This recent post at Publisher's Weekly is all the more interesting for the comments it's collecting. We can debate the meaning and use of epublishing all we want, but it's starting to feel as if we will go in circles forever if we never look outside the publisher's viewpoint. Here, however, we have authors and readers debating the value of ebooks and their different business models. They're different perspectives, and ones we need to remember. Without them, epublishing debates can never be more than theory.
Readers are worried about not recognizing books they've read already. While this has always been a concern with reprints, how can publishers make ebooks more visually memorable?
Authors are debating the value of their own work. When and how did this happen? What value has publishing traditionally placed on an author's work, and how can this be preserved?
Personally, I find the idea of ebooks filling the same role as cheap mass market books a good idea. The same business model should be easily converted. We need to be wary of undervaluing an author's work - and for this reason, I think six or seven dollars is generally a valid price. But the commenter Norma Beisher has a valid point as well: if the ebook is more expensive than the already available mass market, something's gone wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment