in order to give an important thumbs-up or down to a work, you should at least identify as a member of the community.
The community will be the overwhelming majority voice in what is selected for publishing. This makes sense, as we view the community as an ingrained base of potential buyers. That said, it would be disingenuous to say that WEbook will move ahead on 100 percent of their top selections or not move ahead on something that just missed the cut. We have strong writers on staff and in our adviser circle (mainly coming out of the alpha experience), and we intend to use them as an occasional input to ensure we're on a good quality path for constantly improving the brand and the work we bring to the market out of the site community.
What formats will books be available in?
WEbook plans to leverage the full range of existing formats -- paper books, ebooks, audiobooks -- as well as delve into new potential formats, including mobile dissemination and unique, customizable downloads.
Will the books be made available through retailers?
Pandora will be available at Amazon.com, BN.com and other Ingram-related online retailers. As WEbook establishes critical mass, a following, and a brand, we will pursue favorable distribution opportunities with brick-and-mortar retailers.
Is Publishing Getting More Comfortable with Digital Brand Building?
Mac Slocum
April 14, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
Niko Pfund, Vice President and Publisher of the Academic and Trade division of Oxford University Press, recently offered answers to frequently asked publishing questions. Pfund's first response touches on the topic of online availability and its impact (pro or con) on print sales. Pfund writes:
The more specialized a book, the more likely it is to benefit from online visibility, and the more likely it is that people will be sufficiently interested in or stimulated by an online viewing that they will purchase a print copy.
Pfund's answer reminds me of Kevin Kelly's "findability" generative and Tim O'Reilly's argument that obscurity is a bigger threat to lesser-known authors than piracy.
This topic also touches on the murky issues of brand awareness in a digital platform. Online marketers are accustomed to detailed tracking reports, but all those click-throughs and ad impressions don't reveal brand recognition. This discrepancy between the comfort of copious data points and the nervousness of brand building seems to be represented in publishing's first moves into free/viral online distribution. As Pfund notes, "... these sorts of things are very difficult to pin down and quantify in any truly conclusive manner, given all the factors at play." Even with the Web's built-in analytics, a digital effort still requires a healthy dose of experimentation.
What's interesting is that folks like Kelly, O'Reilly and Pfund have focused their thinking on specific groups -- in this case, specialized books and obscure authors. Perhaps this shift toward individual application is the beginning of increased comfort with the ambiguity of digital-based brand efforts.
(Via GalleyCat.)
Roundup: New B&N Site Taps Digital Revenue, Magazine Goes High-End with Production
Mac Slocum
March 24, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
B&N Opens Digital Revenue Streams with How-To Site
Barnes & Noble's just-launched how-to site, Quamut.com, offers edited guides on more than 1,000 topics (it's a diverse roster; everything from iPods to beagles). According to Publishers Weekly, Quamut's free online guides are supported by display advertising and the sale of downloadable PDFs ($2.95 each) and laminated charts ($5.95). Some charts will also be sold through B&N stores.
Magazine Courts High-End with Price and Production
As publishers look to cut costs and go digital, Monocle magazine is choosing a different route -- it's using high-end production and big prices to differentiate itself: "We’ve demonstrated that format (trim size, paper stock) is more important than ever in a digital age. At the same time we’ve challenged the subscription model and convinced readers to pay more for quality -- Monocle’s subscription is 50% higher than its cover price," says Monocle editor-in-chief/chairman Tyler Brule.
"Prince Caspian" Gets Read It Before You See It Campaign
Mac Slocum
March 17, 2008
| Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
Listen
HarperCollins has a new "read it before you see it campaign" attached to the upcoming theatrical release of "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian."
The marketing program includes a Facebook profile and interactive game (see image above), Narnia trivia, contests, a Narnia widget that can be embedded on any Web site, and book information.
The Facebook and widget components are notable because they represent a clear effort to engage the target audience (kids) on familiar ground (social networks, blogs, etc.). Back in the day, a program like this would have been relegated to a microsite and maybe a few text ads. Now, the openness of Web 2.0 creates all sorts of new engagement opportunities -- both for companies and the audiences they seek.
(Via Shelf Awareness.)
- Stay Connected
-
TOC RSS Feeds
News Posts
Commentary Posts
Combined Feed
New to RSS?
Subscribe to the TOC newsletter. 
Follow TOC on Twitter. 
Join the TOC Facebook group. 
Join the TOC LinkedIn group. 
Get the TOC Headline Widget.
- Search
-
