Matters of control.
Feb. 1st, 2010 01:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
seanan_mcguirePeople are talking a lot about eBooks right now. It would be impossible not to talk a lot about eBooks right now, given the recent mess with Amazon and MacMillan.* Before this, people were already talking about eBooks, for a lot of reasons. One of those reasons was what people are calling the "nuclear option": a tendency by some readers to go to Amazon.com and other review sites and post one-star reviews of products because those products are not available to them. The book you want isn't available in the country where you live? Give it a one-star review! That'll show 'em!
...except no. Not really.
People are talking a lot about book covers right now, and the fact that sometimes, the people on them don't actually look anything like the people inside the books. Sometimes they're bad. Sometimes they're terrible. And sometimes, yes, they're inaccurate enough to be insulting, presenting characters as the wrong race, gender, weight, sex, or species. (For a nice round-up on some recent cover issues, check out this excellent post by the always-charming![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
jimhines.) This leads, periodically, to groups of people deciding that the best response is a boycott of the books in question—the classic "voting with your dollar" method that works so very well in other arenas.
...except maybe this one.
Authors have a surprisingly small amount of control over a lot of aspects of how their books are presented to the public. I say "surprisingly" because when I was a kid, I ranked "Author" as a position of power just below "Doctor Who," "The Great Pumpkin," and "God." Most people knock "God" off that list by the time they reach their teens (I did), but still, there's this innate assumption that the author has a lot of control over where their work goes and what it does.
...except no. Not really. Check out these lists for details.
Things the Author Probably Controls
* Whether the book gets written.
* Which publishing houses the book gets sent to.
Things the Author Probably Does NOT Control (unless the author is Stephen King)
* The cover.
* The title.
* The publication date.
* The format of the book.
* The cost of the book.
* Whether there's an eBook edition.
* Whether the book is published anywhere outside the US.
* Whether the book is published in more than one language.
* Whether there's an audio edition.
* Which stores, including Amazon, carry their book.
* How many copies are printed.
Who You Are Punishing If You Boycott the Book or Review It Poorly Because of Format, Not Content
* The author.
Who You Are NOT Punishing
* The publisher.
Now, I don't want my publisher punished, for anything. Both my publishers have been amazingly good to me. I love them like I love candy corn and fluffy little blue kittens, and I want everything they touch to turn to gold, because then maybe they can start paying me in remote islands and genetically-engineered dinosaurs instead of boring dollars. Plus, people take very poorly to being punished. If you hit me because I didn't bring you the sandwich you wanted, I'm not going to go and make you a fresh sandwich. If, however, you say "I'm sorry, I really wanted tuna," well, we can negotiate. The message you send when you pan a book for not being available in the format/language/region you want isn't "I really want this but you won't let me have it"; it's "this sucks." Remember, that nasty review is only going to be seen if someone takes the trouble to read it. Most people will just see what amounts to an announcement of "this is a bad book."
If there were a mass boycott of Stephen King or Tom Clancy, the odds are good that the publishing world would notice. Those are, after all, some damn big numbers. Most authors are not in that neighborhood. Most authors can't even get an invitation to that city. So for us, losing ten sales actually matters. For us. For our publisher...not so much. The message sent by a boycott is not "I am offended by this choice," it's "I am not a fan of this author." If enough sales are lost, the author won't be able to get another book contract, and will need to find another job. The publisher will keep publishing. Some of these choices don't punish the people you're trying to punish, and their side effects can be killer.
So how do you get your point across? Pick up a pen. If you're actively offended by a book's cover, try buying the book and mailing the cover back to the publisher, along with a letter saying something like "Thank you so much for publishing a book that was so well-suited to my interests and desires as a writer. Unfortunately, this cover is unsuitable, because..." Indicate that you wanted the author's work, but not the poorly-chosen cover art, and that you would love to see the book issued again with a better cover. Don't punish the author. If you wonder why a book hasn't been printed in a literary region other than the one where it was originally printed (so American books in Germany, German books in France, etc.), it's probably because the local publishers don't realize that interest exists. Write to them! Say "I am a huge fan of Author T. Author's work, and I was wondering if you planned to print their latest book." They might not know they want the work if they don't know there's a market. But don't hit the author for things that are entirely outside of their control. It's just not nice.
(*If you somehow missed the mess, here's a very quick-and-dirty summation: MacMillan said "we want to charge more for our books than you do. We also want to charge less for our books than you do." Amazon said "no." MacMillan said "but they're our books." Amazon de-listed all MacMillan titles, without telling anyone that they were going to do so. MacMillan got upset. MacMillan authors got upset, since the loss of Amazon as a retailer could potentially mean they can't afford cat food anymore. Non-MacMillan authors got upset, because dude, there but for the grace of the Great Pumpkin go we. Everyone did a lot of shouting. People who want cheap eBooks called MacMillan a bully. People who want authors to be able to sell their books called Amazon a bully. There are some very good accountings of the whole mess floating around the Internet; I recommend you go read John Scalzi's post if you want a solidly-researched starting point. This is not that starting point.)
...except no. Not really.
People are talking a lot about book covers right now, and the fact that sometimes, the people on them don't actually look anything like the people inside the books. Sometimes they're bad. Sometimes they're terrible. And sometimes, yes, they're inaccurate enough to be insulting, presenting characters as the wrong race, gender, weight, sex, or species. (For a nice round-up on some recent cover issues, check out this excellent post by the always-charming
jimhines.) This leads, periodically, to groups of people deciding that the best response is a boycott of the books in question—the classic "voting with your dollar" method that works so very well in other arenas....except maybe this one.
Authors have a surprisingly small amount of control over a lot of aspects of how their books are presented to the public. I say "surprisingly" because when I was a kid, I ranked "Author" as a position of power just below "Doctor Who," "The Great Pumpkin," and "God." Most people knock "God" off that list by the time they reach their teens (I did), but still, there's this innate assumption that the author has a lot of control over where their work goes and what it does.
...except no. Not really. Check out these lists for details.
Things the Author Probably Controls
* Whether the book gets written.
* Which publishing houses the book gets sent to.
Things the Author Probably Does NOT Control (unless the author is Stephen King)
* The cover.
* The title.
* The publication date.
* The format of the book.
* The cost of the book.
* Whether there's an eBook edition.
* Whether the book is published anywhere outside the US.
* Whether the book is published in more than one language.
* Whether there's an audio edition.
* Which stores, including Amazon, carry their book.
* How many copies are printed.
Who You Are Punishing If You Boycott the Book or Review It Poorly Because of Format, Not Content
* The author.
Who You Are NOT Punishing
* The publisher.
Now, I don't want my publisher punished, for anything. Both my publishers have been amazingly good to me. I love them like I love candy corn and fluffy little blue kittens, and I want everything they touch to turn to gold, because then maybe they can start paying me in remote islands and genetically-engineered dinosaurs instead of boring dollars. Plus, people take very poorly to being punished. If you hit me because I didn't bring you the sandwich you wanted, I'm not going to go and make you a fresh sandwich. If, however, you say "I'm sorry, I really wanted tuna," well, we can negotiate. The message you send when you pan a book for not being available in the format/language/region you want isn't "I really want this but you won't let me have it"; it's "this sucks." Remember, that nasty review is only going to be seen if someone takes the trouble to read it. Most people will just see what amounts to an announcement of "this is a bad book."
If there were a mass boycott of Stephen King or Tom Clancy, the odds are good that the publishing world would notice. Those are, after all, some damn big numbers. Most authors are not in that neighborhood. Most authors can't even get an invitation to that city. So for us, losing ten sales actually matters. For us. For our publisher...not so much. The message sent by a boycott is not "I am offended by this choice," it's "I am not a fan of this author." If enough sales are lost, the author won't be able to get another book contract, and will need to find another job. The publisher will keep publishing. Some of these choices don't punish the people you're trying to punish, and their side effects can be killer.
So how do you get your point across? Pick up a pen. If you're actively offended by a book's cover, try buying the book and mailing the cover back to the publisher, along with a letter saying something like "Thank you so much for publishing a book that was so well-suited to my interests and desires as a writer. Unfortunately, this cover is unsuitable, because..." Indicate that you wanted the author's work, but not the poorly-chosen cover art, and that you would love to see the book issued again with a better cover. Don't punish the author. If you wonder why a book hasn't been printed in a literary region other than the one where it was originally printed (so American books in Germany, German books in France, etc.), it's probably because the local publishers don't realize that interest exists. Write to them! Say "I am a huge fan of Author T. Author's work, and I was wondering if you planned to print their latest book." They might not know they want the work if they don't know there's a market. But don't hit the author for things that are entirely outside of their control. It's just not nice.
(*If you somehow missed the mess, here's a very quick-and-dirty summation: MacMillan said "we want to charge more for our books than you do. We also want to charge less for our books than you do." Amazon said "no." MacMillan said "but they're our books." Amazon de-listed all MacMillan titles, without telling anyone that they were going to do so. MacMillan got upset. MacMillan authors got upset, since the loss of Amazon as a retailer could potentially mean they can't afford cat food anymore. Non-MacMillan authors got upset, because dude, there but for the grace of the Great Pumpkin go we. Everyone did a lot of shouting. People who want cheap eBooks called MacMillan a bully. People who want authors to be able to sell their books called Amazon a bully. There are some very good accountings of the whole mess floating around the Internet; I recommend you go read John Scalzi's post if you want a solidly-researched starting point. This is not that starting point.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 10:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 10:15 pm (UTC)The overall MacMillan business plan actually does make a certain amount of (admittedly skewed) sense. Charging trade paperback prices for an eBook of a brand-new Stephen King hardcover makes a lot of sense, especially if that price will be dropping as demand drops off. It's called "trying to make back your initial investment." It may not be the smart thing to do, but I can see why they'd try.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 10:39 pm (UTC)Personally, I think the whole pricing structure for e-books needs a good hard look, because after a certain point the production process--and costs--are VERY different than they are for physical books, and that needs to be taken into account. I'd also really like to see authors get more of a cut--MacMillan has apparently brought out a new author contract which gives authors the lowest e-book royalty in the business. And that, especially when they're negotiating a higher cut for themselves, kinda sucks.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 10:42 pm (UTC)(Also, doing the coding from the text doesn't address the author advice, the copyeditor, the cover artist, or any of the other many, many pre-publication steps. If Amazon were helping to cover these, the water would be a lot less muddy in some ways.)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 10:53 pm (UTC)My issue is that, apparently, MacMillan is doing less in terms of production, demanding a higher percentage of the selling price, AND paying the author less. This ... does not seem like a reasonable business plan to me.
Would you be interested in some offline discussions of potential ways to Do It Better? (member of a group, that is, not so much 1:1.)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:11 pm (UTC)Yes, I'm interested, because I think it's a discussion that really, really needs to happen.
No, I can't commit to it right now, because I'm already stretched so thin that parts of me are becoming see-through.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:52 pm (UTC)However there is an elephant in the room I think those prices are reasonable if I am buying the e-book so that I can have it forever and read it on any device that I choose. Adding DRM (Digital Rights Management or Don't Read Me) so I don't send it to a million of my friends and strangers greatly reduces the value of the e-book because now I can't read it as I choose to read it. I do understand the publishers worries about the million friends and strangers, but I would rather see watermarking as a solution for that problem rather than DRM.
I think that most reader are honest and willing to make a fair trade for fair value. I also know that there are people who will pirate for the sake of pirating and DRMed editions are no barrier to that. I believe that our lovely host has already discovered and been distressed by that fact. Unfortunately I don't know of a better solution than letting the publishers legal department play whack a mole with the pirates.
I really hope that in the next 3-5 years a stable e-book marketplace evolves around non DRMed ePub books that allow us to spend our beer and pizza money supporting authors and publishers of stuff we like.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 01:43 am (UTC)"Got 'im, Mabel!"
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:13 pm (UTC)I sadly think that whack-a-mole is going to be the only solution...and oddly, I have to wonder if that's not part of what's making some publishers try to retain more of a share of the electronic rights. It is, after all, DAW and not me that has to do the work of shooting pirates. They probably want to pay for the armada.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:08 pm (UTC)I agree with that for books that have reached the paperback point in their life. I can't argue with a premium on brand new books. Part of the point of a hardcover release is that you keep the price high for a while. When I was more broke, I always waited until something I wanted to read came out in paperback. So yah... go ahead and offer brand new books at a premium rate for people's impatience.
But when you're to the paperback point, let's be honest here, you don't even need to reformat the book to fit the new size.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:22 pm (UTC)If MacMillan drops prices sharply after a bit, that'd probably be useful, and to a large extent I think it's reasonable for them to try the usual model of Premium, Moderate, Cheap. I just won't buy their ebooks till they're cheap enough to pick up on a whim! O:>
As I typed over in a different LJ recently, though... Until people see ebooks as the ultimate product and not a spin-off that's capitalizing mostly on work that is already being done for the physical book... Well, isn't the physical book paying for all that already? And won't paper costs and the lack of risk of returns cover the small fee for someone to pour the text into an epub file and mark the chapters? So why pay Final Product prices for something that's... a spin-off to the Final Product?
Of course, if publishers are secretly sure that ebooks are actually going to become Final Products, and paper books the quaint spin-offs, it does behoove them to start setting expectations for the price at paper-book levels.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:19 pm (UTC)Some people are already treating the electronic edition as the Final Product, and while the Final Product exists, they can't let the prices get too low, or the structure collapses.
I've had people argue to me that five dollars is too high (never mind that five dollars is less than you pay for a matinee anymore, and won't even cover the cost of popcorn in some theaters), since they're not getting a physical product. Well, since you're not getting the physical product, my publisher needs to make back part of the physical product investment somehow. Regardless of where the money comes from, publishers need to make back the cost of editing, copy-editing, typesetting, cover design, layout, and author advance. If there were thirty people buying eBooks in the whole world, I'd say make 'em fifty cents and have done. But the market is growing, and people form habits fast. If we want the habit of paying to support our authors to exist, we need to lay the groundwork now.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-05 01:48 am (UTC)I do think that the perceived value is going to need to be better, in many cases, to make people understandingly fork over that $4-$5 (Baen sells 'em for that!) or more. In particular, being able to back up one's library easily is important. Books are also at risk, physically, but at least you can loan them around as you wish (and buy new ones; my mom got my R&Rue, and my replacement copy just shipped... O:> ), etc.
(I still say that typesetting and layout are things that I don't see any use for in 90% of the linear-text stuff that exists, if it's an ebook, because once it gets onto my reader, I want to control the font, the size, the leading, and all that good stuff.
Poetry needs layout. Text just needs to have the paragraph markers, bold, italics, underline, blockquote, and maybe smallcaps. I'm reading old stuff on Project Gutenberg, it looks fine, and I'm sure they're not bothering to do any layout beyond double-spacing the paragraphs!
Cover text also falls into the category of Cover Art Experience, and will require choice, etc. I do admit to a fondness for a pretty cover icon.)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-05 11:10 pm (UTC)Yes, eventually the music would have made back enough money to be effectively something I could give away...but I'm an independent. If I were a business, I'd need to be able to make back my money and show a profit in order to justify making another album.
As for typesetting and layout, maybe you don't see the need, but a lot of people do. When I open an electronic file, I don't want to tinker, I want to read my virtual book. Typesetting it isn't my job.
Books in Project Gutenberg have already gone through typesetting and layout. That's why you see things like "italics" and "consistent use of various forms of punctuation." All the things you said "just" about—paragraph markers, bold, italics, underline, blockquote, and maybe smallcaps—fall under that umbrella. Yes, the author can do some of those...but no, the author is not going to be consistent or perfect.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-06 12:57 am (UTC)I suppose that if bold/italics/etc are included in the definition, then yes, minimal typesetting is indeed necessary. But picking font, font-size, the exact pixel balance for your tab markers, etc.? Those... um, well, they go away as soon as I pick a standard font that I want to see all my ebooks in because I like it. (I developed a deep loathing for HTML email because it often tries to take away the settings I like, and replace them with 6-point Flyspeck. My emailers may be better at asserting their setting-dominance over it now, since I haven't had that problem for a while.)
...I probably also consider that minimal markup to be a "just" because I'm doing this book, see (isn't everyone?), and posting it to an LJ filter for beta-readers and my mom. I have to mark it up. (The master document has both minimal HTML markup -- not even <p></p> since LJ doesn't need it (I insert the double-spacing by hand when posting) -- and traditional WYSIWYG underlining. By this time, I can splat in that stuff about like I breathe. And possibly more consistently than I spell without a spellchecker. Arguably, a word processing app could turn WYSIWYG code into HTML, but I do know that MS Word's HTML conversion is a thing of chthonic horror and instead of finding a better app, I went with the "learn to do the minimal stuff raw" approach. Have to do it for my LJ posts anyway...
By the time I finish editing this sucker down to size, though... I think the minimal code in it will be perfect, though. I've seen it enough gods-forsaken times, and always patch the errors (unclosed bold and italics tags are obvious!) in the master document.
I wonder how much I could make putting minimal HTML into documents, to make them ready for HTML or epub format? And how quickly I could get through a book, doing it. Hmmmmmm...
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:23 pm (UTC)Basically, yet another Amazon failure and for many it will be one too many.
(I agree with you on the list of things about which the author does and doesn't have control. Many people obviously don't know enough authors and think that the author is responsible for everything. Oh, and to things over which authors have no control you can add "whether the words on the page are what the author wrote". I remember a book by a well-known author which was virtually unreadable, because they had re-typeset it after the final proofs and messed it up...)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 07:37 am (UTC)When two 700-pound gorillas get to brawlin', then what really happens is that all the little guys get crushed. So Amazon and MacMillan are being all big and bad, and all the authors and customers are getting shafted.
Thanks, guys. Screw you both.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:20 pm (UTC)I can't remember what it's called, but it's very specific about hoe a writer has very little control over specific aspects of the book.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:25 pm (UTC)If it's not that song, can you give me a few keywords to google? O:D
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:52 pm (UTC)(I still wish I could get the words -- or a performance -- of Nine To Five Barbarian. I memorized the chorus but, these 20ish years later... No song. O:( *sigh* )
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 11:53 am (UTC)Or ask
no subject
Date: 2010-02-06 01:07 am (UTC)Now, to obtain a legal copy... (Bill Sutton! I had totally forgotten the attribution.)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-08 03:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:36 pm (UTC)There's a bimbo on the cover of my book.
She is sultry she is sexy
She is nowhere in the text she
Is the bimbo on the cover of my book.
(All hail Jeff and Maya Bohnhoff.)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-01 11:55 pm (UTC)You forgot something very important. Readers got upset. Because we don't accept Amazon business tactics removing our choices for things to buy. Because we reject the idea that we the readers are negotiating tools in Amazon's arsenal. Amazon apparently thinks they own us, and needs to be reminded of the consumer/vendor relationship.
Check out the Amazon Shall Not Censor Me (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=273995541707&ref=search&sid=767573463.2170259575..1) facebook group.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 12:21 am (UTC)Seems the publisher of a new "steampunk romance" novel used a cover artist who basically copied a copyrighted photo (down to pose and accessories, including the buckle style on the goggles). Now that's not prosecutable, it's just bad form.
Then the PR firm for said house put up a "trailer" for the book online - using a host of uncredited photos and works of art without permission. This blew up like a house on fire, and the poor author was originally defending them, as they has assured her that the images were used with permission. Except they weren't.
Now the author is basically hiding under the bed and hoping it all goes away, the trailer has been taken down, and a lot of people are really really mad. They are just mad at the wrong people - they should be mad at the publisher and by extension the PR company, NOT the author.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:38 pm (UTC)I managed to miss this whole boom.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 05:00 pm (UTC)was the initial post about the video - by one of the people whose uncredited pic was used without permission. A couple of other artists weigh in further down. The author weighs in on the second page of the comments assuring people that she was told everything is on the up and up. Quite a few of the artists politely (and some not so politely) assured her this was not the case. There were no further comments from her and I assume that she is hiding until it all blows over/is resolved.
Looks like the post comparing the cover art with the original photo has been taken down.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 04:16 am (UTC)This is *exactly* how Cornilia Funke got printed in English - great example of this working.
Plus Amazon needs a good kicking now and then - it's good for them.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 10:57 am (UTC)In the spirit of your suggestions, I sent the following email to Baen Books:
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 04:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 07:17 pm (UTC)If nothing else, this whole E-book argument has got people talking :)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:39 pm (UTC)