The Arcana of Publishing

It should be obvious to most people by now:  the publishing industry is just as ruined as the music industry, for the same self-harming reasons of a refusal to adopt to new technology and a rigidity that’s simply not part of a viable business model in modern times.  This is detrimental to not just the publishers themselves, but the authors that depend on them for both income and notoriety.

In the latest shot across the bow, Amazon has pulled Macmillian books from the online megaseller’s website in an ongoing argument that’s occurring between them and almost all publishers on the price of e-books.  This comes after the release of the Kindle, Barnes and Noble’s Nook, and the continued insistence by Amazon on low prices for all items it sells – including made-from-pulp books.

Consider, for a moment, how the music industry got into this very same position, and notice the similarities. Now consider that the print publishing industry typically pays their content creators far better than a record label does an average band, and it’s easy to see how this is effecting authors: there is no viable equivalent of MySpace Music or iTunes for the printed word.

Making this situation even worse is the arcane philosophies publishers cling to on the rights to an author’s works – the list of the various publishing rights arenas is long and runs the gamut from all-encompassing digital to regional printing.  As publishers print fewer new authors each year, it’s becoming more and more difficult for budding writers to break into their given genre, and they often seek out self-publishing means for their short stories, novels, or novellas.

The problem with such an approach is that many publishers, such as a genre-specific short story magazine, will not print, or even consider printing, works that have been published elsewhere – blogs, self-printing, and various other low-traffic/low-income sources included.  For an industry that is purported to be intelligent and venerable, the logic of such a decision is exceedingly fragile: if an author posts their short story on their own blog for some small modicum of traffic, name recognition, and reader feedback, how is that even comparable to the purchasing of rights to publish, let alone by a legitimate source?

It’s not unusual for authors to seek out blogs to serialize novels, repost their stories, or otherwise provide “eyeballs to words” on their work – this is just a facet of the modern world of writers.  Some may even format their work for self-publication via a print-on-demand system or for e-reader consumption, in the hopes that it will garner them a few more readers or even fans.  This, which should in no way be a surprise, is also considered enough for publishers to dismiss, out-of-hand, the consideration of an author’s work.

These rules of digital publishing were often formed at some point over a decade ago, long before any of these venues existed, and yet the industry largely refuses to adapt.  The Internet was meant to liberate data, and it was seen as a substantial boon to potential writers, allowing them the ability to self-publish works until a true publisher picked them up.  However, it is becoming more and more apparent that the “write, wait, and hope” methodology of authorship is still the standard that publishers prefer, which is no doubt resulting in countless novels, short stories, and other works being lost to the darkness of time.

It is absolutely unacceptable for authors to be treated in such a manner, as they spend large swaths of time carefully crafting their works and should be permitted to self-promote them in some manner before receiving, if ever, the assistance of a legitimate publisher.  In this digital age, the age of supposed freedom of information, this behavior is despicable at best.

Kyle can be found on his blog, on Facebook, via email, or on Twitter.