Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
Clay Shirkey covered that: "Institutions will try to preserve the problem for which they are the solution." Any organization, including "author" organizations, that was created to fix a problem and has *also* managed to create career opportunities, money, or social esteem, will fight to keep the problem around.
Author guilds were created to advocate for authors when publishers were being problematic at them, and to speak to the media on behalf of authors, and investigate and lobby for better business laws.
Authors no longer need publishers at all... they can self-pub. (For some authors, a publisher is either the preferred or outright better choice--but it's no longer the only choice.) Authors can talk to the media themselves, or bypass "the media" altogether and have a blog where they talk to their fannish public. They can still use legal advocacy, but that, too, is available without a large organization these days; they can do basic legal research online and seek specific help more nimbly themselves than through a large organization.
It's not that they no longer need guilds, but the focus and purpose of those guilds is under threat of drastic change, just like every other aspect of the big publishing supply chains. |
FIrst of all, Mr. Shirkey is simply wrong in suggesting that publishers are somehow obsolete already, but let that pass.IMO, authors certainly need and will benefit from an organization that advocates on their behalf and through whom they can take collective action . THE INTERNET!!! did not abolish the need for such an organization.
Your problem is that you disagree his analysis on agency pricing and Amazon. That's different. Focus on that.