Journalist Andrew Sullivan has one of the biggest and best blogs out there on the Internet, and I am constantly amazed by his ability to write so eloquently and instantaneously about the issues of the day. He’s a pioneer of the form, one of our brightest intellectuals, and someone I admire a great deal.
And the other day, he wrote, “If any industry deserves to go under, it’s the publishing industry.”
Huh. And here I thought the whole “fake hedge funds that are actually a Ponzi scheme” industry was first in line.
The quote in question that spurred Sullivan’s salvo was from Kassia Krozser’s rundown of the SXSW “future of publishing panel,” and she came away unimpressed by the responses from the publishing professionals. But even Krozser, although she is frustrated with the way DRM is often currently employed (UPDATE: see comments section for more), acknowledges in the article that there are publishers trying new things. And while she certainly often posts of frustration with the industry’s glacial adoption of new technology, I wouldn’t characterize her as overly pessimistic about the business. She just wasn’t impressed with the particular panel.
Sullivan subsequently allowed a dissent from someone in the business who thinks we aren’t so horrible after all, then published a rejoinder from someone who is in publishing and thinks that even if we don’t deserve to die per se, we are at the very least in the process of committing suicide.
I bring all of this up because it’s merely a high-profile example of an extremely common sentiment: glee at the supposed impending demise of the publishing business. Some people can hardly wait to stomp on our graves.
People have some resentments toward the industry for a variety of reasons. Maybe, like Andrew Sullivan, they had a publishing experience they found unsatisfactory.
But Schadenfreude, while perhaps fun, isn’t particularly constructive. Couldn’t we at least have a dialogue about what needs changing and some good suggestions for ways of changing it?
There are definitely problems with the business. Bookstores are struggling, imprints are closing, bottom lines aren’t looking great, and I’m particularly concerned that the industry is thinking far too short term with the current retrenching around established authors and celebrities at the expense of growing authors over the long term and investing in new voices.
But the industry is not stupid. Like any massive industry that is comprised of tens of thousands of individuals, it is a human institution with some institutional problems and weaknesses. But despite a reading public whose appetite for books is not growing at a particularly fast rate, despite tremendous competition from other media, we’re still here, and we’re doing way better than a lot of industries, including ones comprised of supposed geniuses and masters of the universe.
We’re currently undergoing a massive transformation to keep up with the times. There are people all over the industry trying new models, whether it’s Vanguard’s no-advance model, HarperStudio’s limited-advance model, Jon Karp’s book a month model, or, you know, blogging and Twittering publishers and agents. Books will always be around, and so will the industry.
Sullivan is considering self-publishing a book based on his popular View From Your Window series of posts. I think it’s a terrific, terrific idea. He has the the time, the marketing platform, and the resources to do this and make it a success. He probably doesn’t need a traditional publisher.
Now it’s just a matter of getting the book to readers. Maybe he’s content to sell strictly through his blog, but his sales would be limited. To go through online vendors he’ll have to deal with online booksellers, yes, part of the publishing industry. To get into bookstores he’d need a distribution deal, which would be best handled by an agent with experience handling those types of deals — my e-mail address is on the right side of the page, Andrew.
We can only hope the publishing industry doesn’t die before Sullivan’s book is published.
Regards the search for better collaboration, improving understanding and improving the publishing to market supply chain: in a recent article in The Guardian, Michael Holroyd talked about a meeting towards the end of last year of writers and Waterstone’s staff at the UK’s London Piccadilly branch, organised by the Society of Authors. (https://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/mar/21/waterstones-azazeel-orange-fiction)
“Deborah Moggach asked a question or two and learned that literary fiction was not on the whole welcome in the shop. In fact, the word “literary” is death to sales.”
There may be changes in reading tastes, in publishing methods and distribution, but books will go on. What seems strange to me, i sthe internal conflict one hears and experiences within publishing houses, and between authors, amazon, google, book buyers and sellers, through to supermarkets and indie bookshops. Everyone involved in the chain must learn to cooperate and work better to ensure its survival. It’s not all about competition. Long live publishing. And long live literary!
If Sullivan wants to self-publish, doesn’t that make him the publisher, and therefore part of the problem?
Oh, I thought I was going to be first.
Oh well. Let me be first to say “Great rant!”
‘…which would be best handled by an agent with experience handling those types of deals — my e-mail address is on the right side of the page…’
Do you know how many bloggers want to hear those words, Nathan? Ha ha.
I want to say that I agree with your point about publishers investing everything in big name writers. And I’d like to use a baseball analogy (since baseball season can’t come too soon) to show how that business model is flawed. The reason I hate the Yankees is because they go out every year and buy up all of the free agent talent on the market. These are the big names that almost everyone knows, whether you follow baseball or not. They’ve been doing it for years and they continued it this off season. And what has it gotten them lately? A dysfunctional team and no championships in almost a decade. Then, look at teams like the Oakland Athletics. They can’t buy anybody. Instead they develop players from the minors who come to the majors and play as a team. They may not win championships either, but they always have a quality team and they haven’t wasted so much money (and then expect the fan to fit the bill by building a new stadium where the nosebleed seats cost $100). Sorry, I meant for this comment to be a lot shorter, but as I new writer who wants to make a living as a writer while not selling out, I get kind of frustrated sometimes.
I had no idea there was so much negative feelings for the publishing biz.
Wow, Nathan, I sure hope Andrew emails you when the publishing industry kicks the bucket. He does have a great blog and is a great intellectual!
I think a lot of people gleeful at the idea of the death of publishing haven’t given thought to what will replace it. I know a lot of unpublished authors think that publishing houses, editors and agents are all that stand in their way of becoming best-selling authors. But obviously not every author who thinks that is going to be best-selling.
I do think the industry will be transformed, as newspapers will be, by the new media. The need for stories, and for someone to vet and brand the stories, is not going to change. In fact, I suspect as it becomes easier for anyone to set up their own publishing house, branding will become more important than ever. How many readers are willing to slog through the slush pile on their own?
One thing I would like to see is more room on the bottom and in the middle for niche books, which will not be bestsellers, but can still find a small, happy audience.
Meh. That’s fine. He can go publish himself. I’ll just finish writing my novel and move on to querying.
(And there will always be people willing to query.)
You know, Andrew Sullivan can be a bit of an egotistical asshole. I’m just saying. He’s a talented writer and smart guy, for sure, but he’s sometimes just an asshole, too.
I think there are two issues here. One is the ‘death’ of an industry.
Industry evolution is pretty normal. The current way dies and a new way emerges.
Hopefully, it’s a better way.
But I think there’s a second point on the table – a lack of compassion for the people involved when an industry has immense growing pains.
I’m not sure Schadenfreude is exactly the right term. I think people may feel vindicated. The system as it is has been exclusive and oppressive to many.
But to forget that there are people involved – people who are not the industry itself, but work within the industry with integrity and intelligence – to forget that is unfair and heartless.
It also imagines enemies where there could be friends.
I would guess that most who work in the publishing industry are aware of the problems and would like to improve things. I had to work for weeks at my job just to get them to fix a toilet. Most of us don’t make the actual decisions.
If a new paradigm is emerging, it seems like dismissing all the talent currently in play is extremely short-sighted and….well, exclusive and oppressive, now that I think about it.
Whenever people talk about an industry, they often are using that word as a shorthand for certain sector–let’s say the top half dozen traditional publishers in this case. But traditional publishing doesn’t equal publishing. The top firms among them don’t equal publishing. And none of it equals books. If people are reading, (and that’s a big if) then there necessarily must be a publishing industry of some kind to satisfy the market. It may not include those traditional top firms, and they may deserve to die, but the death (or, more likely, the radical retrenchment) of those firms doesn’t equal the death of publishing.
This anger against the publishing industry saddens me. I have a feeling that it is generally a collective bitterness stemming from mass rejection, however there are some people who are so utterly against the industry with no reason, that I just don’t understand.
(On a brighter note, I’m just watching the news this morning and seeing the US stock market is up 20% in the last 2-ish weeks. Hopefully this will continue!)
Publishing may change, but it won’t die. Even if you made printed words illegal there would be an underground market fueled by maniac writers who just can’t live if someone doesn’t give them feedback on their latest WIP.
You could cut publishing back. Attack it. Hack at it. Slash away. But the root of publishing is authors and they grow like weeds. You can’t stop a feverish imagination from creating. Short of physically chaining them to a wall you can’t get most authors to stop writing. And so, publishing will live.
The publishing industry is so much smaller-scale than the banking and insurance industries. And for a while that was looking like a bad thing. But now, call me crazy and I’m not an economist, but small-scale is not looking so bad anymore.
I like cantilevered hedge structures as much as the next person, in theory, but I always had a feeling something weird was going on there. Flat is the new up.
So is positivity week officially over?
Buck up, little campers. Look at it as the reinvention of modern publishing.
Since I am not employed in the publishing industry, it is easy to look beyond short-term despair and try to find the opportunity in this. A transition stemming from an industry in peril opens the door for creative new solutions. If you can ride the crest of the wave, you may be pleased at the success that awaits you.
And if the power of positive thought fails me, I still remember how to flip burgers from my college days.
Also, didn’t I read somewhere (maybe on this very blog) that Europa Editions (Elegance of the Hedgehog) was doing well by following sort of an older-than-old-school publishing model–find something great, believe in it, acquire it for a little and really get behind it and build momentum?
Here’s my last rejection. What’s an author to think?
I received your sample manuscript and enjoyed reading it very much. You have a great voice, and I found myself laughing out loud on many occasions. Unfortunately, with today’s difficult publishing market, we don’t think our agency would be able to get your book the attention it deserves.
I think that clearly the agent liked my work, but as you state, Nathan, the industry doesn’t seem to be interested in investing in new voices. So a lot of authors, like me, are choosing to self-publish. And we’ll do it with varying degrees of success.
My question is, do you think that, as a result of this shifting paradigm in publishing, agents will start to take a closer look at the self-published works that have proven themselves? Will there be any shift at all in the way agents look at self-published authors?
“And the other day, he wrote, “If any industry deserves to go under, it’s the publishing industry.””
That’s almost as stupid as Rush Limbaugh saying he hopes Obama fails.
Andrew Sullivan was a cheerleader for the war. Enough said.
Vegas Linda Lou,
I’m sorry for your rejection, but if I had to get a rejection letter, that’s the one I’d want.
Sounds like you have a great book there. I think you have good options. Self-publish – with your voice you have good marketablility. or, wait it out, and keep trying in the meanwhile. Someone may take a chance.
Even in the good times, books were passed on. Didn’t it take 120 tries for Chicken Soup for the Soul to get published? Their agent dropped them, etc. Look what happened there.
Nathan, you know my opinion on this stuff.
Firstly, I’m not so sure Sullivan needs you (agents). Like you say he has a huge domestic platform to market from. He is well-known. He is published. He is opinionated. He has been controversial – privately and professionally. The fact that you forward an invite suggests that he carries ‘weight’ … maybe he is a prime candidate for successful self-publishing.
Okay, so he needs a distributor – Ingram, Baker & Taylor, perhaps? Single title – no drama. He has the platform so they’ll let him in. He probably has a few contacts too. So that covers the bricks and mortar retailers. Amazon he can do himself. He can also sell off his website. Ebook – too easy.
Sub-rights: Yes, you guys are the go-to guys. Although he could probably handle the UK market himself. Hard work though.
Self-pub downside: No advance. More hassle. Print costs. Dreaded returns!
Upside: Total control. Bigger margins – financially.
The reason publishing is seen as a crap industry and why it is hated so much is simply because the creators, ie the authors are treated with disdain – ‘great industry, if only we could get rid of the authors!’. The same applies with TV and film writers. Except for one very distinct difference – TV and film writers make good cash when they break-in. The 8-15% author royalty will motivate many writers to change the business model of publishing, so too the continued dominance of corporate publishers.
The one thing most authors don’t realize, however, is the punishing work required to operate a publishing business. Prepare for sleepless nights, hard work, huge cash flows, unpaid accounts … and a whole lot of swearing.
My possibly worthless advice for authors: don’t self-publish unless you love all aspects of running a business; accounts, design, manufacturing, shipping, distributing, marketing, publicity. There are so many tiny traps to fall into, some so seemingly inconsequential that you could never, in a million years, have foreseen them.
If you are having trouble finding time to write that bestseller, forget self-publishing. Your quality of life will reduce dramatically. Best you stick to the writing task and let the publishers do their job.
I don’t understand all the talk about the “death of publishing” because I read books. Everyone I know reads books. I usually have to stand in line at the bookstore when I buy books in person. Even when I’m lucky and don’t have to wait to check out, I am never the only person in the store.
Not a scientific study, certainly, but people do still read books. Printed books. On paper. In other words, there is still a demand for the publishing industry’s product, so I don’t see it dying any time soon.
The business end of producing the product may change (and probably will have to), but until people stop reading entirely, publishing won’t die.
I am sick to death of the business model that says no growth equals death. A company can be making a profit, but if that profit isn’t as high as forecasters’ estimates, the stock suddenly plunges.
People always talk about “buggy whips” when they talk about an industry that died. Well, there’s actually still a demand for buggy whips and there are still companies that make them.
Publishing is dying? Don’t hold your breath.
chris bates-
He could handle it by himself, but I would wager that he wouldn't get as good a deal as if he had an agent. He either will need to manage print runs himself or he could go with a POD publisher who will handle his inventory, PP&B, etc., but he'd lose money ceding that control, and an agent could negotiate with a distributor to get a better deal.
Having an agent would result in the maximum return. But you're right. He doesn't HAVE to go with an agent, and I suspect he won't.
Yep, totally agree.
POD would be a waste of time. No upside here. Low start-up but financially stupid.
Offset print? Goodbye time for popular blog. Goodbye low start-up cost.
And, you’re right, I don’t think he will go for an agent.
Personally, if I were him I’d be shopping this sucker around … way too much hassle to do this project himself. Traditional publisher is where it is at for these guys. All other options truly are a pain in the butt, which he will discover if he pursues either of those models.
On this one: Take their money and run.
Well, the reason he won’t is he’s making a point.
He’s pissed off, he’s had bad experiences. He’s going to try and prove it can be done better on his own.
He probably doesn’t care about the money. He’s got an axe to grind.
Mira:
Unfortunately, to prove his point he has to become a ‘publisher’. And with that title comes all the realities of survival/profitability in that business.
I feel that the publishing industry will always be around albeit it will change. Eventually, people will build platforms (If someone from the Real World can get a platform, then bloggers can too.) and be able to get a fanbase and eventually published. Or they can self-publish with a good enough platform.
The publishing industry would be wise to consider dissenting voices. The cookie-cutter editor model will not live forever. Eventually editors will have to concede that what sells right now will not sell en mass very long. New voices are going to be the next trend. People get tired of the same old same old.
Editors will have less power over time and as far as I’m concerned, it’s long overdue.
Nathan — I think you captured the nature of my frustration very well. There are publishers out there who would have better represented the industry to the audience. I wish they’d been on the dais. On the plus side, the presentation spurred some very creative minds to plan something bigger and better next year.
Talking about the death of publishing is like talking about the death of the planet. Aspects of the business will, either through natural selection or seismic shifts, will not survive. As these disappear, new life will emerge. As publishing evolves, the core of the business will remain: writing, distributing, marketing, editing, curating. I have theories on which of these core functions will emerge stronger than ever before.
I do want to clarify that I am not so much anti-DRM as I am opposed to the way it’s being implemented :). I am highly skeptical about the efficacy of most of these systems, especially since they increase costs without necessarily providing true benefit, meaning they tend to frustrate legitimate consumers far more than they deter pirates. As we start to see emerging business models, such as subscription-based content, smart DRM will help manage access without thwarting paying customers.
I like Neil Nyren’s take on the condition of the industry here.
kassia-
Thanks so much for weighing in, I was nervous that I was mis-characterizing your views and definitely want to get it right. I updated the post re: your views on DRM accordingly. Thanks again!
Chris Bates:
I’ve researched Lightning Source and have been told by people who have blazed the trail that that’s the way to go. No upside to POD? Financially stupid? What don’t I know?
@LauraD:
I’m gonna disagree with you here… but not to pick a fight!
I believe that good editors are going to be worth their weight in gold. Content will always be king. But without a good editor most books will have content that is just not up to scratch.
Seems there’s lots of angst at all levels of the publishing field right now as it goes through a huge period of change. Most writers already know that kind of angst from working for years on a project that, in the end, may be rejected, even if the project’s very good. Right now, people in many industries are living in uncertain times. I look forward to seeing the future world of publishing, although I suspect it will be radically different than it is today. I wonder whether the future direction will lean more toward the literary or the trendy; and it seems to me that a great deal of infighting is about which of those trends will predominate, with passionate feelings on both sides of that divide. In addition, since most well-known publishing businesses are actually part of a few larger media conglomerations, there must be a great deal of uncertainty and sense of powerlessness in the individual publishing businesses, since many huge decisions aren’t actually in their own hands. And the shrinking global economy is placing pressure on everyone. It will all get sorted out eventually; but, sadly, many will lose their jobs and not everyone will like whichever future direction the publishing world takes. No matter which direction it takes, there will be people who lose out in very big ways and others who reap huge rewards. The specific direction will determine who wins and who loses. I think that everyone’s on edge right now, waiting for the next shoe to drop, waiting to find out if they have personally won or lost.
Vegas Linda Lou:
Low margin biz.
That’s why publishers hang on dearly to the hardcover business model.
If I had it my way on a business model, I’d go: hardcover release … ebook release … paperback release.
However, that won’t hold up nowadays.
Successful POD publishing is a great way to make Lightning Source/Lulu rich!!
Vegas Linda Lou:
I should clarify that I view self-publishing as a business. The ‘No Upside’ comment is coming from a commercial gain POV. There are better options dependent on your circumstances of course (Read: financial liquidity).
I wouldn’t discount the POD method for low-cost self-publishers.
Too funny, Nathan! “Huh. And here I thought the whole “fake hedge funds that are actually a Ponzi scheme” industry was first in line.”
Maybe he should just Twitter all day to his curmudgeon pals since he hates publsihing so much…
So Sullivan wants the publishing industry to collapse AND he wants to become a publisher, using content provided by his readers (who presumably will not share in the profits). At least traditional pubs usually pay those who provide the content, right?
I do agree, though, that it’s a good idea. I really do like the View From Your Window series. And his blog is one of the best. But with so many opinions expressed per day, he sometimes blurts one out that is not fully thought through.
I disagree that publishing is dead and or that it deserves to die. I do, however, agree that changes need to happen and they need to happen fast(er).
Phenoms like Twilight and Harry Potter and The Hunger Games prove (at least in YA where I play) that people (kids) are hungry for books. They want them, they’ll devour them if we give them to them. I had a niece who hated reading until she read Twilight (which broke my heart a little) but now I can’t get books to her fast enough. So I don’t think the problem with publishing is that demand is down. I think where we’re failing readers is getting them what they want as fast as they want it.
Granted, books take a lot of time to get out, but a year to a year and a half? It’s no wonder publishers are having so much trouble staying ahead of the curve. Publishers need to be nimble, they need to be able to jump on the bandwagon when the bandwagon is charging along full speed. They also need to be able to take chances on starting the next new bandwagon.
They also need to get on board with the digital stuff. Kids eventually won’t care how they get their books, they’ll just get them however it is the easiest, and us old people will follow along. I think as time passes the publishing houses will be less about the physical publishing and more about getting the books (digital or otherwise) into the hands of the readers.
Viva la revolution.
@ Chris Bates:
Thanks for your insight. You’re right–self-publishing is a TREMENDOUS amount of work. I’m learning a lot, though, and as more authors opt to self-publish, the opportunities for consultants with that expertise will also grow.
Always thinkin’…
Nathan,
You are correct that the publishing industry is facing multiple challenges. But to my mind, the main problem is that people are reading fewer books. Video is everywhere, and that’s what people seem to be migrating to. I don’t know how you fix that, but until that happens, I don’t think things will look very bright, I’m sorry to say.
Nathan, you are so funny when you are being snarky. Nobody else is so nice when doing snark.
Human beings are physical (duh) creatures needing physical things. No matter how much cyberspace appeals to people, it will never replace tangible objects they can hold. Reading stories using high technology is great, convenient, and frugal. Plus it saves on paper, eliminates need for inks, and saves on space. But this will never replace our favorite tangible books. To quote Henry Ward Beecher, “Books are not made for furniture, but there is nothing else that so beautifully furnishes a house.”
I think the publishing industry is trying to survive any way it can. If this means they must ADD high tech, great. But, I doubt they will ever abandon the traditional, anciently reverenced, and forever loved…book.
Finally, Nathan, I agree with you about the troubles with self-publishing. Unless a person has the money, the time, the popularity (name & fame), and the marketing skills, it is best to LEARN what it takes to win over a literary agent…and hope.
Thank you once again for another great blog.
Napster was originally the “death of the music industry.” Last I checked, the “music industry” didn’t seem too dead.
What we’re witnessing now is less the buggies-to-automobiles disruptive change as the packaged-software-to-internet evolution. The packaged software business is far from dead, but the vast majority of software is now distributed electronically. The winners: software makers, software users, the environment. The losers: warehouse distributors, retail stores, package designers.
The result will be what serves creators and users best. The “publishing industry” (i.e. big publishing houses that are unable to adjust to new economics and distribution mechanisms) may end up dying a slow death of attrition while new businesses move in to serve the consumer needs that are left unserved by the old guard.
Deny it, decry it, even fight it. Or accept it and look for opportunity amid the change.
Publishing is dying and reincarnating at the same time. The invention of the Gutenberg press created the basic model we have today.
The guys with the printing technology get together with the guys who write things. Because there are more writers than publishers, publishers can pick and choose their authors. (Of course they fight over big name authors because the power equation is reversed.)
In their own interest, the guys with the technology have over time added valuable services, such as copy-editing, marketing, and distributing.
So what’s changing? Their major strength, the technology. In the blog responses that discuss the POD model, one thing is made clear, albeit indirectly. Self-publishing in the POD model lacks the copy-editing, marketing, and distributing facets that the publishers can bring to the table.
Now let’s clarify something else. POD is not a business model, it’s a technology. A new way of doing something better than before.
There is no reason traditional publishers should eschew POD – after all, what better way to get revenue from their out-of-print catalogs? In fact, POD makes the concept of out-of-print obsolete.
And there is no reason publishers can’t focus on their enduring, core strengths — copy-editing, marketing, and distributing — in a new paradigm.
andrew-
Very true, and actually, one reason that publishers are suffering so much is because of another technology: the online facilitation of used book sales. Publishers may well utilize POD with their backlists, but there aren’t many people buying new copies because they can get them so cheaply via Amazon, abebooks, etc.
The result: soft backlist sales. And the backlist is where the money is.
Nathan, re used book sales online:
Well, if devices like the Kindle take hold and dominate over the printed book as we now know it, like what the iPod has done to CDs, that will kill the entire concept of the used book.
andrew-
Yes. Although it will also dramatically increase the problem of the stolen book.
I wonder what the book business was like when we didn’t have to worry about this stuff. Those were the days!
Nathan,
I think the ones who will have a more difficult time are those who are older and more entrenched than you are. You’re young, flexible and smart. You see the possiblities of new technology. You’re forward thinking.
Whatever changes come, you’ll be in the front row. It could be very exciting. Change can bring some really good things.
Besides, you have this wonderful blog with many loyal supporters.
I’ve been on this earth long enough to know that sometimes the hardest things turn out to be the best. Everything will work out.
For one thing, once I actually write something, you can be my agent. We’ll make sooooo much money, you could start your own publishing company and do it right.
You’ll see. It will work out.
I do not know enough about the publishing industry to comment about it. Ultimately, I think greed is the culprit in all the industries that we see failing today.
The more I learn about the publishing industry the more self-publishing is looking better.
The book, THE SHACK was self published and its been on the best seller list 36 weeks now. (I personally did not like the book- not because of the writing or story but because I do not believe in religion)
The Christian publishers rejected The Shack because it was too risky and the secular publishers rejected the book as it was “too religious.”
I bet they regret rejecting it now as six million copies are in
print. and several publishers have tried to buy the rights.
https://windblownmedia.com/