When a federal judge ruled that Apple was guilty of conspiring to fix the price of eBooks last week, the lamentations began.
Commentators declared this would lead to the destruction of the traditional publishers and the ascendance of Amazon as a monopolistic hegemon, which would use its vast market powers to homogenize and commoditize our reading culture. Also, frogs would rain down from the sky.
But I don’t think any such thing will happen. (Well, the frogs might.) Here’s why.
The Traditional Publishing Model Is Not Essential to Reading Culture
The traditional publishers think they are essential to reading culture because they were essential in the past and because (I’m quite sure) they are sincerely devoted to their craft.
But the only two actors who are essential to reading culture are writers and readers. Publishers are … or were … a necessary intermediary between the writer and reader, back when printing books and getting them into the hands of readers were complicated, expensive operations.
Now these tasks aren’t necessarily complicated or expensive. There are plenty of new ways, many more than before, for writers and readers to connect. And as long as you have writers and readers, you’ll have a reading culture. Before I discuss why, however, let me make a semi-related point.
Good Books Have Always Been Bad Business
This is not to say you can’t make money from serious books or serious literature. You can. The problem is you can’t make enough money consistently to turn the proposition into a sustainable business.
This leaves publishers with two choices. The first is you have a huge company in which the blockbusters in popular genres subsidize the “serious” books. For publically traded companies, this is the only option because they will be punished by the markets if they lose money.
The second is you have a small company, privately held, in which the owners see themselves as patrons of and missionaries for writers as much as they see themselves as business people, and their financial goals don’t extend too much beyond avoiding bankruptcy.
The recent obituary for Arthur Rosenthal of Basic Books described this dynamic nicely when it said he “let his taste in nonfiction and his quasi indifference to profit margins guide him as a publisher”.
Now Amazon is making the lives of people who work within the huge company model a living hell. But it is making the small company model so easy that anyone with a computer and internet access can become a publisher.
Writers of Serious Books Are Adapting. Amazon Is Helping Them Do It
One of the assumptions in much of the recent wailing over Amazon’s victory is that only serious books are real books and only serious publishers are real publishers.
No one was fretting that the Dan Browns of the world would disappear because they knew they wouldn’t. A hegemon Amazon would still publish Dan Brown because he makes a lot of money.
The commentators did worry that a hegemon Amazon would ignore the serious, unprofitable books. Well, maybe. But maybe not. Amazon has demonstrated an almost pathological indifference to earning a profit over the years. This would make them a perfect publisher for the Virginia Woolfs of the world. And perhaps they would like the prestige of a having such writers under their imprint?
But if not, Amazon has given writers the tools to directly publish and promote their own books. Amazon’s print-on-demand model allows small publishing companies to produce print books with very low overhead costs. Kindle Direct allows people to publish eBooks at basically no cost.
Everyone has a chance. Including the serious writers and important voices who are getting overlooked right now by those old gatekeepers of the reading culture, the traditional publishers.
The Government Doesn’t Just Punish Price Fixing. It Also Punishes Monopolies
Finally, remember that it is not only illegal to fix prices. It’s also illegal — not to become a monopoly, as it turns out talking to my FTC lawyer friend — but to use monopoly power to stifle competition. And the government departments that are aiding Amazon by ruling against Apple, so some people claim, are the same departments that would force Amazon to change its business practices or break up if it did.
We can’t risk that harm, you say? Well, under the legal system of the United States, you generally can’t punish companies because you think they will break the law. You have to wait until they actually do.
In the meantime, I encourage everyone to seize the new opportunities. They’re good fun. And you might make some art, or some cash, too.
Related Massey Posts
A few comments on “Book Publishers Scramble to Rewrite Their Future” by Evan Hughes
The NPR Interview with Mark Coker of Smashwords | Self-Publishing on eBook
In a way, it is this sort of lamenting and dramatising and catastrophising( probably not a real word!) that I touch on in one of my posts. These doomsday prophecies pop up whenever new opportunities arise and do their best to stifle creativity. Why? I guess that is an age old question.
Well, I think the overall principle is that people don’t like change. They especially don’t like change if it comes to a business model, which has been making money running on autopilot, and someone comes along and puts that model under threat. I don’t think much has really changed in the world of publishing, actually, except that the pulp-genre books are more visibly main stream and available side by side with the Junot Diazes today on the same website, rather than Junot being in the bookstore and the pulps on a wire rack at the drug store. I would think it was a problem if Amazon because the only source of print and eBooks. I just think there are a lot more steps between the Apple ruling and Amazon world domination than other people see, and so a whole lot more opportunities for other people and businesses and dynamics to come into play. We shall see.
We shall see, indeed. Recently I was trying to source some books by date of publication and came across lists of books published each year. It was fascinating to see the changes over the years. Early 1950s the list was full of classics/literature/ award winners. Then as the years roll on, as you say, the pulp genre starts to come to the fore.
I wonder if that is an actual reflection of the books published or the record keeping? The ISBN … a unique identifier for each book … wasn’t invented until 1965. So if different publishers handled pulps and mainstream fiction (?) and used different systems of distribution which weren’t standardized and universal (?) — and if the pulps were regarded as a cheap commodity not deserving of attention or respect, and on that front I don’t think I need to add a “(?)” … than the change MIGHT be a function of better tracking rather than more pulps being published. The same way a spike in crime or disease, not that I’m necessarily equating pulps with crime or disease, is sometimes the result of better reporting, not an actual increase in an illegal activity or of a pathologic condition. There are also the histories of the penny dreadfuls in England (born circa 1830) and dime novels in the US (born circa 1860) aimed at the tastes of the new literate working classes, and priced at a cost they could afford. Plus comic books and then radio serials and then B movies and then television, all of which can be really “pulpy”. Which is a long way of saying I suspect there has always been a flood of pulp, it is just more mainstream and visible and acceptable now, particularly to those with literary tastes: Michael Chabon, Junot Diaz, and Jonathan Lethem coming immediately to mind.
Now you mention it, I would say the record keeping has a part to play. I did wonder how the lists were compiled. Mmmmm; you missed Mills and Boons from your coverage 🙂 !
I’ve heard of Harlequin, of course, since I live in the States. The romance genre doesn’t hit my radar much because it is even less my thing that zombie novels. But romance is another excellent example of books as Big Macs. And the inexpensive, formulaic romance novel has been around a long time, too. I think the whole subject is interesting because a question I really like is … “What does this book do for its reader?”
A good question… and a great expression ‘Books as BigMacs’. If we dine too much on BigMac books do we become obese?
Oh yes.
LOL.
The jury’s still out for me…
The jury is still out for everyone, until speculation becomes reality! Two thoughts, one happy, one maybe not. The happy thought is people have generally proven themselves to be adaptable and resilient. The unhappy thought is that the ruling stands on pretty solid ground, at least according to the lawyers … including one I know who has worked both inside and outside the FTC on anti-trust … I’ve asked. Which means Amazon is likely going to get to continue doing what they are doing. For a while.