Publishers still missing the point on e-book prices

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

It is stereotyping. Stereotyping is a form of discrimination. It doesn't matter if you are right statistically.

No, it is a form of prejudice.
Prejudice is thinking things, discrimination is doing them.

In general, sure. But you were applying this general rule to assume that one octagenarian didn't know as much as a college student. Substitute race and criminality to see the problem.

So I shouldn't assume that a particular doberman is more likely to do me injury than a particular dachsund? A particular tiger than a particular house cat?
We apply prejudices all the time, we call it life experience.
If I see an OAP at the bottom of a set of stairs with a large amount of shopping I'm more likely to offer to help them carry it up than it they were a beefy looking 30 year old, because it is more likely that they would appreciate my help. Similarly I'm more likely to offer a pregnant woman a seat on a train, because they are more likely than average to benefit from sitting down. Those are all discriminatory acts.

[Kevin8or]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

It is stereotyping. Stereotyping is a form of discrimination. It doesn't matter if you are right statistically.

Okay fine, but stereotyping, and generalization, is useful in discussing affairs. We do it every day. We're constantly categorizing. It's how we make sense of the world.

Blue Tyson said that an octogenarian is not likely to be an internet expert. The statement was correct, and there's nothing offensive about it. Whether Ursula Le Guin fits the (true) stereotype was a good question for us to answer, given how she was used in the conversation, but it wasn't an offensive question.

Judging by posts in the thread, Le Guin is more internet savvy than most people her age (though probably not an "expert"). That information helps us readers decide how much weight to give her opinion on the matter. I thank those who provided it.

[TechnoCat]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

It is stereotyping. Stereotyping is a form of discrimination. It doesn't matter if you are right statistically.

The problem here is that the word "discrimination" has two meanings.

One meaning is to note a difference and act on it. When I choose a part for my project, that is discrimination. It used to be a good thing to have, e.g., discriminating taste, but that was before the language became overwhelmed by people incapable of controlling their emotions.

By this definition/usage, when you decide that you would rather eat at Outback than McDonalds, you are discriminating. When you see an eatery you have no prior knowledge of, with a drive-up lane, lots of glass and employees in polyester outfits, and decide not to eat there because you want a good steak, you first have stereotyped and then discriminated. And it's all good. It's a valuable survival skill.

The other meaning - the one you appear to have used - is the emotionally-charged accusatory one, used when attacking someone rather than discussing their motives, or to shout them down. There are many terms that have become the verbal equivalent of thuggery, of shutting down conversation by an accusation that is culturally nearly impossible to defend against. If I call you racist, sexist, homophobic or, yes, discriminatory, there is no effective defense because another oddity of the culture is that all attacks are in the eye of the victim.

The original message on this was very indelicate, but made a valuable point... that she very likely does not fully understand the current internet economy, for example. The debate over the political correctness overshadowed the actual intent of the writer. Are you so afraid of his point that you have to attack how he delivered it?

[HarryT]

Moderator Notice
Can we please stick to the topic of this thread and not get sidetracked into discussions of stereotyping and discrimination. We invite anyone interested in discussing those topics to create a new thread for the purpose in the P&R forum.

Thank you.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I expect the 30% consider "piracy" the most important consideration...

That might be expected, since most web forums clearly indicate a tacit, if not outright, support of piracy.

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

That might be expected, since most web forums clearly indicate a tacit, if not outright, support of piracy.

I don't see that at all. There is support for removing DRM and getting the
full use of the ebooks that you purchase. That is not "piracy".

Luck;
Ken

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

I don't see that at all. There is support for removing DRM and getting the full use of the ebooks that you purchase. That is not "piracy".

Read between the lines. There is spoken and unspoken support for a lot more than that, on many forums.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

Read between the lines. There is spoken and unspoken support for a lot more than that, on many forums.

If you see any spoken (or implied) support for piracy on this forum, please report the post to the moderators.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

If you see any spoken (or implied) support for piracy on this forum, please report the post to the moderators.

You may have noticed that I did not single out this forum in my comments.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

Read between the lines.

You can imagine anything you want to "between the lines".

[stonetools]

There are people on THIS forum who have expressed the view that piracy should simply be viewed as a form of advertising for the author. Some clearly feel that piracy is more benign than attempts to reduce piracy.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

You can imagine anything you want to "between the lines".

This seems like a good place to quote my favorite quote about literature ever.

Originally Posted by Vermic

I find myself quite taken with the idea that you can look at a work and just infer the presence of characters who are never mentioned or referenced in the work itself. For example, I hereby assert that one of the major protagonists of Watership Down is John McClane, Bruce Willis' cop hero from Die Hard. Although he never actually makes an in-person appearance in the book, nor do the rabbit characters mention him, nor indeed is he referenced whatsoever in the narration, nonetheless the influence of John McClane from Die Hard can be felt on every page.

Less attentive readers of Richard Adams' great novel may disagree with me. But I would remind them that McClane is very good at hiding.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by stonetools

There are people on THIS forum who have expressed the view that piracy should simply be viewed as a form of advertising for the author. Some clearly feel that piracy is more benign than attempts to reduce piracy.

Well, there you go: If that's not "tacit acceptance," I don't know what is...

EDIT: As it turns out, the survey's #2 most important aspect of ebook selling is "Cost." Makes rather relevant to the thread, no?

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by stonetools

There are people on THIS forum who have expressed the view that piracy should simply be viewed as a form of advertising for the author. Some clearly feel that piracy is more benign than attempts to reduce piracy.

There are even authors, such as Paulo Coelho, who take that view and have even pirated their own books.

It's up to each person to examine their own principles regardless of what they may read.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

If you see any spoken (or implied) support for piracy on this forum, please report the post to the moderators.

There is indeed both stated and oblique support for unauthorized file-sharing of ebooks on Mobileread. There are people who've said they have downloaded books they have in physical form, and will continue to do so; there are people who admit ownership of hundreds (thousands, sometimes) of darknetted ebooks; there are people who've said they stripped the DRM off paid books to give a copy to a relative or friend.

What MR doesn't allow is detailed instructions on how to do those things, not discussion about whether or not they're ethical or legal. Support for the ideas is permissible, as frustrating as it is for some authors.

The ebook-community group at Yahoo is, fwiw, very author/publisher-focused and anti-"piracy", which they seem to define as "more than one reader per purchase." Part of what I like about Mobileread is that I can say "I don't think unauthorized sharing of the text of books is the worst thing that can happen to authors, nor do I believe it will cause the collapse of the publishing industries." And in some people's minds, that translates to "support of piracy."