Just read an interesting post over at Jeff Gomez’s blog, Print is Dead. In it, he quotes a recent article in the Economist, which said:
Publishing has only two indispensable participants: authors and readers. As with music, any technology that brings these two groups closer makes the whole industry more efficient—but hurts those who benefit from the distance between them.
Now, my initial reaction was that I couldn’t agree more. (And, ultimately, I will always agree with this.) But, then Jeff (rightly) pointed out that he’s reading that article at all (as opposed to the thousands of other things he could be reading online) because the Economist is a brand that he trusts. Which brings up all the issues currently swimming around the publishing industry concerning content distribution.
As many have pointed out in recent years, we now live in a time when anyone can cheaply record music in their basement, write a book on their computer, even shoot a good-quality film on the relative cheap. Hell, this blog/column is just one in a vast sea. And in this kind of situation, the issue of vetting becomes paramount. Meaning, how do we find what’s actually good amongst the ever-increasing options?
In the publishing industry, it’s currently the agents who do that vetting—for the publishers, and thus the readers. But, we are entering a world where those of us who write may need such vetters less and less. We’re getting closer to a world where those who write can provide “content” directly to readers. In fact, isn’t that what I’m doing right here, right now?
I say, let the vetting come from us, the people. We can decide for ourselves what we like and don’t like. We can decide for ourselves which review sites we trust, and go there, which blogs we like, and go there. And since authors can post sample chapters online, readers can see for themselves if they like the work enough to buy it. It only takes me a few minutes, or even seconds, to decide whether something online is worth my time. If it is, I bookmark it or add it to my RSS reader. If not, then I ignore it. And so do you.
Do you really need someone to tell you what you like? Did you ever, really? Or, is it just that your options have been pre-selected for you. (Hmm, kind of reminds me of a certain form of “democracy” we all know.)
In the end, it’s the never-ending war between the people and those who seek to control them—in this sense, when it comes to what we are allowed (by means of what’s allowed through the Industries’ gates) to buy, read, and listen to. The Internet has been putting control into the people’s hands for a while now. In a way, it’s the great equalizer. (And while most of what’s out there is, admittedly, crap, a lot of it isn’t. You just have to find the good stuff. What’s so bad (or even different) about that?) And, unless “they” start putting some serious restrictions on what we can see online, once the music and (at least soon) the publishing industries (as we know them) begin to crumble, well…there’s a reason why I keep calling this a revolution.
Are we there yet? No, of course not. But, only a blind person drowning in that river we call denial could ignore the shifting tide.
