Paper or laptop?
by Features Editor Shelah Miner
My husband has been spending an awful lot of time lately looking at the newest version of the Kindle at Amazon.com. A few weeks ago, he made me sit through the entire promotional video. There are things I love about the Kindle– I love that it’s so light (when I go on vacation, the books I take along add substantially to the weight of my luggage. I can manage with two pairs of shoes for a week, but not two books), that users can either read or listen to the books they purchase, and that it’s virtually immediate. When I want a book I wouldn’t have to hunt it down in bookstores or wait for a week for it to arrive from an online source. But I know I’d miss the tactile quality of the book and the statement that all of my favorite books make in the bookshelves of my home.
I know that some independent Mormon journals (like Mormon Artist and Exponent II) have gone the way of the Kindle– they’re exclusively online publications. At the other end of the spectrum are the journals that have print-access only (like Irreantum). Still others (Sunstone and Dialogue) offer selected articles online at no charge (Dialogue also has an online subscription, for an additional fee), and others (Segullah) have both a print journal and a complete free online edition.
I’m curious about how each publication ended up with its particular print and online presence, and whether the editorial staff of the journals feel comfortable with the access their readers have or don’t have. I know that I personally like to read the article for the first time in a print journal, but it’s much easier for me to access it again if it’s online, since I tend not to keep back issues. Has online publication of your journal helped or hurt your subscribership?
Subscribe to RSS
March 16th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
As far as Irreantum is concerned, it was born as a print journal and has remained this way for a couple of reasons. I believe the first and most important has to do with many of our readers’ (and my) preference for physical books–their look, their smell, their weight in the hand. Not to mention the feeling of permanence associated with a book on a shelf. Although I do a lot of reading online, fiction and poetry, especially, aren’t the same for me in an electronic format. The idea of a Kindle, in fact, leaves me cold. There’s an intimacy lacking. A lot of this is personal preference, I realize; the “younger” generation (I can’t believe I’m saying that!) is probably a lot more comfortable with electronic books, but I grew up with a book in my hand, curled up on the couch, reading. It’s the method I prefer.
That said, I’m not opposed to having some of Irreantum’s content available online. Although I don’t think we’d put all our content online for free (we have a hard enough time attracting subscribers as is) I’d love to do something like Dialogue does and have specific pieces available for free. The reason we don’t have that right now is purely logistical: it takes time and expertise that I don’t have. But if somebody would be willing to do the work, I’d be all for it.
March 16th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Please don’t buy the Kindle. Wait for six more months. Apple is coming out with a much better and more versatile portable tablet that will be well worth the wait.
Also, the trend is definitely on-line. So those publications that don’t have an online presence will feel the effects within the next year or two.
Love live the Seattle Post Intelligencer!!!!!
March 16th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
There is a certain irony in the fact that Irreantum really formed via an online community, but has never had a significant online presence.
March 17th, 2009 at 8:23 am
The difficulty with this question is what it doesn’t state which is, “How would an online magazine be supported?”
An article in a recent New Yorker argues that the free culture of the Internet, though promoting an unprecedented exchange of information right now, will eventually lead to a paucity of GOOD information. In other words, it takes time and money to put out a good product, whether its a good piece of investigative reporting or a good piece of fiction. If no one is underwriting that cost, the good stuff will eventually dry up and we’ll be left with an Internet teeming with ill-researched articles and badly crafted fiction.
Right now I don’t see a good way to move publication strictly to electronic media and still maintain the quality of our content. People just don’t think they need to pay for anything electronic. I’m totally open to ideas, though. Because I think Shawn is right, publishing will be almost totally electronic within the next few years. And there are all kinds of possibilities bound up in that.
By the way. My wife loves her Kindle. It’s the perfect stealth reading device in church.
March 17th, 2009 at 9:35 am
That New Yorker article doesn’t apply to the Mormon market. After all, none of the writers in the Mormon market get paid. Plus it’s not journalism. And at heart all of the Mormon publications are basically philanthropic organizations where the value has never been in the actual physical product you receive.
I would guess that right now the cost of a print publication is crushing the AML and it’s got to be a huge drain on Dialogue as well. All Mormon publications have is their editorial staff, archives, brand name and community of supporters. Sunstone has some advertising, but not much. And Irreantum doesn’t even have paid staff.
How exactly does quality of content in this context correspond with a print publication?
Mormon publications are making the same mistake that newspapers are making (even though Mormon publications are better positioned to live without paper versions — I firmly believe this) that is mistaking the medium for the actual product. I’m sorry but the sentimental “I like the feel of paper” is not an argument for a printed journal (or at least not for one without a model that can easily support paper versions — I’m not adverse to paper version at all. I prefer them for some things as well).
So this:
“If no one is underwriting that cost, the good stuff will eventually dry up and we’ll be left with an Internet teeming with ill-researched articles and badly crafted fiction.”
is utter nonsense when it comes to Mormon publications. It very well may be true for investigative journalism. But a) no one is suggesting that Mormon publications give away their content for free* and b) the Internet is going to be teeming no matter what however c) it’s quite likely that it won’t be teeming with the stuff that the major Mormon publications provide** and d) if the free culture of the Internet changes, then you better already be positioned to take advantage of that and e) we haven’t even begun to talk about all the issues that mobile is going to bring — including the possibility that some of the major forms we prefer to deal with — short stories/articles — may no longer be part of the mix for some populations.
I’m not saying that this is all easy or that I have all the solutions (although here’s one brief model for the AML). But if this issue isn’t a major priority and a point of discussion and aren’t educating yourself on these issues, the next few years aren’t going to be much fun.
And need I mention the graying of subscribers? The young folks aren’t doing much with us. They’re off creating their own stuff — YouTube videos, blogs, artists co-ops, electronic mags, writing novels for NaNoWriMo and circulating them to their friends, etc.
“People just don’t think they need to pay for anything electronic.”
This is not excuse for those who have excellent, unique, fantastic product. Here’s a little exercise: How many subscribers would Irreantum and Dialogue need to have in order to charge $10 per year (or $15 for Dialogue) for an electronic subscription? And then say you can reach the break even point of that. What premium products and donations could they raise above that to fund additional initiatives (awards, events one-off themed publications, etc.) and put away a bit of money in a rainy day fund?
In addition, how could moving to an online format open up opportunities for more cultivation of the younger generation? e.g. creating the next crop of subscribers, submitters, editors and financial contributors?
Sunstone is different because more salaries are involved plus the whole symposia system.
*Even though some of them are. Segullah, for example. And once Mormon Artist begins running fiction and poetry then all of sudden Irreantum has some serious competition.
** Although I think it’s clear that the Bloggernacle has soaked up some of the energy, attention and writing that formerly went to the Mormon publications. However, the good news is that I think the Bloggernacle may be peaking and there is a real opportunity for some of the Mormon publications to draw some attention back to them with the right mix of print, online publishing and social media interaction/marketing.
March 18th, 2009 at 9:47 am
I’m enjoying this conversation, William.
To me, this is the basic difficulty: even if we go to an entirely electronic delivery model, it still takes TIME to put out a really quality piece of writing. A LOT of time. For any serious personal essay I write, I spend probably 75 total hours to write, edit and publish it. And that’s not counting the years I have put into learning how to write in the first place.
If I were getting paid minimum wage on such an essay, I’d be getting $525. So let’s round it down to $500 per essay or article. In one Sunstone issue, with 11 normal length articles/stories/essays, that would add up to $5,500 of unpaid time and work. And that’s not counting all the money that goes into the editor’s salary, the associate editor’s salary, office space, running costs, illustration, copy editing, etc. It’s not counting the numerous hours that go into the writing of poetry we publish either.
In other words, there is all kinds of unpaid time already being poured into producing Sunstone. But the only people who are willing to pay for the time that has money directly connected to it are those who want a magazine delivered to them.
There is a difference between essays/articles/fiction that have gone through a rigorous editing process and those that have not. The blogs are chock-freaking full of unedited writing. I’d be willing to bet that the average blog post takes no more than 3 hours to write. And it probably doesn’t go through a number of heavy revisions. And it probably doesn’t get dismantled by an editor. And it probably doesn’t rise again in new and glorious form. And it probably doesn’t get edited again for flow. And it probably doesn’t get edited again for minutiae. And it probably doesn’t get copy edited. And it probably doesn’t get that last touch put on it by an outside editor. An article/story/essay in Sunstone gets all these things, which is why we’re willing to commit it to print.
Blog posts are the kind of stuff that will interest future generations the way the letters our ancestors wrote interest us. Sure, the letters are of passing interest to a small group of people, they give us a little insight into the times and the writer, but beyond that, they have little to offer the larger scheme of things the way say _Babbit_ or _The Jungle_ do.
Do we want Mormon thought and creativity dominated by blog post-quality material? Not me. I want Mormonism to have work that lasts. But in order to do that, we need time, and time equals money. And the only people willing to pay are those who want a magazine delivered to them.
Right now, as far as I know, Irreantum does not pay its editors. That’s why we get 1 issue a year from each of them. They simply don’t have the time to produce anything more. They have lives and jobs they need to tend. The only reason I can put out six issues of Sunstone a year is because I get paid. If I didn’t, I’d probably be able to put out one issue a year as well.
I share your sentiments that we need to find a way to move into electronic format. I’m even willing to let go of my penchant for text and head into the world of multimedia. The thing I’m not willing to give up is quality. And quality doesn’t come without time, and time doesn’t come without money.
Where are we going to find those “excellent, unique, fantastic product”s if we don’t provide the creators with the wherewithal to feed themselves?
If we can find a way to go electronic and still get people to pay for all the work that goes into quality, I’m more than willing to jump on. Right now, the people who support quality work are the people who want a magazine delivered to them.
How do we get the electronic people to support quality? This is an invitation to brainstorm.
March 18th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Excellent comments, Stephen. I largely agree, but I want to tease out some more points.
I agree with the limitations of blogging and the need for editing (to a certain extent — some of the stuff that has been produced for AMV is very high quality and has indeed been featured [or could be] in Mormon publications with very limited editing).
But I’m afraid that there are those who conflate blogging or other forms of online discourse with electronic publishing. This is particularly true among academics in the humanities (whereas those in the sciences have embraced)
Again (and I’m glad you recognize this): those who work in Mormon publications shouldn’t make the same mistake newspapers have made by dismissing the medium because it supports other forms of expression. There seems to be this perception that a print journal is inherently better.
That’s ridiculous. It is marginally more portable (although with mobile devices that is increasingly no longer the case) and offers a certain aesthetic experience that a certain generation of readers has been conditioned to privilege. Works published electronically (especially if done the right way) also have strengths and limitations. For all that I seem to be an electronic evangelist, I’m actually agnostic when it comes to platform/medium. Any project should look at issues of aesthetics, cost, sustainability, marketing, community building, etc.
It’s the same approach I bring to anything I do in PR. Rather than “We need a flyer” or “We should have a Facebook page” or “We need to get our CEO twittering” or “Can’t we have a flash e-mail because that’s cool” The answer to all those is: no. Or rather — what are you trying to accomplish? what stories do you need to tell to accomplish your goal? which audiences do you need to reach in order to accomplish the goal? and what’s the best way to reach that audience both in terms of message/story and mode(s) of delivering those messages?
So the issue here is exactly as you say it: “Right now, the people who support quality work are the people who want a magazine delivered to them.”
My response to this is:
a) how long are these people going to be around?
b) are you bringing enough new people on board who support this particular model?
c) are you grooming enough people to make sure your community continues to be healthy and has a pool of talent to draw from in order to continue to put out excellent product?
d) is your content, as quality as it may be, attractive to enough people that they will continue to support your current organizational and publishing model?
The answer to these questions and the best or close to the best models of publishing that result from some strategic thinking will vary across the board. And it’s not just the print publications that need to be thinking about this. For example, my guess is that Mormon Artist is going to wrestle with some things over the next 24 months as it tries to grow and continue to put out a regular product.
Now, the whole phenomenon of Mormon blogging can’t just be ignored. Yes, the product is normally not as good as what you get from the mags/journals. But what if it’s good enough? And what if the talentbase . Irreantum, Dialogue and Sunstone have been lucky that they have enough brand equity left that a younger generation of talented editors wanted to take the helm.
This question is very important, but it also misses some of the point: “How do we get the electronic people to support quality?”
Electronic people support quality all over the place. I don’t want to rehash the same examples and counter-examples (Consumer Reports, the New Yorker) that get brought up in every discussion of The Internet Is Killing Journalism. However, I don’t think any of this has much to bear on the Mormon market because the real issue comes down to how indispensable and unique the product the Mormon market provides is to its audiences.
Electronic people also suggests a divide between electronic and print people. I don’t think that divide neatly exists. And I don’t think the choice needs to be print or electronic. However, I do think that as it current stands, print is privileged in such a way to make electronic subscription not worth it so until someone tries a real experiment (Dialogue’s e-subscription is okay, but it’s not a real model for e-publishing, of course), I think we just don’t know. Perhaps it’s best if Mormon publications ride out their aging print subscriber base and hope that the Internet itself comes up with solutions. But I don’t think that all the Mormon publications are in a position to hang in there for the long run.
“Where are we going to find those ‘excellent, unique, fantastic product’s if we don’t provide the creators with the wherewithal to feed themselves?”
The creators don’t get paid. A few of the editors do (and I would assume some of those who provide layout/graphic design services). I’m operating the assumption, and I think it’s a good one, that for the near future the Mormon market, esp. the literary-minded, quality-writing and editing market that we value and want to support is going to be at heart an amateur endeavor.
I’ve gone on too long already and do have a few specific ideas, but two more things I’d like to note:
1. The best way to get quality out of amateurs (although in many ways a lot of us in the market are semi-pros, but semi-pros without sales and many works published because of the low number of opportunities in the market) is to offer writing contests with cash awards.
2. The editing burden for publications with volunteer editors needs to be spread out. The only way it can be spread out is if you develop a pool of subscribers and contributors (and one way to do that is to lower the barrier of subscribing) that become experts in and major fans of your product. This is something Segullah has, from what I can tell, done very well.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Okay, here’s one idea:
Commission one of the hot writers in the field (Angela Hallstrom, Darren Cozzens, Todd Robert Petersen, etc.) to write a novella. Serialize it in three parts in your journal/mag and promote the heck out of it (and hopefully gain a few subscribers with it). Then when it’s journal run is complete offer it as a chapbook for $5-6 (plus S+H) and/or an e-book download for $3-4 and split any income 50/50 with the writer and pour your half in to a fund for publishing the next chapbook or some other one-off project. In addition, offer 1-10 premium fine book limited editions signed by the author and handcrafted by someone with experience in book arts. Provide percentages cuts of the fine book sales (priced $25-100 depending on the product) to the illustrator, book binder and author as way remunerate them.
It would be a gamble of serious time for the writer and the editors and still wouldn’t pay back that time, but it would be an excellent experiment and if successful would offer more to authors than what they currently receive and could help the journal generate excitement, some funds to play around with, etc.
At some point AMV is going to experiment with a similar idea on a much, much lesser scale. I just need to find a way to free up my wife’s time so she can work on the illustrations.