Comments on: The Value Of Readers http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/ Dissecting the publishing industry with love and skepticism Mon, 21 May 2012 06:15:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Al Heath http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-167180 Al Heath Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:37:42 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-167180 Uh--what ARE the demographics? As between mature (i.e., beyond teens) women and men, who does read what? Who supports fiction in general? What are the stats on "masculine" novels? Amongst non-fiction books, where does the bulk of the readership go? Is the aspiring writer still best advised to write a book on Lincoln's doctor's dog? Who reads (gasp) "literature"--the "best" books, etc.? Anybody still reading Virginia Woolf, et al? Uh–what ARE the demographics? As between mature (i.e., beyond teens) women and men, who does read what? Who supports fiction in general? What are the stats on “masculine” novels? Amongst non-fiction books, where does the bulk of the readership go? Is the aspiring writer still best advised to write a book on Lincoln’s doctor’s dog? Who reads (gasp) “literature”–the “best” books, etc.? Anybody still reading Virginia Woolf, et al?

]]> By: adam smith http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-165541 adam smith Thu, 12 Apr 2007 11:27:17 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-165541 Doesn’t this go to reader demographics? Advertising is all about demographics. I know readers expect to see only ads for books in the book review section, and that’s the way it is for the most part in the New York Times Book Review (well, there was that ad by Lulu, not selling the books, but soliciting authors), but I could understand it if ads for cars, trips, jewelry, etc., were there, too. Someone is holding the line. <a href="http://www.tur-key.info/category/sights/" rel="nofollow">info</a> Doesn’t this go to reader demographics? Advertising is all about demographics. I know readers expect to see only ads for books in the book review section, and that’s the way it is for the most part in the New York Times Book Review (well, there was that ad by Lulu, not selling the books, but soliciting authors), but I could understand it if ads for cars, trips, jewelry, etc., were there, too. Someone is holding the line. info

]]> By: Deborah Smith http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150881 Deborah Smith Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:11:36 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150881 As a longtime romance novelist (though my big fat southern novels don't quite fit the public perception) I've often gnashed my teeth over the self-destruction and hypocritical snobbery of newspaper book pages. Here in Atlanta the sports teams can't pass gas without it being front page news, but the book pages editor won't sully herself to put genre fiction on the two lousy pages the paper calls a book review section each week. If genre fiction is reviewed in major papers at all it's usually just "smart" fiction aka sci-fi and mystery, which is deemed to be of interest to intellectual slum readers, not the hoi polloi. Romance novels, which comprise a solid majority of all books sold, and which are read by tens of millions of women from all educational and economic levels -- women who often read avidly in other genres as well -- are completely ignored. Nora Roberts doesn't need more help selling her books, no, but doesn't it strike anyone as incredibly, overtly sexist that she routinely outsells the Big Boys like Grisham, Clancy et al yet can barely get noticed in the mainstream media? What does that say about the value of having testicles when you put your name on a book? As a longtime romance novelist (though my big fat southern novels don’t quite fit the public perception) I’ve often gnashed my teeth over the self-destruction and hypocritical snobbery of newspaper book pages. Here in Atlanta the sports teams can’t pass gas without it being front page news, but the book pages editor won’t sully herself to put genre fiction on the two lousy pages the paper calls a book review section each week. If genre fiction is reviewed in major papers at all it’s usually just “smart” fiction aka sci-fi and mystery, which is deemed to be of interest to intellectual slum readers, not the hoi polloi. Romance novels, which comprise a solid majority of all books sold, and which are read by tens of millions of women from all educational and economic levels — women who often read avidly in other genres as well — are completely ignored. Nora Roberts doesn’t need more help selling her books, no, but doesn’t it strike anyone as incredibly, overtly sexist that she routinely outsells the Big Boys like Grisham, Clancy et al yet can barely get noticed in the mainstream media? What does that say about the value of having testicles when you put your name on a book?

]]> By: ktwice http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150725 ktwice Mon, 30 Oct 2006 02:50:54 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150725 In defense of the LAT, today they reviewed a Soft Skull Press title. That's pretty cool. I think it was the most interesting thing they reviewed, but that's because I thought Antonia Fraser nailed the Marie Antoinette story, and the review of Sena Jeter Naslund's recent biography neglected to note the existence of this fairly recent work. Also they were far better than normal on the gender disparity issue (I have a theory that it's not intentional on the part of editors -- they're just drawn that way, it's not an excuse, but it helps explain the problem). Staid is a good response -- there isn't a lot of personality in many of these reviews. I'm not sure who the audience is supposed to be. Lynn -- I'm not sure that readers expect to see only ads for books, but that's what they get. Now for the biggest issue from today's LAT books section: where the hell is it? I carefully peel apart the paper on Sundays because the actual content is wrapped in layers of ads and a less-than-careful consumer will lose both Comics II (another rant) and other sections. Maybe one reason for the decline of readership is that people accidentally trash the section with other ads! In defense of the LAT, today they reviewed a Soft Skull Press title. That’s pretty cool. I think it was the most interesting thing they reviewed, but that’s because I thought Antonia Fraser nailed the Marie Antoinette story, and the review of Sena Jeter Naslund’s recent biography neglected to note the existence of this fairly recent work. Also they were far better than normal on the gender disparity issue (I have a theory that it’s not intentional on the part of editors — they’re just drawn that way, it’s not an excuse, but it helps explain the problem).

Staid is a good response — there isn’t a lot of personality in many of these reviews. I’m not sure who the audience is supposed to be.

Lynn — I’m not sure that readers expect to see only ads for books, but that’s what they get.

Now for the biggest issue from today’s LAT books section: where the hell is it? I carefully peel apart the paper on Sundays because the actual content is wrapped in layers of ads and a less-than-careful consumer will lose both Comics II (another rant) and other sections. Maybe one reason for the decline of readership is that people accidentally trash the section with other ads!

]]> By: Arethusa http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150705 Arethusa Mon, 30 Oct 2006 00:21:31 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150705 I don't know. Maybe I am beyond elitist as I found the national newspaper book reviews--retrieving from memory as I haven't properly read one in an age--not elitist but mind-numbingly staid. Yet another Shakespeare/Lincoln/Trudeau biography, the latest from Joyce Carol Oates/Stephen King/John Updike, some foodie book, lots of political non-fiction, maybe something about small fishing towns in Labrador. If there was a Hungarian novel it would have been by a 1st gen American or Canadian because there's no way in hell they'd review a translated work. (Unless the author was dead and hopefully a Nobel Prize winner.) Barely anything from small presses, nothing foreign, nothing *new*. Just the same old, same old. I'm more concerned about the gender disparity than anything else, although more genre work would be nice as well. I don’t know. Maybe I am beyond elitist as I found the national newspaper book reviews–retrieving from memory as I haven’t properly read one in an age–not elitist but mind-numbingly staid. Yet another Shakespeare/Lincoln/Trudeau biography, the latest from Joyce Carol Oates/Stephen King/John Updike, some foodie book, lots of political non-fiction, maybe something about small fishing towns in Labrador. If there was a Hungarian novel it would have been by a 1st gen American or Canadian because there’s no way in hell they’d review a translated work. (Unless the author was dead and hopefully a Nobel Prize winner.)

Barely anything from small presses, nothing foreign, nothing *new*. Just the same old, same old. I’m more concerned about the gender disparity than anything else, although more genre work would be nice as well.

]]> By: Lynne W. Scanlon http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150672 Lynne W. Scanlon Sun, 29 Oct 2006 12:52:15 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150672 I agree that newspapers should cast a wider net. I think editors should be routinely nosing through self-published books online and searching (hard) to find good books by struggling authors, as well as letting readers know when the a hot new book from a hot old author is available. "The dedicated book review section has a fair bit of advertising, but, not surprisingly, the ads are completely out of sync with the content." Doesn't this go to reader demographics? Advertising is all about demographics. I know readers expect to see only ads for books in the book review section, and that's the way it is for the most part in the New York Times Book Review (well, there was that ad by Lulu, not selling the books, but soliciting authors), but I could understand it if ads for cars, trips, jewelry, etc., were there, too. Someone is holding the line. I blogged recently about trying to make money off my "literary" blog. I went out and got two "sponsor" ads (a smart CPA whose clients include authors) and a search engine optimization service (who can help drive traffic). I'd be seen cartwheeling around New York City if I could snag an ad for an international airline. My visitors are from around the world. I'm not holding the line. Lynne AKA The Wicked Witch of Publishing I agree that newspapers should cast a wider net. I think editors should be routinely nosing through self-published books online and searching (hard) to find good books by struggling authors, as well as letting readers know when the a hot new book from a hot old author is available.

“The dedicated book review section has a fair bit of advertising, but, not surprisingly, the ads are completely out of sync with the content.”

Doesn’t this go to reader demographics? Advertising is all about demographics. I know readers expect to see only ads for books in the book review section, and that’s the way it is for the most part in the New York Times Book Review (well, there was that ad by Lulu, not selling the books, but soliciting authors), but I could understand it if ads for cars, trips, jewelry, etc., were there, too. Someone is holding the line.

I blogged recently about trying to make money off my “literary” blog. I went out and got two “sponsor” ads (a smart CPA whose clients include authors) and a search engine optimization service (who can help drive traffic). I’d be seen cartwheeling around New York City if I could snag an ad for an international airline. My visitors are from around the world. I’m not holding the line.

Lynne AKA The Wicked Witch of Publishing

]]> By: Daniel Scott Buck http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150645 Daniel Scott Buck Sun, 29 Oct 2006 01:08:58 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150645 Look for the comment by Barking Kitten about how the NYT reviewed Updike four times. And then vomit: http://bookcriticscircle.blogspot.com/2006/08/why-do-critics-ignore-certain-books.html Look for the comment by Barking Kitten about how the NYT reviewed Updike four times. And then vomit:

http://bookcriticscircle.blogspot.com/2006/08/why-do-critics-ignore-certain-books.html

]]> By: ktwice http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150587 ktwice Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:38:26 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150587 Thanks, Ed. Missed that one. And, yes, Lauren, I knew where you were going. It's an ongoing issue -- the ratio of books written by women to books written by men. However, the critical point is not that Nora Roberts (or James Patterson or John Grisham or Tom Clancy) would increase readership -- these particular authors are beyond needing reviews to sell books (though certainly fair game when it comes critically analyzing their work). If readers feel excluded from the book review section -- and the LAT has improved somewhat since Ulin took over, though I have a habit of picking up the section during the bad weeks. They remain a little too oriented toward "Stardust Lost: The Triumph, Tragedy, and Mishugas of the Yiddish Theater in America" -- which is probably a great book if you're interested in the subject -- than reaching out to a broader readership. To bring in readers, I really believe that book review sections need to mix it up a bit. If you want to introduce a broader audience to Yiddish theater or disaffected Hungarian moroseness (yes, being Hungarian, that is a topic near and dear to my heart), then you need, well, a broader audience. Creating a review section that says to a large segment of the book-buying public "nothing to see, move on" reduces the potential audience for that book. Newspapers are advertising-supported businesses. Advertisers go where the readers go. Readers go where they find content that interests them. Arts coverage in newspapers needs to pay for itself, just as news coverage does. If you increase the readership of the book review section, then you increase the value to the people who pay the bills. And I really think that has to start with valuing readers -- all of them. Thanks, Ed. Missed that one. And, yes, Lauren, I knew where you were going. It’s an ongoing issue — the ratio of books written by women to books written by men.

However, the critical point is not that Nora Roberts (or James Patterson or John Grisham or Tom Clancy) would increase readership — these particular authors are beyond needing reviews to sell books (though certainly fair game when it comes critically analyzing their work). If readers feel excluded from the book review section — and the LAT has improved somewhat since Ulin took over, though I have a habit of picking up the section during the bad weeks. They remain a little too oriented toward “Stardust Lost: The Triumph, Tragedy, and Mishugas of the Yiddish Theater in America” — which is probably a great book if you’re interested in the subject — than reaching out to a broader readership.

To bring in readers, I really believe that book review sections need to mix it up a bit. If you want to introduce a broader audience to Yiddish theater or disaffected Hungarian moroseness (yes, being Hungarian, that is a topic near and dear to my heart), then you need, well, a broader audience. Creating a review section that says to a large segment of the book-buying public “nothing to see, move on” reduces the potential audience for that book.

Newspapers are advertising-supported businesses. Advertisers go where the readers go. Readers go where they find content that interests them. Arts coverage in newspapers needs to pay for itself, just as news coverage does. If you increase the readership of the book review section, then you increase the value to the people who pay the bills. And I really think that has to start with valuing readers — all of them.

]]> By: Lauren Baratz-Logsted http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150585 Lauren Baratz-Logsted Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:31:18 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150585 I stand corrected, Ed. :) One full-page review, compared to reviews for every book Grisham/Crichton/Clancy come out with. I stand corrected, Ed. :) One full-page review, compared to reviews for every book Grisham/Crichton/Clancy come out with.

]]> By: Karen http://booksquare.com/the-value-of-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-150578 Karen Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:15:09 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2006/10/27/2194/#comment-150578 Well, I dunno, I read the LAT book reviews. The coverage seems better since Ulin took over, and not particularly elitist, although I like about a new translation of a great Hungarian novel about oppresion, strife, and disaffected youth at the turn of the century. Reviewing Nora Roberts would do ... what? Increase her readership? Increase readership of the book section? Give the book section more credibility? Make it more relevant to contempoary life? Well, I dunno, I read the LAT book reviews. The coverage seems better since Ulin took over, and not particularly elitist, although I like about a new translation of a great Hungarian novel about oppresion, strife, and disaffected youth at the turn of the century. Reviewing Nora Roberts would do … what? Increase her readership? Increase readership of the book section? Give the book section more credibility? Make it more relevant to contempoary life?

]]>