Tag Archives: books

Newspapers need to learn quick

I just read about the LA Times dropping their dedicated books coverage and eliminating staff. Not 10 minutes later I read about The Birmingham News and its plans to trim staff (which is a much nicer buyout deal than handing out pink slips).

I understand the competition and strain that newspapers are under. Plus, your larger news organizations are not the most nimble when it comes to redirecting content and adopting “new media” techniques. But they have to learn, and quick. Trained professional journalists are too valuable. I read a ton of blogs and websites. Most of them are good. But I still depend on the professional filters that journalists provide. There is too much noise and it’s nice to know that some folks are out there sorting through it for us.

At a minimum, I think every new organization that lets a reporter go should host them a blog for as long as they want to write. That seems fair to me! Think of all the extra traffic they’d get from content that they don’t have to pay for (except for the $5 in annual hosting fees).Plus, it would be a good way for them to get their feet wet in the digital age. I just don’t want all these skilled book reviewers and news hounds to go away. If they are over 50 and still doing their jobs it’s because they love and are good at it.

Why would you throw that away? New media or traditional print?

So that’s my contribution to the world this week. Give everyone a blog. Everything should be much better now.

Twitterati Literati

yale logoI just started following Yale Univeristy Press on Twitter. Are there other cool publishers that I’m missing? Please pass along if you know of any.

It’s interesting to follow publishers as they move into new areas. It seems most are hesitant to explore things like Facebook, Twitter, Plurk, etc. So I’m glad to see some trying it out and doing a good job at it. And by good job, I mean sending stuff out other than “get 20% off book x this week”.

Press releases are ok, but if I’m following a publishers feed or engaging them via social media it’s because I’m interested in them on a topical level. So far Yale University Press‘ feed is doing that.

Are you kidding me?

Following a Twitter link, from rgriner (who blogs here), led me to this list of “The 100 Best Reads from 1983 to 2008” as selected by Entertainment Weekly. It made me sad. Sad, sad, sad.

They call them the new classics with Cormac McCarthy’s The Road at #1 and Jon Stewart’s America at #100. No doubt, every book on this list was a BIG seller. Was that their only criteria? But Potter was pushed to #2, so something else must have weighed in on their calculations. But what?

I agree that most of these titles should be on a list like this, but certainly not stacked this way. We may have to develop our own list. Hmmmmmm…