From Eric Hellman’s Go To Hellman blog. Please offer your comments to Eric at the Go To Hellman blog.
Here’s the third section of my draft of a book chapter for a book edited by No Shelf Required‘s Sue Polanka. I previously posted the introduction; and What does Open Access mean for eBooks subsequent posts will cover Open Access E-Books in Libraries. Note that while the blog always uses “ebook” as one word, the book will use the hyphenated form, “e-book”. The comments on the second section prompted me to make significant revisions, which I have posted.
Business Models for Creation of Open Access E-Books
Any model for e-book publishing must have a business model for recouping the expenses of production: reviewing, editing, formatting, design, etc. In this section, we’ll review methods that can be used to support Open Access e-book publishing. Continue reading
Dr. Frances Pinter, Publisher, Bloomsbury Academic presented a new business model for the efficient and effective funding of open access “books.” (Frances presented this at the TOC conference and had an interview with me about the topic earlier in 2010 if you’d like more details.)
Dr. Pinter described her background in publishing and the focus of Bloomsbury Academic on open access publishing.
What does the academic community still want from publishers? independent verification of quality, typesetting/editing, variety of formats, etc. Frances also adds the “Mother-in-law” factor too, every academic wants a print copy of their magnum opus to present to their mother-in-law.
How are publishers responding? experimentation, becoming service providers rather than gatekeepers, becoming co-creators of value
Frances compared the open access model to ice cream, stating:
- What’s ice cream got to do with this? plain vanilla – basic html open access publication
- and the ice cream cone? print book, ebook, eReader format of the publication
- finally, the ice cream sundae? enhanced eBook with the frills and thrills Continue reading
Interesting article in SSP”s Scholarly Kitchen by Joseph Espisito, “The POD Booby Trap and the Lure of Open Access Books.” Espisito discusses “the booby trap” of open access, stating, “The unfortunate, unstated premise of those who fall into the POD booby trap is that they really don’t and can’t believe in the emerging primacy of digital text. The trap is set for anyone who thinks that print is superior for enough readers to make print a long-term viable option. This is highly doubtful. E-books have already reached the tipping point. In just a couple months, Apple has sold millions of e-books from its online bookstore, millions that come on top of the tens of millions sold by Amazon for its Kindle and Stanza brands. And Google Editions haven’t even launched yet. No more make-believe. If we want the cultural advantages of broad dissemination of scholarly texts through open access, then let’s step up and pay for it. Authors, department heads, university provosts, granting agencies — all of these have a stake, or claim to, in the distribution of academic material. Let the stakeholders fund the stake.”
Let the stakeholders fund the stake. This sounds exactly like a plan that Frances Pinter from Bloomsbury Academic is trying to promote. She spoke about it at the O’Reilly TOC conference and I had a follow up interview with her in March. She’ll be keynoting on this exact topic at The Charleston Conference in November.
I had a great discussion with Dr. Frances Pinter, Publisher at Bloomsbury Academic yesterday. Frances was one of the keynote speakers at the TOC Conference. She spoke about the future of academic monograph publishing in her keynote and again in our interview yesterday. Frances has some really out-of-the-box ideas, it’s definitely worth a listen. To view her keynote at TOC, visit YouTube.
Her interview, and many others, are available on the NSR interviews page.
Earlier this week I attended the O’Reilly Tools of Change (TOC) Conference for the first time. Over 1250 attendees gathered in New York City to discuss and network about issues and trends in publishing, in particular, digital publishing. While much of the information presented was for the publishing industry, I did manage to find several great ideas and concepts that relate to libraries. I’d like to share these with you, in no apparent order. Continue reading
TOC – Rethinking The Role and Funding of Academic Book Publishing – Frances Pinter (Bloomsbury Academic), Feb. 24
Creating quality content is not without cost. Frances discussed publishing monographs in academia, which is an endangered species. print runs for academic books have been on a major decline. She focused on the SS and H (Social Science and Humanities) where the book form is still preferred over journal articles (unlike the sciences). She offered a very interesting proposition to support an open access model for academic monograph publishing, supported by library budgets. I hope Frances presents this to library audiences, because it’s worth thinking about and considering. Libraries want open access, have declining budgets, and like to collaborate. Her model addresses all of these factors. I’ll try to get her slides or check with her about an audio interview. Continue reading