Gatekeepers versus the flood of crud
May. 19th, 2012 11:20 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mbarkerI missed a point in the other posting. I think it is rooted in the shift of models from publishing house to author-does-it-all, but it also ties into the change from limited markets to unlimited ones. In any case, I think I'd call it the gatekeepers versus the flood of crud question.
Basically, the claim is that the publishing house model provided us with gatekeepers, carefully selecting out only the best for us. Now, we might quibble, pointing out the selection was more for popularity, following trends, and similar difficulties, but it is clear that there was a filtering action. Publishing houses selected authors and titles, in part to deal with a limited production and marketing system. When you can only print a limited number of titles every month, you have to be selective.
In the new world of epublishing, though, anyone can relatively easily publish... Well, anything. The fear that the publishing houses try to raise is that this will result in a flood of crud, inundating readers without providing any good way for them to sort out the jewels from the slush. And in fact, there is a lot of stuff out there, and more coming.
But are readers really overcome by the flood of crud? Do they have ways to pick out "the good stuff?" Well, part of the answer is those large samples, free giveaways, and other ways to let the readers taste before they buy. Readers are likely to try some -- read that sample, the free short story on the web, maybe get one inexpensive novel or a free giveaway -- and then go out and buy the whole series, all the rest of a writer's work, if they like what they've seen. Readers talk to each other. Social networks, blogs, discussion forums, reader reviews, there's a lot of comparison and advice -- free publicity for the good stuff! Readers even look at those "also bought" lists.
The other thing that's becoming very obvious is that one person's crud is another person's diamond, and vice versa. Heck, the story that I don't care for this year may turn out to be just what I'm looking for in a year or two. With unlimited shelf space, it really doesn't make sense to try to select or limit what's published to what some arbiter of public taste thinks is good stuff. Put it out there. Let the readers decide.
Yes, there is a flood of stuff out there, and there is more being shoveled into the infinite digital maw every day. But readers are more than capable of sorting through it. And writers also are responding. They're putting up websites with their complete bibliographies, and guides for readers who are looking for what they can provide. They're putting up free short stories and samples galore, and most importantly -- they're blogging and giving notices about what's coming next!
We may have lost the gatekeepers of old, but we're developing a whole new set of guides and ways of plumbing the flood to pick out what each of us wants. Instead of being forced to pick from a small trickle that made it through the filters of the publishing houses, we've got a much wider flood to pick from. As a reader, I would rather try surfing on the wave than put up with that slow trickle that someone else controls.
What's your choice?
Basically, the claim is that the publishing house model provided us with gatekeepers, carefully selecting out only the best for us. Now, we might quibble, pointing out the selection was more for popularity, following trends, and similar difficulties, but it is clear that there was a filtering action. Publishing houses selected authors and titles, in part to deal with a limited production and marketing system. When you can only print a limited number of titles every month, you have to be selective.
In the new world of epublishing, though, anyone can relatively easily publish... Well, anything. The fear that the publishing houses try to raise is that this will result in a flood of crud, inundating readers without providing any good way for them to sort out the jewels from the slush. And in fact, there is a lot of stuff out there, and more coming.
But are readers really overcome by the flood of crud? Do they have ways to pick out "the good stuff?" Well, part of the answer is those large samples, free giveaways, and other ways to let the readers taste before they buy. Readers are likely to try some -- read that sample, the free short story on the web, maybe get one inexpensive novel or a free giveaway -- and then go out and buy the whole series, all the rest of a writer's work, if they like what they've seen. Readers talk to each other. Social networks, blogs, discussion forums, reader reviews, there's a lot of comparison and advice -- free publicity for the good stuff! Readers even look at those "also bought" lists.
The other thing that's becoming very obvious is that one person's crud is another person's diamond, and vice versa. Heck, the story that I don't care for this year may turn out to be just what I'm looking for in a year or two. With unlimited shelf space, it really doesn't make sense to try to select or limit what's published to what some arbiter of public taste thinks is good stuff. Put it out there. Let the readers decide.
Yes, there is a flood of stuff out there, and there is more being shoveled into the infinite digital maw every day. But readers are more than capable of sorting through it. And writers also are responding. They're putting up websites with their complete bibliographies, and guides for readers who are looking for what they can provide. They're putting up free short stories and samples galore, and most importantly -- they're blogging and giving notices about what's coming next!
We may have lost the gatekeepers of old, but we're developing a whole new set of guides and ways of plumbing the flood to pick out what each of us wants. Instead of being forced to pick from a small trickle that made it through the filters of the publishing houses, we've got a much wider flood to pick from. As a reader, I would rather try surfing on the wave than put up with that slow trickle that someone else controls.
What's your choice?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-05-21 12:05 am (UTC)They might be less gatekeepers and more filters - they aren't reducing the size of the flood, they're pulling out the good stuff.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-21 02:07 am (UTC)