.gif)
Have you ever thought why at a time when people have so little time to read books publishers keep increasing their output?
I think books are being published because more and more people want to write them!
There was a time when there was one book (The Bible) and millions of readers. Then gradually we ended up with more choice of reading material and smaller readership for each publication. However, I feel there has been a fundamental shift of focus from readership to authorship.
When we read other people's writing it allows us to see the world through their perception. In this way we are able to feel what it is like to be the "other" person.
If reading is a window to the world, I think writing is a window to our own soul. When we write we reflect on our own perceptions and are able to feel what it is like to be who we are.
So when the primary purpose of writing is self-realisation then the objective is met through the quality of the understanding reached by the author irrespective of the size of the readership.
The advent of cheaper publishing and distribution methods via the Internet has made the shift of emphases in favour of authorship to be more profound.
The Observer’s retiring literary editor, Robert McCrum on 25 May 2008 wrote that “… while this has been the decade in which millions have found a voice through the internet, only a minority has discovered an audience. Self-expression has been democratised, but books and writers still face that age-old struggle to achieve a readership”.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Friday, May 23, 2008
How international a publisher are you?
Liam Gallimore-Wells sent me the following set of questions and I wish to share my replies with you.
> What are the main qualities / motivations that makes Intellect’s international approach to publishing stand out from other competitors in the market place?
We are an academic publisher of original ideas related to popular culture. The issues we deal with as well as the academic world are international by nature. I doubt if any of our competitors could survive without being open to ideas from other countries. We for sure cannot see any way of doing without it!
> What would be the potential impact on your business without an openness to ideas/ energy / opinions from other countries?
We would not be able to survive as a publisher both economically as well as intellectually.
> What makes being based in Britain special / unique for the purposes of running a successful independent publishing house?
Britain is special as it has a long tradition of tolerance and a long history of international connectedness via the empire and the commonwealth. These connections make it more possible for a publisher of original thinking like us to prosper.
> Are there any drawbacks in terms of attracting / securing new readerships by being a publisher that’s open to printing diverse cross representations of authors’ ideas / thinking? If so, how can these drawbacks be turned into positives?
The main drawback is in marketing terms. If what you publish is new ideas then it is difficult to persuade people to pay for them when there are limited resources at the disposal of academics. Ideally we would like it to be possible to make our books free in order that finance is not a barrier for the dissemination of new ideas. Already in journal publishing the "Open Access" movement is making this idea a possibility by charging the publishing costs to the authors instead of the readers.
> As founder of Intellect, how has your own personal and professional path/journey complimented or informed your culturally inclusive approach to business?
I was born in Iran some fifty years ago, my family migrated to the UK some 30 years ago. It is inevitable that having been welcomed by the culture of British tolerance and inclusivety I would also reflect these qualities in my dealings with others.
> What are the main qualities / motivations that makes Intellect’s international approach to publishing stand out from other competitors in the market place?
We are an academic publisher of original ideas related to popular culture. The issues we deal with as well as the academic world are international by nature. I doubt if any of our competitors could survive without being open to ideas from other countries. We for sure cannot see any way of doing without it!
> What would be the potential impact on your business without an openness to ideas/ energy / opinions from other countries?
We would not be able to survive as a publisher both economically as well as intellectually.
> What makes being based in Britain special / unique for the purposes of running a successful independent publishing house?
Britain is special as it has a long tradition of tolerance and a long history of international connectedness via the empire and the commonwealth. These connections make it more possible for a publisher of original thinking like us to prosper.
> Are there any drawbacks in terms of attracting / securing new readerships by being a publisher that’s open to printing diverse cross representations of authors’ ideas / thinking? If so, how can these drawbacks be turned into positives?
The main drawback is in marketing terms. If what you publish is new ideas then it is difficult to persuade people to pay for them when there are limited resources at the disposal of academics. Ideally we would like it to be possible to make our books free in order that finance is not a barrier for the dissemination of new ideas. Already in journal publishing the "Open Access" movement is making this idea a possibility by charging the publishing costs to the authors instead of the readers.
> As founder of Intellect, how has your own personal and professional path/journey complimented or informed your culturally inclusive approach to business?
I was born in Iran some fifty years ago, my family migrated to the UK some 30 years ago. It is inevitable that having been welcomed by the culture of British tolerance and inclusivety I would also reflect these qualities in my dealings with others.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Does it help to put “international” in the title of a journal?
A journal does not become such by being called “International journal of X”!
Both European Science Foundation and UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council define a journal as being international when it fits in either Category A or B below.
1) A journal is international (Categories A and B) when the following requirements are fulfilled in addition to those that apply to all journals:
• A genuine, varied and regular international cohort of contributors and readership
• Consistently high-quality scholarly content
• Broad consensus within the field concerning international status and visibility.
2) In addition, they will have some, though not necessarily all, of the following characteristics:
• Active international advisory board
• Open to unsolicited contributions
• Highly discriminating and selective in the choice of articles published
• Published on time and to an agreed schedule
The difference between category ‘A’ and category ‘B’ journals is likely to be the degree to which they conform to 1) above, and both the number of characteristics under 2) to which they conform as well as the degree of conformity. Generally, ‘A’ journals should conform to more of these characteristics, and to a greater extent, than ‘B’ journals.
Both European Science Foundation and UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council define a journal as being international when it fits in either Category A or B below.
1) A journal is international (Categories A and B) when the following requirements are fulfilled in addition to those that apply to all journals:
• A genuine, varied and regular international cohort of contributors and readership
• Consistently high-quality scholarly content
• Broad consensus within the field concerning international status and visibility.
2) In addition, they will have some, though not necessarily all, of the following characteristics:
• Active international advisory board
• Open to unsolicited contributions
• Highly discriminating and selective in the choice of articles published
• Published on time and to an agreed schedule
The difference between category ‘A’ and category ‘B’ journals is likely to be the degree to which they conform to 1) above, and both the number of characteristics under 2) to which they conform as well as the degree of conformity. Generally, ‘A’ journals should conform to more of these characteristics, and to a greater extent, than ‘B’ journals.
Monday, May 12, 2008
What quotes need copyright permission?
As a publisher one of the most frequently questions I am asked by authors is:
How long does a quote needs to be before one needs to get copyright holder’s explicit permission for reproduction?
I used to reply 150 words, but I was wrong!
There is no answer that applies to all cases as it very much depends on the context.
The British Academy and The Publishers Association have published a very useful guide for academics to copyright entitled, Guidelines for researchers and publishers in the Humanities and Social Sciences (April 2008) where the following are taken from:
" Section 30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act states:
Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work or of a performance of a work, does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement.
Some previous publishing industry assumptions, for example that taking up to 400 words is ‘safe’, are now unreliable. So, for example, an extract of 250 words from James Joyce’s Ulysses (less than one thousandth of the entire work) was held to be substantial on the basis of their unique and distinctive quality. Similarly, an extract taken from the musical work ‘Colonel Bogey’, consisting of some 20 bars and lasting only 50 seconds, was held to be a substantial part, because it was that bit of the music which the public would immediately
recognise (the ‘hook’).
Generally speaking, to be fair dealing any excerpt or extract made from a copyright work must not be an appropriation of an entire work or of that part which would represent the substance of the author’s skill and labour.
Lengthy extracts from another work have been allowed in one case where the court was satisfied that the purpose was purely to enable criticism to be made effectively, rather than simply to provide the same information as the original work and to compete with it. In many cases, the effect of good criticism and review is to increase rather than diminish the market for a work.
Fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work for the purposes of research for a non-commercial purpose does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement (emphasis added)."
How long does a quote needs to be before one needs to get copyright holder’s explicit permission for reproduction?
I used to reply 150 words, but I was wrong!
There is no answer that applies to all cases as it very much depends on the context.
The British Academy and The Publishers Association have published a very useful guide for academics to copyright entitled, Guidelines for researchers and publishers in the Humanities and Social Sciences (April 2008) where the following are taken from:
" Section 30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act states:
Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of criticism or review, of that or another work or of a performance of a work, does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement.
Some previous publishing industry assumptions, for example that taking up to 400 words is ‘safe’, are now unreliable. So, for example, an extract of 250 words from James Joyce’s Ulysses (less than one thousandth of the entire work) was held to be substantial on the basis of their unique and distinctive quality. Similarly, an extract taken from the musical work ‘Colonel Bogey’, consisting of some 20 bars and lasting only 50 seconds, was held to be a substantial part, because it was that bit of the music which the public would immediately
recognise (the ‘hook’).
Generally speaking, to be fair dealing any excerpt or extract made from a copyright work must not be an appropriation of an entire work or of that part which would represent the substance of the author’s skill and labour.
Lengthy extracts from another work have been allowed in one case where the court was satisfied that the purpose was purely to enable criticism to be made effectively, rather than simply to provide the same information as the original work and to compete with it. In many cases, the effect of good criticism and review is to increase rather than diminish the market for a work.
Fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work for the purposes of research for a non-commercial purpose does not infringe any copyright in the work provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement (emphasis added)."
Monday, December 17, 2007
Who should cover the costs of publishing?
Traditionally, readers are expected to pay for the production costs of books and magazines. However, in the majority of cases others also contribute. Advertisers are a good source of revenue to the extent that many publications are fully funded by them. In academic publishing ‘open access’ is another way of saying that someone else other than the reader pays.
Many pharmaceutical companies cover the costs of publishing medical research so that doctors have no barriers in accessing results that help to sell their products! But such benefactors are in short supply when it comes to arts and humanities publishing.
If we are honest, the main beneficiary of academic publishing is the author whose ideas are ‘perpetuated’. As such, they should be the ones who contribute to the costs of making publication a success. In practice, there are already resources to support publications based around creative practice.
Unfortunately, most of these funds are wasted on self-indulgent self-publishing. Most artists’ concept of publishing is limited to production of a physical artefact without considering the wider issues of marketing and distribution. They use their limited budgets fully in producing a book based on their own aesthetic sensibilities without considering the potential readers. Most authors are also not aware of ways that the book could be produced using value-for-money formats. Any resources saved by the publisher in production could then be spent on marketing.
A professionally produced academic book benefits from the experience of the publisher in many ways. To begin with, the process of peer review eliminates vanity publishing. Secondly, the publisher acts as a proxy for potential readers, thus making the book more welcoming to the readers instead of being an obscure object of self-indulgence. Most importantly, the publisher places the book in the mainstream of potential readership through its existing contacts.
I acknowledge that many new avenues of self-publishing have emerged via the internet. However, the role of a publisher remains as critical as ever. In this respect I was pleased to read Vint Cerf’s opinion (Media Guardian, 3/12/07) that while blogs and video-sharing websites have opened up new outlets to millions of people around the world at the same time, the appetite for professionally produced content continues to grow.
Many pharmaceutical companies cover the costs of publishing medical research so that doctors have no barriers in accessing results that help to sell their products! But such benefactors are in short supply when it comes to arts and humanities publishing.
If we are honest, the main beneficiary of academic publishing is the author whose ideas are ‘perpetuated’. As such, they should be the ones who contribute to the costs of making publication a success. In practice, there are already resources to support publications based around creative practice.
Unfortunately, most of these funds are wasted on self-indulgent self-publishing. Most artists’ concept of publishing is limited to production of a physical artefact without considering the wider issues of marketing and distribution. They use their limited budgets fully in producing a book based on their own aesthetic sensibilities without considering the potential readers. Most authors are also not aware of ways that the book could be produced using value-for-money formats. Any resources saved by the publisher in production could then be spent on marketing.
A professionally produced academic book benefits from the experience of the publisher in many ways. To begin with, the process of peer review eliminates vanity publishing. Secondly, the publisher acts as a proxy for potential readers, thus making the book more welcoming to the readers instead of being an obscure object of self-indulgence. Most importantly, the publisher places the book in the mainstream of potential readership through its existing contacts.
I acknowledge that many new avenues of self-publishing have emerged via the internet. However, the role of a publisher remains as critical as ever. In this respect I was pleased to read Vint Cerf’s opinion (Media Guardian, 3/12/07) that while blogs and video-sharing websites have opened up new outlets to millions of people around the world at the same time, the appetite for professionally produced content continues to grow.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Why we need ‘peer review’!
Manuel Alvarado in his reply to my earlier comments makes a very clear case against the process of ‘peer review’ in academic publishing in the arts and humanities. He presents 3 reasons behind his objection:
1) When trying to create new intellectual disciplines, a body of literature does not exist, nor is there a body of experts for the peer review process. Therefore, he suggests we should only use peer review in long established areas of scientific and medical publishing.
2) When the subject matter of the books may date quickly we should avoid slowing down the process by peer review.
3) Peer review is inherently conservative and would hinder publication of intellectually stimulating and groundbreaking work. Peer review does little more than confirm that conventional academic protocols have been observed. Reviewers may have academic and personal prejudices and hobbyhorses.
I happen to disagree with Manuel and would like to respond to each of his points.
1) It is true that publication as a method of dissemination is new to the arts and humanities. However, there is no good reason why publication of academic work in these areas should be exempt from the review process. In fact, the process of educating academics in these subjects to become good reviewers contributes to their development of a solid academic community. If we allow a poor publication model to be applied to the arts and humanities, we will end up with these becoming poor academic subjects. It is of paramount importance to a publisher to promote and encourage high standards as these new subjects are developed.
2) Academic publications are “archival repositories of verified knowledge”. Material that requires rapid dissemination need not be considered for inclusion in a long-term repository. Part of being academic is to take time to reflect on whether one’s discoveries can take the test of time.
3) It is true that peer review in a very small measure acts as a filter that rejects some material that may be good. But for sure it also rejects a lot more material that is poor in quality of presentation and some that is plainly not worthy of publication. And what is wrong with art and humanities publications following consistent style concentrations? Clarity of presentation helps in better communication.
To be honest I don’t believe that Manuel has bypassed peer review in his past publishing enterprises. My view is that as a result of his being both an academic specialist as well as being the publisher, he has been able to perform the peer review process in-house. His dual role has allowed him to speed up the publication process, giving the illusion that peer review was not needed.
In fact, most of what Manuel says confirms to me that peer review and the rest of what an academic publisher offers an author is a discipline that does the author more good than harm!
Publishing is a process of mediation and conflict! At each stage the author negotiates an improvement:
• the refereeing process (proposal, MS) - need to persuade peers it is worth publishing it.
• copyediting process - need to be clear to a non-specialist reader
• design and layout - need to fit into a house style while making sure that ‘form’ reflects the ‘content’ of the publication.
Manuel is right in mentioning the web as a crucial tool in the process of dissemination. The web comes into its full potential as an alternative when the author is unwilling, unable or in too much of a rush to negotiate publication via a caring academic publisher. A publisher adds value to the author’s work, but at a price! It requires the author to be more patient as well as increasing the financial costs.
1) When trying to create new intellectual disciplines, a body of literature does not exist, nor is there a body of experts for the peer review process. Therefore, he suggests we should only use peer review in long established areas of scientific and medical publishing.
2) When the subject matter of the books may date quickly we should avoid slowing down the process by peer review.
3) Peer review is inherently conservative and would hinder publication of intellectually stimulating and groundbreaking work. Peer review does little more than confirm that conventional academic protocols have been observed. Reviewers may have academic and personal prejudices and hobbyhorses.
I happen to disagree with Manuel and would like to respond to each of his points.
1) It is true that publication as a method of dissemination is new to the arts and humanities. However, there is no good reason why publication of academic work in these areas should be exempt from the review process. In fact, the process of educating academics in these subjects to become good reviewers contributes to their development of a solid academic community. If we allow a poor publication model to be applied to the arts and humanities, we will end up with these becoming poor academic subjects. It is of paramount importance to a publisher to promote and encourage high standards as these new subjects are developed.
2) Academic publications are “archival repositories of verified knowledge”. Material that requires rapid dissemination need not be considered for inclusion in a long-term repository. Part of being academic is to take time to reflect on whether one’s discoveries can take the test of time.
3) It is true that peer review in a very small measure acts as a filter that rejects some material that may be good. But for sure it also rejects a lot more material that is poor in quality of presentation and some that is plainly not worthy of publication. And what is wrong with art and humanities publications following consistent style concentrations? Clarity of presentation helps in better communication.
To be honest I don’t believe that Manuel has bypassed peer review in his past publishing enterprises. My view is that as a result of his being both an academic specialist as well as being the publisher, he has been able to perform the peer review process in-house. His dual role has allowed him to speed up the publication process, giving the illusion that peer review was not needed.
In fact, most of what Manuel says confirms to me that peer review and the rest of what an academic publisher offers an author is a discipline that does the author more good than harm!
Publishing is a process of mediation and conflict! At each stage the author negotiates an improvement:
• the refereeing process (proposal, MS) - need to persuade peers it is worth publishing it.
• copyediting process - need to be clear to a non-specialist reader
• design and layout - need to fit into a house style while making sure that ‘form’ reflects the ‘content’ of the publication.
Manuel is right in mentioning the web as a crucial tool in the process of dissemination. The web comes into its full potential as an alternative when the author is unwilling, unable or in too much of a rush to negotiate publication via a caring academic publisher. A publisher adds value to the author’s work, but at a price! It requires the author to be more patient as well as increasing the financial costs.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Why do artists want to publish?
Well, most artists don’t. They may like to have someone interview them and write about them. But most creative think that art speaks for itself!
“If you could say it in words there would be no reason to paint.” Edward Hopper (American Painter. 1882-1967)
But some artists also work as art teachers, and some even teach in universities. These ones have got to publish in the same ways as their colleagues in science, engineering and even humanities need to do.
Manuel Alvarado calls this “the dead hand of the pressures of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE).” For those who do not know what RAE means, I can explain. The British Government in its wisdom decided that the part of a university’s budget allocated for research should be distributed through a periodic assessment of the quality of research produced by UK university departments. It seems that measuring the volume and quality of research output via publications is the easiest way of doing this. University based artists and others in practice-based work have found themselves challenged to back up their creative artefacts with written material that contextualises them in their academic context.
Of course, there are other mediums where one’s ideas can be communicated to an audience:
• a website, blog, DVD
• a video diary, television programme, movie
• a radio series
• a song
• a painting, a photograph
• an installation, exhibition
• an ad series
• a peaceful demonstration
• an act of terrorism
• a bombing raid
But writing has won the day! In some way I am glad about this because I like words as a cultural currency.
Writing:
• is cheaper than staging a play
• can preserve the creative work
• offers reflection on Practice
• helps build a creative heritage
Of course, there are drawbacks when we use writing as the main currency. For example, documentation establishes a standard version, there is less freedom for improvisation, and there may be fewer variations!
“If you could say it in words there would be no reason to paint.” Edward Hopper (American Painter. 1882-1967)
But some artists also work as art teachers, and some even teach in universities. These ones have got to publish in the same ways as their colleagues in science, engineering and even humanities need to do.
Manuel Alvarado calls this “the dead hand of the pressures of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE).” For those who do not know what RAE means, I can explain. The British Government in its wisdom decided that the part of a university’s budget allocated for research should be distributed through a periodic assessment of the quality of research produced by UK university departments. It seems that measuring the volume and quality of research output via publications is the easiest way of doing this. University based artists and others in practice-based work have found themselves challenged to back up their creative artefacts with written material that contextualises them in their academic context.
Of course, there are other mediums where one’s ideas can be communicated to an audience:
• a website, blog, DVD
• a video diary, television programme, movie
• a radio series
• a song
• a painting, a photograph
• an installation, exhibition
• an ad series
• a peaceful demonstration
• an act of terrorism
• a bombing raid
But writing has won the day! In some way I am glad about this because I like words as a cultural currency.
Writing:
• is cheaper than staging a play
• can preserve the creative work
• offers reflection on Practice
• helps build a creative heritage
Of course, there are drawbacks when we use writing as the main currency. For example, documentation establishes a standard version, there is less freedom for improvisation, and there may be fewer variations!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
