Recent NY Times Article on Self-Publishing - Page 2


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Recent NY Times Article on Self-Publishing

  1. #11
    Authonomy is a joke. It no more shows no real forward placement out of HC (just the UK branch, by the way). It's crude fan-building site, no more than that.


    If you want to see what publishing is doing, just step back about 6 years and see what music biz did. Freak out, try to figure out some way to control it, then to own it all, then to buy it in, then to buy into it.



    The lastest ploy, I'm just starting to figure out is all this "transmedia" yack.
    They'd suddenly LOVE for everybody to start wanting books that play on iPads or proprietary equivalents because they are complex soundtrack/video/flash enabled things that very few authors could create by themselves...and therefore they'd be back in the position of having the advantage of owning capital-intensive production.
    Last edited by Linton Robinson; July 8th, 2010 at 05:21 AM.
    See my books Hidden Content (and in heaven).

  2. #12
    ...

    My apologies, OX, for borrowing your shtick.
    Last edited by JosephB; July 8th, 2010 at 01:52 PM.

  3. #13
    Lin - The giveaway is in the last sentence of that HC blurb.

    'The publishing world is changing. One thing’s for sure: whether you’re a reader, writer, agent or publisher, this is an exciting time for books. In our corner of HarperCollins we’ve been given a chance to do something a little different.' (emphasis added)

    Notice that this is an exciting time for books, never mind all that electronic media. I think that was a bit of a slip they made without realising how revealing it is, that it shows that their minds continue to equate publishing with ink on paper between covers.

    But the last sentence tells it all. It's like a plea for help. A few of the younger, brighter editors really want to move in a new direction, but even for them any radical change is scary and something only 'a little different' is safe.

    The Titanic was big and fast, with powerful engines, but the rudder was too small to allow a rapid change in course. HarperCollins and the other big houses are big and rich, but their will to move in new directions is too small to allow for a rapid change in course. The ice is 'right ahead', but they've not yet fully realised that 'founder she must'.

    And you are right about the proprietary devices that are intended to replace books without replacing the publishers.

    The Backward Ox - Your sergeant did act 'impeccably'. He neatly and with an air of calm civility pounded the crapola out of my friend. He was seated quietly at the bar when the MP's walked in and were told that the man bleeding and moaning on the floor had gotten drunk and had fallen off a bar stool.

    As for my habits as a journalist, I've never been like a newspaper fellow I know in Belize City whose motto is, 'if it didn't happen that way, it should have'.
    Last edited by garza; July 8th, 2010 at 12:44 PM.
    El día ha sido bueno. La noche será larga.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Port Townsend, Washington, USA
    Posts
    12
    I'm afraid I don't see anything positive in that article. I have a hard time understanding why it was even written, much less published.


    Interesting comments on Authonomy. I investigated that site, but saw it as like all those online contests and awards that just depend on hustling people to a site to vote. I have a hard time seeing it as a legitimate attempt to locate books and writers.


    On the other hand, it is an interesting medium of self-publishing, in a way. While many there are simply trying to amass numbers to get to editorial attention, there is also an actual reading community, I'd say.


    I remember smiling at the fancy that there might be a possible future in which Harper's book business dwindles away, but they emerge as an online reading community.
    Last edited by Corvus; July 8th, 2010 at 01:01 PM.

  5. #15
    Oh, I see. Where the article appears (The New York Times) and the frame of mind of the author (a frustrated novelist, no doubt) supersedes the actual content of the article, which is a generally positive assessment of self-publishing.
    No. You don't see.


    Your ideas on this article are completely out of line with those who actually publish, as you see. And you reply to people pointing out the problems with it with sarcasm and insistence.


    And no, it's not at all what you keep saying it is.
    And it's not "encouraging readers" as you previously seemed to think and is deniable by the very sites cited. And it steers writers in the worst directions. It's a sucky article and it's already been kicked around in the community of people who.... and try to note this, okay?.... have actual experience in self-publishing and interact with that community. Understand what I'm saying there.

    I don't know why you have to insist that this old thing you happened to run into is this great thing, when nobody else seems to agree, and don't know where you are getting your values when I see no evidence you know diddly about this whole field. But if you have to think it's some great inspiration of whatever, why not just keep on thinking that, instead of continuing to prove it by saying things that don't make any sense and are at odds with the impressions of people who actually do this, and survey what's being said about it? And sneering at those who evalutate it differently than you do?

    Otherwise, carry on gentleman. As you were.
    Oh, yes, sir. Thank you very much for your permission, sir. We will, actually. With your orders or not.
    See my books Hidden Content (and in heaven).

  6. #16
    Hmmm, Corvus. I have put a few things up on Authonomy and know a few online serial writers who just slap an episode up there every time they post it to their own blog.

    I got really sick of the whole "ratrace to the editor desk" thing. I can't believe they don'r realize their number system isn't showing them the best books, or even most marketable books, but just the books by people who are the most relentless and ruthless promoters.

    Of course, that ability is counting for more and more these days, compared to other qualities of authorship, so who knows? Maybe they're onto something. Those same logrolling pimps can just turn their efforts from Autonomy to online contests and spamming once in print.

    I love your scenario of HC ending up as an online reading site.
    See my books Hidden Content (and in heaven).

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.