Group items tagged

Okay, sure, I understand feeling the need to self-publish, and yeah, I can see how even big publishers could have bad marketing, but to take the advance and run? That just seems wrong wrong wrong to me on all levels.

The argument between the author of a best-selling memoir and his publisher over the amount of royalties he was owed from sales of the digital editions of his work, has led to the author not only leaving the publisher, but going on to set up a new publishing house for himself and calling on other writers to join him.

Green initiatives are prevalent throughout most industries these days, including publishing. But how sustainable are our publishing practices? Dennis Stovall, director of the publishing program at Portland State University and publisher at Ooligan Press, tackles this topic in the following interview.

Jane Friedman created this great infographic to "describe what I see as the key 5 publishing paths, their value to authors, the potential pitfalls, and examples of each." Read more about each path on her website: http://janefriedman.com/2013/05/20/infographic-5-key-book-publishing-paths/. She also says that she will continue to develop the infographic as the publishing landscape changes. Which of these paths is the best business decision? Where and when does ethics fit in?

Interesting in light of diminishing budgets and fewer resources being available for fact checking, etc.

iPublishCentral, a self-service digital content publishing, marketing, warehousing and distribution platform, will allow participating AAUP members to market books on the Internet, sell content online, and promote brands and titles across the Web. Among the three core components of iPublishCentral are market, distribute and deliver.

Publisher pulls book because of factual inaccuracies. Where were the editors?

Good overview of issues in green publishing.

Is self publishing technology helping to connect writers with readers, or is it completely disrupting the publishing industry?

As more journals shift from being run by university presses and scholarly societies to corporate entities, the goal is better management, better sales (since packages of journals are frequently sold together) and economies of scale. The fear of some involved in journal publishing is that corporate interests will limit the role of scholars in making key decisions.

Author-pays model meets bottom-line publisher. The vanity press of scholarly publication?

f all published research anyway so it does really matter much whether most journals are "real" or not--m

A math journal published by Elsevier published over 300 research articles written by the Editor-in-Chief. The articles appear to have bypassed the peer-review process entirely.

Elsevier, in cooperation with some pharmaceutical companies, published over 5 journal-like entitities from 2000-2008. These "journals" were given names that sounded basically reputable, but were essentially reprints of works that appeared in other Elsevier journals and featured works that touted the benefits of drugs produced by these drug companies.

A few years ago, b2b publishers were snapping up all the titles they could get in order to create large publishing behemoths. Now, many of those big publishers have shuttered underperforming titles and split off the rest of their assets into smaller, more niche publishers, often led by the former employees of the big companies.

No penalty for misrepresenting a work of fiction as truth. The lesson of "A Million Little Pieces" is publishers will not worry about misrepresentation when it generates publicity for book.  We have a new category of work "semi-fiction" - formerly know as BS.