Interesting side note, was reading kindle korner loop and one poster commented that he used to NOT pay attention to publisher, but that anti-digital practices of some publishers was changing that. These publishers are managing to shift “brand” identity from author to themselves–in a very negative way. Good plan, guys.

Ditto the ‘evolve or die!’

Addendum to my comment to Fran: I noted upfront that there are many visionary leaders in publishing and they are doing their best to help effect this transition (and no matter how feel about ebooks, there is no question the publishing industry is in the midst of major business transformation). I also don’t fault the current leadership for what appears to be overly slow response to change because what sometimes seems to be the simplest thing to implement is often far more complex than it seems from the outside.

Where my frustration arises is when companies like Amazon and Apple and you-name-it are vilified for stepping into the breach and creating viable marketplaces where none existed. Calling this “radically wrong” is a misstatement and childish. Like it or not, the business of digital books has morphed into a very public conversation — the media and consumer interest is very high, giving book publishing far more publicity than ever before — and publishers have not only failed to lead in the marketplace, but they’ve failed to contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way. I’d say this is both the job of effective leadership and part of change management.

Fran — Thanks for this comment. Prior to the recent public comments by David Shanks, I had a positive impression of his activities at Penguin. In fact, I was bit surprised by the narrowness of his statements, and that they reflected what seems to be a common misconception in the industry. Galassi’s thoughts I had heard before, so didn’t focus so much on them. I don’t think he’s going to change his perception or public stance.

I think my bigger point, possibly not well-stated, was that these are the industry leaders and many other players are looking to them for guidance and vision. If they are not clear about the issues or projecting misinformation (while Scott Turow says piracy is a huge issue, there is so little hard evidence to point to for effective action), then they are setting a possibly incorrect tone for others in the industry. In this specific example, equating digital reading with “[reader] device” confuses the issue and, possibly, creates a mental market limitation on the part of other publishers listening to his words.

Change is hard — as I was writing I reflected on the various types of change I survived at one corporation. Culture, process, integration, massive sea change in (historical and ) major revenue streams. They weren’t pretty and they weren’t easy. I realized the most successful of these ventures came when there was support from senior management. They not only made buy-in at all levels easier to achieve, but their public statements reflected largely forward looking vision. I contrast this with an unfortunate comment by an executive from Universal Music who, years into the MP3 revolution, decided to say, very publicly, that his plan to save the CD was new packaging.

Seems so simple, but the CEOs are too busy flailing about the destruction of what is, at base, an unsustainable commercial ecosystem that they can’t see the forest.

As a writer, DRM doesn’t bother me. My books are available in multiple formats. As a consumer? It frustrates the heck out of me.