Is the new literary App a killer App or just a vague promise?

That's the question that popped into my mind after reading Noam Cohen's article 'Blurring the Line Between Apps and Books' on the New York Times. This interesting article presents couple of interesting literary apps developed lately and their potential value proposition for both authors and publishers.

So what sort of value proposition we're talking about? Well, when it comes to authors, Stephen Elliott, author of "The Adderall Diaries", who produced an app for his book, explains in the article what he's looking for:

“As an author, I want you to have the best experience,” he said. “People want to talk about the books they are reading with other people. Why, with everything we know, wouldn’t you include a chat room with your e-book?”

Once readers buy the app, he says, they are beginning a relationship with him and other readers; they can leave comments and read responses and updates from the author. They may even be told down the line that he has a new book for sale and then be able to buy it through the app.

And what's the potential in literary apps for publishers? Dennis Johnson of Melville House Publishing, who is working with Electric Literature to introduce an app book before Thanksgiving, share his vision in the article:

The attraction is obvious, he said.“If you publish work that is hard to sell in the American market, say literary fiction in translation, this is another format to hardcover, paperback and e-book,” he said. “A fourth line of revenue.”

In an interview, he imagined the possibilities, such as having readers whose devotion is deeper than merely dipping into a title, who would install a piece of software onto a phone or tablet. “I love the idea of putting books on subscription,” he said, “of having a membership in your publishing house, of having a readership invested in your books.”

So far so good and the excitement is obvious, but will such apps can and will follow these kind of expectations? I doubt.

And here's why: First, there's actually nothing new about these propositions. They're out there on other platforms. In the case of authors, many of them already build relationship with their readers on twitter and facebook for example without any extra charge. When we're talking about publishers, you've got many creative ways available today of crowdsourcing, where readers can participate in writing, decision making on which books will be published and even invest in new books. Most if not all of these options do not require a payment in advance like a literary app does.

Second, and this is especially relevant to authors, there's the cost issue. You can buy the ebook of Elliott for $9.99 or pay $14.99 for the app, which includes the e-book and "a dedicated discussion board to talk with other readers...Also features extras like Stephen Elliott's book tour diary, an RSS feed for news and events, a video interview with the author, and more."

I guess the attractiveness of such offer mainly depends on the attractiveness of the book or the popularity of the author, and I'm not sure if popular authors or best selling books need such platform in the first place.

It's true that authors are still looking for ways to generate extra income out of their books, but I'm not sure if these kind of apps will prove themselves to be one of the best ways to do it. I guess the attractiveness of such offer mainly depends on the attractiveness of the book or the popularity of the author, and I'm not sure if popular authors or best selling books need such platform in the first place.

The literary app is described in the article as a growing trend, but I've got a feeling it has a limited potential and we'll still have to wait for a real killer app to pop up.

What do you think? I'll be happy to hear your thoughts about it.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Looking for one more blogger to join the green books campaign!

As we mentioned earlier this week, the 2010 Green Books Campaign will take place soon:

On Wednesday, November 10, 2010, at 1:00 PM Eastern Time 200 bloggers will take a stand to support books printed on environmental paper by simultaneously publishing reviews of 200 such books (One of them you can see in the picture here - Make It by Jane Bull, which will be reviewed at http://storytime-storytime.blogspot.com/).

And we have room for one more blogger to join in!! We still have more than 40 books to choose from for review and you can see them at http://www.ecolibris.net/greenbookscampaign_list.pdf.

So if you're interested in joining 199 other bloggers in this unique campaign, aiming to use the power of the internet and social media to promote "green" books and increase the awareness of both readers and publishers to the way books can be printed printed in an eco-friendly manner, choose from the list the book you wish to review and email us the details to info@ecolibris.net.

And don't forget that the campaign has a new Facebook page, where where you can follow news and updates on the campaign. You're also welcome follow it on Twitter at @greenbooks2010.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

The 2010 Green Books Campaign - now on Facebook and twitter!

The 2010 Green Books Campaign is not that far away! In 18 days, on Wednesday, November 10, 2010, at 1:00 PM Eastern Time 200 bloggers will take a stand to support books printed on environmental paper by simultaneously publishing reviews of 200 such books.

Launched in 2009 by Eco-Libris, the Green Books Campaign is looking to promote books printed on environmental paper by turning a spotlight on books that are already printed this way. Our goal is to raise book buyers' awareness and create a discussion on the ways books should be printed, using the power of the Internet and social media to create a buzz and get the word out on the campaign.

We want it to be an interactive discussion and therefore we have a new Facebook page, where where you can follow news and updates on the campaign in the upcoming 18 days. You're also welcome to add your thoughts, ideas and questions there! The campaign is now also on Twitter and you can follow it at @greenbooks2010.

And if you want to join the green celebration, we still have room for 5 more bloggers! We still have 50 books you can choose from for review at http://www.ecolibris.net/greenbookscampaign_list.pdf

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Banning phone book litter in Seattle? Not so fast...

Last week the city of Seattle made an important step last week - it voted "on a yellow pages "opt-out" ordinance that would get rid of those phone books." It makes Seattle the first city in the country to set up an opt-out registry if you don't want to receive yellow pages.

We have discussed here before how wasteful are the Yellow/White Pages' practices ('The Yellow Pages are going green, but how about eliminating the wasteful printing in the first place?') and also compared the carbon footprint of a search on Google and a Yellow Pages directory. So any step in the right direction is a reason to be more optimistic.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure if the headline given by our friends at Treehugger to this story (Phone Book Litter Banned in Seattle, Nation's First Opt-Out City) is not a bit too optimistic. Applying Opt-out system is an important step, but it's very far from banning phone book litter. First, you can already opt out system for Yellow Pages (well, right now they're upgrading it so you can't really use it) and second, it's going to be real ban only when it will change to an opt-in system.

I'm afraid that even the most user-friendly opt-out system won't get enough people to move themselves out of the list, even in a progressive city like Seattle. If the city really wants "to allow residents to say no to the books" it should give them the freedom to choose if they want to receive these books in the first place. It's reasonable, better to the environment and will save money to the city (according to the announcement "City Councilor Mike O'Brien says unwanted yellow pages cost the Seattle $350,000 a year in recycling costs").

So I hope that the city of Seattle won't stop in launching an opt-out system and will end the current wasteful practice by creating an opt-in system to get things done. Then, we'll be able to talk about banning phone books litter in Seattle.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Is it greener to borrow ebooks from your local library?

When Daniel Goleman and Gregory Norris published their life cycle analysis (LCA), comparing e-books and physical books (How Green Is My iPad?, NYT), they wrote that at "all in all, the most ecologically virtuous way to read a book starts by walking to your local library."

Now, how about staying and home and getting an e-book from your local public library?

I got thinking about it after hearing a report on NPR's Marketplace about libraries in Birmingham, Atlanta that offer users to check out e-books ('iPad and Kindle users can't borrow from e-book libraries'). This is a growing trend, and it seems that libraries find it an interesting channel that will keep them connected with readers in the digital age.

For readers it's very convenient (cheaper than buying e-books and "there are no late fees, no trip to the library, the book expires after the date.") and of course the big e-readers sellers don't like it too much (Library e-books don't work with two of the biggest e-readers - the Amazon Kindle and Apple's iPad) as it means less business for them.

But what about the environmental side of this option? I mean, leaving the e-book vs. physical book debate aside for a moment, is it "greener" to borrow a book from a library than buying it online? I'm not sure. I can't think actually of any reduction of your environmental impact if you choose to use e-library over buying online.

I mean, this sort of activity, can eventually change the way libraries operate and probably influence their current public functions (will we be able to afford and support big brick and mortar libraries if most of their activity will be online?), but I can't think of any advantage from an environmental perspective for borrowing e-book comparing to buying it.

I'll be happy to hear your thoughts about it!

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Saving trees or softer touch for the butt?

It seems that this is the question consumers have to ask themselves if they're considering using toilet paper made of 100% recycled paper. You can guess the answer most of us will give..

The New York Times had an interesting article today on Marcal Small Steps, a company that is selling for 60 years toilet paper that as they say is made 'from paper, not from trees'.

They have now a new marketing campaign and it seems that they're doing well - in any case, much better than the market in general. But they still have a very small market share in paper product categories ("low single digits"). The reason? Their products are not soft enough for the American consumer.

There is some trade-off here and no matter what the reason is (Darby Hoover of NRDC suggest it's "decades of advertising promoting softness"), most of the consumers will prefer to wipe their tooshie with a softer paper even if it comes on the account of trees. Trade-off has always been an obstacle in the efforts to green up consumers' behavior. It is very unfortunate, but we have to face reality and think what can be done to get more green paper products purchased.

Right now, according to NRDC, just 10% of the paper products for home contain recycled content. This is very low. Too low. Some companies look for middle ground, like Kimberly-Clark (remember their new relationship / partnership with Greenpeace?) that is selling Scott Naturals’ products, which are "only partly made of recycled content, with the toilet paper using the least at 40 percent and napkins the most at 80 percent."

Aric Melzl, senior brand manager for Scott explained on the article that “you can have a product that’s 100 percent recycled with a smaller following or you can have Scott Naturals, where you choose to deliver the quality that folks are expecting with more mass appeal and a bigger business and more impact on the environment than a business that has a smaller following."

He definitely has a point and this is a good way to convert consumers gradually to use greener products, but this is still a partial solution. The other part that I'm missing here is innovation - Can't we really find a way to make sure there won't be any trade-off at all?

I mean, in a day like this, when we are so happy to see the rescue of the 33 Chilean miners, you wonder how we know can save miners captured 2,000 feet below the ground, but have no idea how to make toilet paper from recycled paper that will be soft enough for the American tooshie? (by the way, does anyone know what toilet paper the miners used on the last 69 days?)

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!

Who is also offering more of the same? Barnes and Noble!

I wrote couple of times in the past (here and here for example) on the lack of winning strategy at Barnes & Noble with regards to their 700+ brick and mortar stores. At the same time I was always wondering if I miss anything and somehow they do have a real good plan for the stores.

Now, after reading an interview with Leonard Rigio of B&N on Publishers Weekly I know they just don't have it. All they can offer is more of the same.

Rigio is of course very confident when he refers to the digital side of B&N, saying that "the company will continue with plans to aggressively transform itself into a major force in the sales of digital content." But what is his vision about the stores? Here's the plan:

Despite the possible bump in print sales over the holidays, it is clear fewer print books will be sold in bookstores in the future, forcing booksellers to find ways to make up for lost sales as well as to bring in customers, Riggio said. B&N stores "will remain chock-full of books," he said, and will continue to have the appearance of a grand library. But the company has already added more nonbook items, such as education games and toys, and the retailer will continue to test new initiatives over the holidays. And while the merchandise mix of the stores will change, Riggio said he doesn't expect the number of stores to change. "We tend to close a few stores every year at the end of their lease, and we move some stores to better locations. But over the next two to three years, I don't see the composition of our stores changing much at all," Riggio said.

So, if I summarize it, we'll have similar number of stores selling books and some more merchandise like toys and notebooks. This is far from being promising or even encouraging. These ideas are nothing new - Blockbuster, for example, tried to do something similar in the past and we all know where it ended. Not to mention that keeping the same number of stores operating doesn't sound too realistic.

These ideas certainly won't help to transform the stores from a liability back to an asset. If anything, this interview shows me that B&N is still very much in the dark when it comes to its bookstores. It's time for them to look for new ideas before it will be too late.

Yours,
Raz @ Eco-Libris

Eco-Libris: Promoting sustainable reading!