First, the unsurprising news.
Reading fiction boosts health, well-being.
So … fiction authors provide an actual benefit, apart from entertainment.
Gen Z and Millennials are putting their own spin on book clubs.
I’m all for making book clubs less stuffy, more casual and fun.
And here’s a part that’s music to my ears!
The rise of book clubs also comes as independent bookstores have seen growth in recent years. More than 250 independent shops opened in 2022, the latest year available, according to the American Booksellers Association. Many experienced sales above pre-pandemic levels, according to the organization.
Some experts say anger about the control of Amazon over the book industry — Amazon controls more than half of print book market — is driving some people to shop at local bookstores.
“People are coming back to physical books in a way they didn’t,” Coan said. “Gen Z has beef [sic] with Amazon and tries to avoid it whenever possible. That’s what’s driving people to indie book stores.”
Barnes & Noble has also mounted a comeback. The chain expanded in 2023 for the first time in a decade, opening 30 new stores. In 2024, Barnes & Noble plans to open 50 stores.
Now that is awesome!
Then we have this!
A New Publisher Promises Authors ‘the Lion’s Share of the Profit’.
This a huge step on the publishing industry’s part to creare a business model that grants authors ownership interest in the business itself.
Here’s the subhead:
Authors Equity is tiny but has big industry names behind it. Its founders hope their profit-sharing approach and experience will entice authors.
However in this article, certain concerns are raised”
Publishing Models That Rely on Gig Workers Are Bad For Everybody.
Maris Kreizman on the Problem With “Authors Equity,” a New Publishing Company.
To quote article:
Authors Equity boasts a new business model that might appeal to a certain and select group of authors: instead of being paid advances on book earnings, authors will share in any profits their book generates. Regular publishers already make profit share deals with high profile authors, so what’s innovative about this new company? Minimal overhead. As the Times reported, “The publishing team for each book, including editors, publicists and marketers will be assembled from a growing pool of freelancers. Authors and their agents will help decide who gets hired.”
These lines stopped me cold. Rather than offering book workers the stability and benefits of full-time employment, Authors Equity will rely on the gig economy to get the job done. Look a little more closely, and “growing pool of freelancers” is a terrible euphemism for “jobs are disappearing and more and more of us are fighting for scraps by competing for freelance gigs.” Authors Equity wouldn’t be the first media company to choose to work with freelancers rather than a staff. I’ve watched such decisions destroy so much of the ecosystem of journalism and contribute to the length of a massive strike in TV writing and production, and I would hate to see it happening in the book industry too.
Yeah. I get that. Believe me.
We absolutely need new ideas and new models to benefit authors in today’s publishing landscape. It’s rough out there, and corporate consolidation isn’t helping. Over the past decade or so I’ve watched as the big publishers have become more and more risk averse, taking fewer chances on exciting new voices while focusing on the celebrity- and politician-driven books and established authors who are guaranteed to sell larger quantities. I’m not sure Authors Equity offers much of a solution to this problem, given that lesser known authors can rarely make do without an initial advance.
There are far more “lesser known authors” who couldn’t possibly live on the paltry advance most of them get. However …
It’s particularly ironic that the company name Authors Equity most immediately calls to mind the theater actors union Actors Equity, which has been working since 1913 to fight for the rights of live performers. Authors don’t have a union. Neither do publishing workers outside of the small but mighty HarperCollins Union. Equity for a small, select group of authors is simply not enough.
In her years at PRH Madeline McIntosh was a well-respected leader, important to the people who made the books at her company. I hope she’ll reconsider her company’s business model in favor of one that is less damaging to the industry. I also hope that one day universal healthcare becomes a reality, and that all authors and book workers will have unions.
So here’s a radical idea: how about a business model in which each author gets the attention they deserve because the people who work on their books are not overwhelmed, financially or otherwise. I’m no titan of business but I have to imagine that if the people who make the books are not under enormous pressure to find work (or, as in the case of current book workers, the corporate pressure to churn out more and more books), they’ll be more equipped to give each and every author the proper care. And that would be truly equitable.
Now, there’s a radical idea I’ll endorse happily. Because Lord knows, when it comes to churning out books, indie authors are somehow doing that. I can’t imagine how, but they are.
And speaking of “corporate overlords”. :)
Amazon must face narrowed lawsuit over eBook prices, US judge says.
Authors push back on the growing number of AI 'scam' books on Amazon.
And this litigation against the Internet Archive drags on. And on.
Furthermore …
‘Barbie’ Ruled the Box Office, but 2023 Was Tough for Women in Hollywood.
And finally …
This is an interesting-looking grant. I just wish I’d known about it in March. :)
Anonymous Was A Woman Environmental Art Grants.
I hope to make a short horror film with an environmental theme. This year, she adds (only slightly nervous about committing that to actual words on the internet).
I dunno … maybe I’ll go for this? Maybe?
And here’s a grant that opens for applications in August! Check the requirements. This grant is intended to support a variety of ambitious projects.
PS: I refuse to confirm or deny the existence of this article.