A GIANT STEP FORWARD

FOR PRINT ON DEMAND 

It’s one thing to “speed-read” a book. Many of us have done it. But now it is possible to “speed-publish” your book. Techhnology has taken Print on Demand a giant step beyond with the Expresso  Book Machine, now generating a great deal of new interest. This remarkable invention can produce a complete book within 15 minutes. That means formatting, printing and binding it.  

The New York Public Library has had a machine in operation since mid-2007, but there are only nine in other locations around the world. Just recently Titles, the bookstore at McMasters University completed installation and will officially go into full operation in January. 

Offered by On Demand Books, the target market for the machine is primarily libraries and bookstores, and that has caused some concern among retail booksellers. However, at the present time, the machines that are in operation principally draw on scholarly texts, out of print books and other relatively inaccessible texts. The concern is the future impact on publishing and retailing if interest in this new concept ever escalates and becomes cost-effective for widespread  installation. Ah well, progress never stops…especially in our industry, where innovation and restructuring seem to be today’s watchwords. 
 

Technorati Profile

BOOKS BY AND ABOUT OBAMA OFFER HOPE

TO A WORRIED PUBLISHING INDUSTRY 

The only bright ray for today’s teetering publishing world is the growing interest in President-elect Barack Obama. He wrote two books that have generated more than $4 million in sales, and since his election victory more than two dozen books are either under contract or actively in the negotiating stage. 

They range from children’s books to a bio on Obama’s father. Most are laudatory and optimistic about Obama’s call for change. But negatives like Brad O’Leary’s Audacity of Deceit are cropping up as well. The interest in this historic election has also revived books like The Defining Moment,” Jonathan Alter’s book on FDR’s first 100 days, and Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals, which tells about Lincoln’s bipartisan  Cabinet. 

I doubt that this will generate very much holiday cheer for industry insiders with  biggies like Random House and Simon and Schuster cutting staff, Harper Collins announcing a pay freeze and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt suspending acquisition of new manuscripts.  

However, I guess winning a Presidential election ought to be added to the storehouse of promotional  strategies for making your book a best seller. Try it. Sounds like fun.

Technorati Profile

SUPREME COURT RULES

AGAINST ACCESS BY THE PRESS 
 

Here we go again. The High Court of our land struck a blow at, not for, the press. In this era of governmental secrecy, even the judicial system willingly undermines the press and its vital role in society. It took a great deal of effort and time before the Court agreed that the public should have access to criminal proceedings. 

But it remain totally unresponsive to the urgings of media groups that included Association of American Publishers and Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, that the same access is desperately needed for civil matter, particularly in this era of corporate manipulation that often borders on but doesn’t quite register as criminal. 

In the current case, the justices upheld  a ruling by the Third Circuit that allowed records of a seven-year battle over  federal employment discrimination to be kept secret. The High Court denied review without any comment. Another example of our “open” society and democracy that has ramifications that will be felt throughout the civil justice system. 

Technorati Profile

TIME MAGAZINE WRITER CALLS BIASED COVERAGE

OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN A “DISGUSTING FAILURE” 

Although he does concede that it was a “remarkable candidacy,” Mark Halperin, editor of Time’s “The Page,” condemned the coverage of the presidential campaign as a “disgusting failure” because of the pro-Obama bias he claims the press demonstrated. He spoke at the Politico/USC conference on the election. 

Co-panelist John Heilemann, who is with New York magazine and is co-authoring a book on the election with Halperin, added, “The biggest bias in the press is towards effectiveness. We love things that are smart” 

There is no question that the Obama campaign was “smart” and it was “effective.”  But there has to be a line drawn between reporting effective techniques with objectivity and relating them through unequal lineage or personal opinion in the news columns. I have to agree with the two speakers that the bias did exist, but also understand as a former reporter how difficult a challenge it was to report objectively on a race in which the contrasts between the operations of the  two campaign were so glaring. 

Technorati Profile

FOR A CHANGE GOOD NEWS

IN THE MAGAZINE WORLD TOO 
 

The Wooden Horse reports that the Fall 2008 MRI magazine audience research showed that a number of magazines have actually gained readers, even some that the experts claimed were slipping. Among those that posted double digit advances were Real Simple, Men’s Fitness, In Touch Weekly  and Forbes.    

Newstand sales grew for The Economist (9.9%), Women’s Health (11.5%), National Geographic (9.9%), Fast Company (23.6%), House Beautiful (9.2%) and New York (3.4%).

A LESSON FROM LAST NIGHT

FOR THOSE OF US IN THE COMMUNICATIONS WORLD 
 

The historic culmination of the two-year test of our democratic ideology has restored my fading pride in my American heritage. It was the incredible realization that so much of our public apparently has grown beyond the racial prejudice that has characterized our nation since its founding. Hopefully, it signals a true recognition that every person is created equal and that this was not just a matter of sublimating innate prejudices to concerns over pocketbook issues. I want to believe that the majority of Americans have at last shed their divisive bias that has been so injurious to our country.  

The vindictiveness of this election campaign has reinforced the fact that there is a vital lesson to be learned by those of us in the communications world, regardless of our partisan leanings.  

For the past eight years, many of us fretted over what seemed to be the public’s gullibility. Hopefully last night’s victory has shattered the “Rovian” myth that you can convince (perhaps fool is a more accurate word) the public by constant repetition of allegations and misstatements, regardless of their accuracy. A desperate need exists to restore integrity to the communications industry.  

The FCC must at last accept the responsibility of creating a mandatory program of vetting the acuracy of any statement before it is allowed to be broadcast. For far too long, listeners have

been wooed by misleading and downright dishonest assertions in political as well as in commercial advertising. Whether it be distorting the position of an opposing candidate or ballyhooing the safety and virtues of a questionable product by the drug industry, this abuse of the public airways must be stopped.   

While each and every one of us in the communications industry firmly supports the free speech guarantees of our Constitution, that speech must be factual and not misleading. It cannot be violated by falsities in print, in broadcast or in the digital world. Op-ed columns voicing personal opinions are meaningful additions to the news columns of our magazines and newspapers. Blogs add an exciting dimension to our understanding of events. Talk shows contribute greatly to the vitality and importance of broadcast. But none of these must ever be allowed to violate the public trust, a sacred component of our culture.  

We are nearing the end of an era in which secrecy and dishonesty characterized the highest levels of our government. The challenge to reverse that disgrace is not the responsibility of just President Obama and the associates he picks. The American public must demand integrity and we as communicators—journalists, broadcasters, authors, bloggers as well as advertising and PR copywriters—must assume the lead in that crucial battle.  

Technorati Profile

DEFAMATION SUIT BY TRUMP

REVERSED BY NEW JERSEY APPEALS COURT 

Authors and publishers just scored another victory. Last week we reported on the Florida Supreme Court’s reversal of “False Light” claims. This week a highly controversial defamation law suit in which Donald Trump claimed his business reputation was injured was tossed out by the New Jersey appeals court.  

Trump had demanded Timothy O’Brien, a financial reporter for the NY Times, provide all of his research and confidential sources in what the Donald contended was a defamation issue because O’Brien’s book estimated his net worth as lower than Donald claims it actually is. That, he alleged, injured his reputation as the great financier and developer. 

A trial judge ruled that the book was “entertainment” and not “news” and therefore wasn’t entitled to protection under the shield law. Fortunately, the appeals court had enough common sense to rule against this silly suit. The Association of American Publishers joined the suit with a very helpful amicus brief. 

Technorati Profile

FLORIDA COURTS RULE IN FAVOR OF

STRONGER PROTECTIONS FOR WRITERS 

In a late October ruling, Florida’s Supreme Court refused to recognize “False Light “claims of invasion of privacy. Unfortunately these are still allowed by a number of other states. The Association of American Publishers defines false light as claims that “allow plaintiffs to bring what are essentially defamation suits without having to surmount the substantive and procedural protections afforded to defendants under defamation laws.”  The AAP, always on the alert for rules that harm the rights of publishers and authors, filed an amicus brief in the case. 

In a sense, false light eliminates the plaintiff’s heavy burden of proof required in defamation suits. The Florida court found the standards for false light charges to be too vague. As the AAP’s amicus brief stated, these suits eliminate the First Amendment protections that are inherent in the defamation laws.  

It’s a great first step, but this shabby system must be eliminated in every state of the nation.  

Technorati Profile

ASSOCIATED PRESS UNDER FIRE FROM

BUDGET SQUEEZE OF DAILY NEWSPAPERS 

The developing rebellion over service and costs at the Associated Press has suddenly escalated with defections by biggies like the Tribune Co and the Columbus Dispatch.  Most of the earlier dropouts were smaller papers, with the sole exception of The Star Tribune in Minneapolis. 

It’s not surprising that newspapers are desperately searching for ways to cut expenses. Ad revenues have slipped by 25% since 2006. By contrast, the AP is posting an 81% increase in profit. Revenue now has reached $710 million. 

There is no way individual newspapers on their own can afford the extensive worldwide coverage offered by the AP. Some have banded together to share coverage, but that is only effective on a limited geographical area. The wire service claims it is trying hard to cut fees for its 1400 members, but has already gotten flack from members over the 10% cut in fees it announced, effective January 1.  

Many editors are objecting to the way the wire handles its mobile Internet service, tagging content from member papers as its own. They also object to the fact that the AP is selling news to Google and Yahoo for use on their news sites.   

The parties must find a compromise. If the AP—a nonprofit originally formed more than 160 years ago by daily newspapers—folds, there is no way that others like Reuters or some of the specialized news services can fill the gap. The bottom line is important, but no newspaper can survive without a solid editorial base.

NEW INFO AVAILABLE ON POD PUBLISHING

IN 3^RD EDITION OF MARK LEVINE’S GUIDEBOOK 

Industry experts have wrangled for years over the value and the integrity of the POD (Publishing on Demand) craze spawned by the invention of digital printing. Mark Levine has carefully analyzed POD houses for years and offered his findings to the world. Now the third edition of his book The Fine Print of Self Publishing has been released. 

The new edition analyzes 45 POD companies, offering what Levine calls the “8 Must have Qualities” of a good POD house. It also covers the royalties you can anticipate, looks at the profit the POD house makes and helps you understand all the potential pitfalls of the contract before you sign on. 

I have long been a guarded advocate of POD as an excellent gateway for new writers as they try to break into the book world, but only if you choose a POD house one with great care. They vary widely in cost and in quality. Following the process can be very informative for a newcomer and prepare him/her to either negotiate sharply with traditional publishers or completely self-publish any future books. Books like Levine’s ease you through the shoals of the risky sea of POD houses that offer you the sky. 

Technorati Profile