MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Tuna · 07-03-2009, 06:43 AM

I've nothing much to add here as I feel PKFFW is making the case very well.

Moejoe, the problem is that single instances of great 'free' works, or things like Radiohead's never to be repeated publicity stunt don't make for a healthy eco-system.

As PKFFW has pointed out, correction of a few typos does not make for a well edited book. Even then, as the focus of end users is unpredictable, for every book that is corrected you'll find half a dozen that aren't. That'll only get worse as the number of ebooks increases. How many people do you think will pick up a book and either (a) put up with typos, loose grammar and unweildy paragraphs or (b)sit down and correct them?

For all that you decry traditional media, I think we'll find people returning to some of the 'big corporations' once the novelty of watching another cat video or reading some poorly concieved science fiction cliche has worn off. You deplore the output of the BBC, yet they are the ones who have put immense effort into pioneering new media and new delivery mechanisms. They are also the ones who actively find new talent and encourage and develop it. Whilst you might find the majority of their output not to your taste, surely you can recognise that they still produce high quality programmes that suit many corners of the public's interest? Against that, the entire world of 'free' creativity can boast very, very few successes.

As for singularities, the barriers for creative works have been very low for at least the last decade. Writing books and composing music in your 'back room' have been possible for longer, and video production and editing for around that time. Even the distribution mechanisms have been around for nearly as long. Yet we're not surrounded by a flood of new talent, or of singlular creative works. If free was able to deliver the breadth and quality of works that paid currently does we should have seen more evidence of it by now.

07-03-2009, 06:43 AM	#28
Tuna Zealot Posts: 114 Karma: 325 Join Date: May 2009 Device: Cool-ER	I've nothing much to add here as I feel PKFFW is making the case very well. Moejoe, the problem is that single instances of great 'free' works, or things like Radiohead's never to be repeated publicity stunt don't make for a healthy eco-system. As PKFFW has pointed out, correction of a few typos does not make for a well edited book. Even then, as the focus of end users is unpredictable, for every book that is corrected you'll find half a dozen that aren't. That'll only get worse as the number of ebooks increases. How many people do you think will pick up a book and either (a) put up with typos, loose grammar and unweildy paragraphs or (b)sit down and correct them? For all that you decry traditional media, I think we'll find people returning to some of the 'big corporations' once the novelty of watching another cat video or reading some poorly concieved science fiction cliche has worn off. You deplore the output of the BBC, yet they are the ones who have put immense effort into pioneering new media and new delivery mechanisms. They are also the ones who actively find new talent and encourage and develop it. Whilst you might find the majority of their output not to your taste, surely you can recognise that they still produce high quality programmes that suit many corners of the public's interest? Against that, the entire world of 'free' creativity can boast very, very few successes. As for singularities, the barriers for creative works have been very low for at least the last decade. Writing books and composing music in your 'back room' have been possible for longer, and video production and editing for around that time. Even the distribution mechanisms have been around for nearly as long. Yet we're not surrounded by a flood of new talent, or of singlular creative works. If free was able to deliver the breadth and quality of works that paid currently does we should have seen more evidence of it by now.