Comments on: It’s not digital publishing. It’s publishing.

By: Anne Wayman

Anne Wayman — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:34:18 +0000

Kate – I agree with both of you. Bowerbird points out something I actually alluded to in my blog about your post – and that’s that writers probably should be given a larger percentage for digital just because the costs are so low… at a minimum they should get the same percentage as print. There have already been a few attempts to make digital mean always in print no matter what the publisher is doing and to reduce or eliminate pay… writers and their agents have to stay alert on the digital / electronic rights – vigilant.

Glad you posted this.
A

By: Digtal Publishing Is Real Publishing

Digtal Publishing Is Real Publishing — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:30:35 +0000

[...] The link is to Kate Eltham’s Electric Alphabet (which goes into my RSS reader). There she wrote an article called It’s not digital publishing. It’s publishing. [...]

By: The Daily Square – Gypsy Woman Edition | Booksquare

The Daily Square – Gypsy Woman Edition | Booksquare — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:30:29 +0000

[...] It’s not digital publishing. It’s publishing.Kate Eltham makes an excellent point. [...]

By: Kate Eltham

Kate Eltham — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:30:44 +0000

Yeah, good point Brian. “New media” is a fairly pervasive phrase here in Australia, but like you I rail about it less because it replaced “multimedia”.

By: Kate Eltham

Kate Eltham — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:29:19 +0000

Hi bowerbird, thanks for commenting. I don’t disagree on either point. But I think there is still a perception in some companies (obviously not all, from Richard’s reports from Frankfurt) that digital is “other” and not core to what they do in the marketplace or even core to what they do in daily interactions with colleagues and customers.

By: Publishing – davis publishing | Point Article News Feed

Publishing – davis publishing | Point Article News Feed — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:15:31 +0000

[...] It's not digital publishing. It's publishing. – Electric Alphabet7 hours ago by Kate Eltham Richard Nash reports on conversations about digital at Frankfurt Bookfair. Perhaps it's time to stop talking about âdigitalâ and just talk about publishing? [...]

By: bowerbird

bowerbird — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:31:57 +0000

kate said:
> It’s not about digital publishing anymore.
> It’s just publishing.

um, i’m not exactly sure how to interpret that.

but i’m quite sure that, under some interpretations,
it’s not just wrong, but it’s wrong to a deadly degree.

if you mean that “all publishing will be digital” then,
to a large degree, you’re probably correct, although
paper — as print-on-demand — will still do quite fine.

if you mean that digital publishing and print publishing
boil down to the same thing, however, you are wrong…

print will always have significant variable costs attached,
but the variable cost of digital products approaches zero.

this difference is _huge_.

and it is precisely because they leverage this difference
that the mammal digital publishers of the future will be able
to out-maneuver, out-fox, and out-compete the dinosaurs.

anyone who thinks “it’s all publishing” will be left in the dust.

-bowerbird

By: Brian O'Leary

Brian O'Leary — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:51:08 +0000

Agreed, although I rail about “digital publishing” less than most because it effectively replaced “electronic publishing” as a phrase