After spending a week reading my marketing book, I have had my fill of the jargon that's being used. I know every industry has it, but online marketing terminology seems a little showy to me. I'm willing to admit that maybe it's just my perception--I mean, I work in an industry that commonly refers to an entire excavator as a shovel. The language in the construction industry tends to get more simplified over time, easier for everyone to understand, rather than disguising itself behind words that seem to obscure the meaning rather than enhance it.
Ironically, the one I'm most tired of, due to its intentional ambiguity and overusage, is transparent. This word is being thrown around in all of the business world, as well as politics, which immediately raises a red flag in my mind. Okay, so my understanding is that it is being used in place of the word honest, which we all know cannot be used directly. It seems that the minute you assert that you are an honest person or business, the immediate question is, "why did you feel the need to say that?" Being honest is supposed to be expected. It's like this guy on the bus who was trying to pick up on me by literally bragging that he "doesn't hit women".
I think the other thing the word transparent is trying to convey is that its business practices are visible to all. That makes sense, especially in light of the recent fiasco in the banking and mortage industries. But still... I feel sure that I have heard or read the word transparent more times in the last month than any other time in my life. Enough already.
In the same vein, (regarding word choices, anyway), it's also interesting to note the differences between the preferred terms of corporations and the words used by consumers. One such example, from my book Online Marketing Heroes is that Southwest Airlines advertised their discounted fares as red hot airfares!. But nobody types that into a search engine, so they weren't getting as much traffic as they expected. Consumers liked to use the term cheap airfare or cheap airline, but the executives at Southwest Airlines were reluctant to use that term. The obvious connotation with the word cheap is a sense of worthlessness and low quality. But it was brought to the airline's attention that, if Southwest did not use the word cheap, it will certainly be used by some other airline who will get the customer's business.
So I guess the point of my ramblings today has to do with the power of words and how they affect people. Now if you'll excuse me, I must prepare for a date with my new boyfriend who never hits me.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
Publishing 10 years from now...
Ten years from now... (in my imagination)
There will certainly be continued growth in Print-on-Demand and online material. These options will be the preferable choice just for the lower overhead and lack of need for storage for the printed book. Consequently, there will likely be a smaller need for distributors.
I'm not sure about this whole e-book thing. I'm wondering if the Kindle will go through so many versions that it will require users to upgrade their devices in order to enjoy better technology, and then will be subject to the kind of frustration that we experienced with the Nintendo system-- that eventually, you have to upgrade (or change to a whole new manufacturer for the better procudt) because all the new stuff is only supported by the newest version of the reader. If that happens, I feel like people will eventually get wise to that game and give up on it.
Walking past a music store last weekend, I stopped to ponder how it would be if the printed book went the way of the vinyl record--relics, cool and retro, still existing as the truest media for the artform. But I feel pretty sure it won't happen in the next 10 years, because there are still too many types of books whose content do not lend themselves easily (or at all) to electronic media. Picture books and board books come to mind, and books on photography and art would just not sell well as images on a screen. The tactile aspect feels appropriate and necessary for image-laden books. For these, I do think the small presses are more fit to handle the demand. Maybe this is wishful thinking, but I think in the long run, small publishers are better suited to determine readers' changing demands and respond to them, much like Kelley was sayimg.
On further speculation, how would it be if something happened that wiped out the internet--completely, irreversably destroyed it? What if this event rendered all computers useless? We would have bigger problems than book publishing , that's for sure, but perhaps this would be the only circumstance under which we as a society would get back to creating things by hand, without the aid of electronic devices. We are hopelessly dependent upon the digital world. But without it, we would still have books. We would still share stories. We could still look up information in printed format. I feel more secure just knowing that there are books around us, and the presence and rediscovery of books I knew as a child give me a warm and happy feeling. It makes me sad to think about a child who would not have the opportunity to feel this way about a favorite book. The experience is just not the same with an electronic screen.
Of course, I do believe it will be well over 10 years before any of the giant publishers close thier doors or fail to meet public demand. The three will likley remain strong, and become more competetive with each other over time. Personally, I look forward to the day when the small presses join forces to slay the ugly conglomerate corporations.
*sigh*
There will certainly be continued growth in Print-on-Demand and online material. These options will be the preferable choice just for the lower overhead and lack of need for storage for the printed book. Consequently, there will likely be a smaller need for distributors.
I'm not sure about this whole e-book thing. I'm wondering if the Kindle will go through so many versions that it will require users to upgrade their devices in order to enjoy better technology, and then will be subject to the kind of frustration that we experienced with the Nintendo system-- that eventually, you have to upgrade (or change to a whole new manufacturer for the better procudt) because all the new stuff is only supported by the newest version of the reader. If that happens, I feel like people will eventually get wise to that game and give up on it.
Walking past a music store last weekend, I stopped to ponder how it would be if the printed book went the way of the vinyl record--relics, cool and retro, still existing as the truest media for the artform. But I feel pretty sure it won't happen in the next 10 years, because there are still too many types of books whose content do not lend themselves easily (or at all) to electronic media. Picture books and board books come to mind, and books on photography and art would just not sell well as images on a screen. The tactile aspect feels appropriate and necessary for image-laden books. For these, I do think the small presses are more fit to handle the demand. Maybe this is wishful thinking, but I think in the long run, small publishers are better suited to determine readers' changing demands and respond to them, much like Kelley was sayimg.
On further speculation, how would it be if something happened that wiped out the internet--completely, irreversably destroyed it? What if this event rendered all computers useless? We would have bigger problems than book publishing , that's for sure, but perhaps this would be the only circumstance under which we as a society would get back to creating things by hand, without the aid of electronic devices. We are hopelessly dependent upon the digital world. But without it, we would still have books. We would still share stories. We could still look up information in printed format. I feel more secure just knowing that there are books around us, and the presence and rediscovery of books I knew as a child give me a warm and happy feeling. It makes me sad to think about a child who would not have the opportunity to feel this way about a favorite book. The experience is just not the same with an electronic screen.
Of course, I do believe it will be well over 10 years before any of the giant publishers close thier doors or fail to meet public demand. The three will likley remain strong, and become more competetive with each other over time. Personally, I look forward to the day when the small presses join forces to slay the ugly conglomerate corporations.
*sigh*
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Books and Childhood, continued
Since I really enjoyed the last blog assignment to talk about books that changed our lives, I thought I would say more about the topic of childhood and books.
As soon as I could read, I was enamoured with books. Fiction was my favorite, but if someone's real life had an engaging story to it, I was into that as well (Anne Frank and Helen Keller come to mind here). I liked to feel like I really understood the characters and was with them during their adventures, and I aspired to create fun characters and situations for myself when I wrote.
I didn't grow up with parents who read. My dad liked Isaac Asimov and had some of his novels on his bookshelf, but I don't recall ever really observing my parents reading. In fact, I would go so far as to say that my mom is an anti-reader, and says that she doesn't have time to sit around and "do nothing". I thought about that recently, and I asked her why she never got into reading as a child, and I discovered something interesting and sad. I knew that as a child, my mom spent five years in Doernbecher's Children's Hospital with a chronic kidney condition, and her parents visited her on the weekends. But my mom said that she doesn't remember there being very many books around the ward when she was there. That would have been during the late 1950's or early 1960's. That seems terribly sad to me. I had other questions, too, that I couldn't bring myself to ask, especially the question about why didn't her parents bring her some books, or read them to her when they came to visit?
I worked as a nanny for four and a half years, and I read to the kids every day I was there. I chose funny and interesting picture books and middle grade novels, and fell in love with those books myself. I loved the reactions the kids had, and the discussions it sparked. I read to them at dinner every night, which we all looked forward to. It was such a gratifying exchange between us, and I am sad that my mother missed out on that in her own childhood. For myself, I still feel a strong connection with my childhood when I read and write. It may be the reason I am drawn to children's books. I'm right there with Whitney when she talks about her love of YA literature, and that's why I want to be involved in some capacity with creating/publishing/editing books for kids. It still feels like home to me.
As soon as I could read, I was enamoured with books. Fiction was my favorite, but if someone's real life had an engaging story to it, I was into that as well (Anne Frank and Helen Keller come to mind here). I liked to feel like I really understood the characters and was with them during their adventures, and I aspired to create fun characters and situations for myself when I wrote.
I didn't grow up with parents who read. My dad liked Isaac Asimov and had some of his novels on his bookshelf, but I don't recall ever really observing my parents reading. In fact, I would go so far as to say that my mom is an anti-reader, and says that she doesn't have time to sit around and "do nothing". I thought about that recently, and I asked her why she never got into reading as a child, and I discovered something interesting and sad. I knew that as a child, my mom spent five years in Doernbecher's Children's Hospital with a chronic kidney condition, and her parents visited her on the weekends. But my mom said that she doesn't remember there being very many books around the ward when she was there. That would have been during the late 1950's or early 1960's. That seems terribly sad to me. I had other questions, too, that I couldn't bring myself to ask, especially the question about why didn't her parents bring her some books, or read them to her when they came to visit?
I worked as a nanny for four and a half years, and I read to the kids every day I was there. I chose funny and interesting picture books and middle grade novels, and fell in love with those books myself. I loved the reactions the kids had, and the discussions it sparked. I read to them at dinner every night, which we all looked forward to. It was such a gratifying exchange between us, and I am sad that my mother missed out on that in her own childhood. For myself, I still feel a strong connection with my childhood when I read and write. It may be the reason I am drawn to children's books. I'm right there with Whitney when she talks about her love of YA literature, and that's why I want to be involved in some capacity with creating/publishing/editing books for kids. It still feels like home to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)