Amazon Versus Publishing: Viewpoints

I discussed the perceived battle between Amazon and the publishing industry last week. (Scroll down or use this direct link: Publishers Versus Amazon: An Escalating War.) For more commentary, check out this post by Joe Konrath, where he ruthlessly attacks the anti-Amazon arguments of Authors Guild President Scott Turow. 

Presumed Inane from A Newbie's Guide to Publishing 

Here's the link to the original interview with Turow in Salon.com, explaining why we should fear Amazon.

(Disclosure: I am a member of the Authors Guild and appreciate their services. I have also been highly impressed by Konrath's blog. Be warned that he often swears, though I don't think there's any in this post)

Can Publishers Stay Relevant?

Last week I talked about some of the ways the publishing industry is fighting Amazon. I also acknowledged another Amazon-related challenge for publishers – the way midlist authors are turning to self-publishing. They often start with their out-of-print books and then do well enough that they consider self-publishing their new work. The numbers may not be huge yet, but they are growing, and if the publishing business doesn’t change, publishers will lose their midlist – books that don’t make a fortune but sell enough to pay their expenses and help keep everybody in business.

I don’t know if publishers are talking about this yet. The public comments I’ve heard have typically been rooted in denial. Publishers and their employees want to see themselves as relevant, so they stand by the idea that traditional publishing is proof of quality, and any serious author should want the “validation” of a traditional deal. And many authors still do.

As writers, we learn about publishing companies so the names mean something to us, but I’m quite sure that if I told a non-writing friend that I had a book published by Clarion or Aladdin, it would mean nothing to them. Ironically, I’ve had people assume that my traditionally-published books were self-published, before I ever started exploring self-publishing. Most people still don’t understand the difference.

What’s the advantage of the “validation” of a traditional publishing deal, if it means nothing to most readers? Plus, publishers seldom do much to market books from debut or mid-list authors. But there’s a way publishers can make their names mean something, and support their authors better at the same time.

These days, you’re probably hearing a lot about “brand building” for authors, the idea that you should stand for something specific. Yet many publishers haven’t embraced the concept themselves.

If you know that a certain publisher always produces well-edited and well-designed books with a specific, narrow focus that matches your interests, you’ll trust them and look for their books. You might even buy directly through their website, which means higher profits for the publisher.

Small publishers can keep a narrow focus more easily (such as a regional focus), but bigger companies could do it as well. Tor, for example, is known for fantasy and science fiction, while Poisoned Pen Press focuses on mystery, as you could probably guess from the name. “Harlequin is Romance” as their tagline says, and specific Harlequin lines follow clear guidelines on subject matter and tone. But who goes out of their way to pick up a book by Simon & Schuster or HarperCollins? What do those names mean?

Big publishers publish too great a variety to brand themselves by genre, but many include imprints with a narrower focus, though few of those are known outside the business. If publishers develop imprint brands with a clear, narrow focus, and promote those, they might build customer loyalty.

And if they promote the brand rather than promoting a few titles each season, that would also be an advantage to mid-list and new authors, who’d benefit by the association even if they get no individual publicity.

How about it? Do you have any other ideas for publishers on how to stay relevant?

Blogger won't let me comment on my own posts anymore, so here's an addendum: Porter Anderson suggests "author collectives" supported by publishers: ‘Social’ Media: And the Boat We Rowed In On 

Publishers Versus Amazon: An Escalating War

Last week, I shared some opinions about Amazon and other bookstores. But other bookstores aren’t the only ones who hate and fear Amazon. Many publishers do as well, despite the fact that Amazon makes it easier for people to get those publishers’ books. The advantages are balanced – many would say outweighed – by Amazon business practices that try to force publishers to lower e-book prices, and ask for special discounts and other considerations.

(Amazon is also making self-publishing an appealing alternative to traditional publishing for many mid-list authors, and no doubt that will eventually force publishers to improve their contracts in favor of authors. But that’s another issue.)

Digital Book World has had a lot of interesting updates lately on the skirmishes between Amazon and various publishers.

In How EDC Plans to Sell More Books After Dropping Amazon, it discusses the practices of the Educational Development Corp., a children’s book publisher, which published the classic potty training book Everyone Poops. The EDC is pulling all of its titles from Amazon. The EDC is an unusual company, however, and has another option. Amazon sales accounted for only about 13 percent of EDC’s sales in 2011. The company makes “nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its sales force of 7,000, which is mostly made up of independent contractors who sell to their friends and acquaintances, often in their own homes at gatherings – like Tupperware parties, but with children’s books.”

The company has been losing sales reps who get discouraged when potential customers attend gatherings but then order the books off Amazon. Without competition from Amazon, the EDC expects sales to grow – as they did for the company’s Kane/Miller line of children’s book, which had a 33% increase in sales after the company pulled titles from Amazon two years ago. Now there’s some creative marketing!

In another battle, Amazon stopped selling e-books distributed by the Independent Publishers Group, a large book distributor for smaller publishers, after the two organizations couldn’t agree on a contract. (Amazon Yanks 5,000 Titles from Independent Publishers Group, a Chicago Book Distributor) Digital Book World reported on several organizations that were backing IPG. Here’s one: Science Fiction Writers Group to Redirect Book Links Away From Amazon in Solidarity With IPG

And if things weren’t tough enough, the Justice Department is preparing to sue five of the “Big 6” North American publishing houses, along with Apple, for colluding to maintain artificially high prices for digital books. Jordan Weissmann explains the situation—and possible fallout—in a recent article from The Atlantic, How Cheap Should Books Be? Jane at Dear Author offers her take on the situation in this post: What Kind of Competition Has Retail Price Maintenance for Digital Books Fostered?  And The Guardian weighs in with Ebooks: defending the agency model.

It’s a tough new world for publishers, and with a few exceptions like the EDC, most are struggling to stay relevant and reach customers. On PandoDaily, Sarah Lacy, a journalist and author of books on technology, shared a long e-mail from a publishing industry insider who says, “We’re in Amazon’s Sights and They’re Going to Kill Us.”

Many will see that e-mail as further evidence that Amazon is an Evil Giant trying to take over the world, and it should be stopped. But I tend to agree with Sarah’s comment at the end: “Amazon didn’t create publishing’s woes, any more than blogging created the challenges of newspapers. The company is just cleverly exploiting them. And good for them.”

Don’t get me wrong – Amazon has tried some pretty shady practices. They always seem to be pushing the limits, probably to test just where those limits are. But it’s not censorship to decide you’ll only do business with certain people under certain contracts. It’s not “unfair” to push for the best contract you can get. (That’s why authors like agents.)

Amazon has opened up a lot of opportunities for authors, and they’ve shaken up an industry that desperately needed shaking. Like Sarah Lacy, I’d love to see publishing adapt to this new era. She suggests it will take publishing employees quitting their jobs to start new companies. That may be true, as big publishers seem to lack the flexibility to innovate. But come on, guys – there must be ways you can improve.

Next week I’ll share an idea on how publishers can stay relevant. I’d love to hear your thoughts as well. Leave a comment here or drop me an e-mail, and maybe I’ll quote you next week.

Why Some People Hate Amazon — And Why I Don't

I’ve heard a lot of complaints about Amazon lately, on blogs and listserves and discussion boards. People say that Amazon is a “bully” trying to take over the publishing world. Some companies are fighting back. For example, Barnes & Noble won’t stock books published by Amazon, now that Amazon is opening a publishing arm.

(By the way, Barnes & Noble has its own imprint, Sterling Publishing, though it’s up for sale. Amazon sells Sterling Publishing’s books as well as Barnes & Noble’s Nook e-readers.)

I understand the anger against Amazon, but refusing to stock products people want seems like shooting yourself in the foot. This doesn’t punish Amazon. In fact, it benefits Amazon. If a customer wants a book, and it’s only available through Amazon, are they likely to buy something else through Barnes & Noble, or order what they want through Amazon?

The policy, instead, punishes authors. So you have Amazon bribing you with a better- than-average contract on one hand, and Barnes & Noble threatening you on the other hand. Both are using pressure. Most authors will go where they can make the most money, which for most of Amazon.

The policy also punishes customers. What business thinks it’s logical to refuse to give customers what they want, in order to punish their supplier? And how does this support Barnes & Noble’s commitment to providing their customers with “any book, anywhere, anytime”?

Amazon might not be playing nice, but neither is anybody else. And I’m not alone in my feelings.

Jane at Dear Author said in a post, Dear Publishers: What Have You Done for Me Lately?, “Publishers have called on readers to be okay with their high priced ebooks, forego discounts, struggle with DRM [piracy protection], limit sharing, turned their backs on libraries, reject the money of our reading brethren outside of North America, but they want our help in shunning Amazon? What have you done for me lately?”

Mystery author L.J. Sellers has publicly expressed appreciation for Amazon, which has allowed her to finally make a living as a self-published writer, after years of holding down a regular job while publishing as a mid-list author. In a post on the Crime Fiction Collective blog, “Can We Stop Calling Amazon a Bully?“, she says, “Amazon functions much like other companies, only more successfully than its competitors. Some people would argue that its tactics are not fair, but what does that mean? Does the word fair apply in business? Again, we’re not dealing with children. The concept of one for me and one for you is not how capitalism works.”

But Amazon is putting other book sellers out of business! What should we do?

From a capitalist viewpoint, maybe nothing. I don’t recall people getting worked up when Netflix started putting video stores out of business. The world is changing, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

On the other hand, diversity is good. We don’t want just one source for our books, or it gives that source too much power. And bookstores aren’t quite like other stores for many people. So if you want to keep your local bookstore in business, shop there. Some even have online ordering for e-books. B&N online sometimes has better prices than Amazon. They list my romantic suspense, Whispers in the Dark, for $8.99 in paperback, while Amazon has Whispers in the Darkfor $9.99. (I have to note the irony that a few years ago Barnes & Noble and Borders were seen as the bad guys for putting independent bookstores out of business. But please, make your own decisions about whom to support.)

And here’s another interesting link in the bookseller wars, from Dear Author. “Paid Content reports that Amazon will be offering non Kindle versions of digital content in an effort to persuade Barnes & Noble to relent and carry its Amazon published print titles in stores.” Jane later comments, “I’m sure B&N will come up with another excuse to ban Amazon published books” and brings up an interesting point. Will Amazon start carrying electronic formats for other devices, such as the Nook, along with their Kindle e-books? How will that affect the market?

Next week, I’ll talk a little about how publishers are reacting to Amazon.