Oh, the MSM. Randall Stross‘s New York Times column gripes about Freeload Press‘s current use of unreflowable PDF. And yet Stross doesn’t name the “improved software that can automatically adjust the text so it is more legible.” It’s OSoft‘s dotReader, and maybe he and a few others will notice after a mention in my eBabel article in a well-known publication. Stay tuned. Not only did Stross miss out on the name of the software, but also on dotReader’s interactive nature—a potential boon to academia, especially distance education.
Less than totally sensitive to students’ budgets, Stross disses ad-supported books of the Freeload variety. College students aren’t dummies. It’s not as if they’re K-12 kids forced to watch fast-food ads on Channel One, a genuine outrage that does bother me. Tellingly, Stross’s article fails to quote one student or to distinguish sufficiently between the PDF and the free-textbook issues. We’re talking about not just free books but also $100 books knocked down to $39. Here, millions of students are used to free and low-cost information online; can’t the book world ever catch up? Instead of writing a formulaic condemnation of advertising in books, Stross should accept the inevitability of it and push for ads to be done right. No prob, Randy—we understand. You’re a traditionalist on other matters, too.
Detail: Freeload says that following an AP story, the phone was ringing off the hook with expressions of interest from publishers and advertisers. Just wait until Freeload moves beyond PDF.
Related: Help NYT columnist Randy Stross beef up his personal Web site––via your friendly suggestions. Trouble is, he wrote a charming letter, then ignored the TeleBlog’s free and heartfelt advice. Shouldn’t a biographer—one critical of the anonymity of Wikipedia authors—say a little more about himself on the Net?
Also of interest (added Aug. 28): Slashdot discussion–with many participants being anti-e-book, not just anti-ad. It’s a shame that so many people associate e-books with the PDF format.
For those late to the TeleBlog: I’m among the ringleaders of the OpenReader standard, and dotReader will be the first program to read our format.
One of the problems with ad-supported textbooks is the age gap between the professors who make the decisions and the students who would use them. I imagine many professors would find it difficult to believe that members of the younger generation don’t really pay attention to ads– even the most obnoxious ones that force you to click “close” before you can continue reading. And certainly, I don’t imagine anyone would mistake an ad in a textbook for their university’s endorsement of that product.
Well put, Quinn. Even Baby Boomers are great at tuning out irrelevant ads.
As for relevant ones, even they aren’t going to be a threat in the dotReader version of the Freeload service. Students won’t see the ads except when moving to a new chapter, and even then the advertising will be in just one corner.
Methinks that if some of the professors faced the students’ financial challenges, they would be more receptive to ad-supported books.
Thanks,
David
(With a reminder that Quinn, a much-cherished contributor to the TeleBlog, is the daughter of OSoft CEO Mark Carey, developer of dotReader)
Stross condemns advertisements in textbooks and gives the following précis of his objection:
Perhaps. But, why doesn’t Stross lead an uprising against student newspapers that are the intellectual life-blood of a campus. These broadsheets are the central domain for discourse concerning the lively debates entwining scholarly living. Perhaps not; but they do give the results of important Beer Pong tournaments. Stross should be outraged because this fundamental channel of communication to a “captive student audience” has long been subverted by paid propagandistic messages for local shops and eateries.
School yearbooks should also be excoriated by Stross. These documents have been created annually for many decades, and are an essential vehicle for student reminiscence. Yet, they are riddled with advertisements targeted at a “captive student audience”. Jewelers, banks, bookstores, hotels and other establishments purchase ads in these tomes. Such nefarious messages as “Good Luck to the Class of 2006” are inescapably branded on the pages.
There is also something very peculiar about the form of textbook captivity described in the New York Times article. The jailer somehow forgot to padlock the dank and forlorn jail cell.
So, the use of an advertisement supported textbook is not mandatory; instead, it is another available option, and the alternative ad-free price seems to be a fine bargain. “Get Out of Jail Free” cards have never been obtainable more cheaply [1].
Stross recognizes that the escalation in textbook prices is a problem, and he appears to offer a “real-world Solution to Demonstration Problem”. E-textbooks will be offered at reduced prices by major vendors such as McGraw-Hill and Pearson. They will be offered only via a subscription “which means that a student buys access for a defined period, like a semester.” This will surely simplify student lives. They will not have to consult old textbooks to refresh memories, gather facts, and re-illuminate ideas. They will not be able to do so when the short subscription elapses. However, they can just rely on fact-free sloppy reasoning as if they were writing a New York Times opinion column.
[1] Yes, I admit it. This is a subliminal ad for Parker Brothers “Monopoly” game. I needed the extra cash.
[End humor mode] Stross articulates some reasonable points, but I hope that experiments with advertising continue. If an inexpensive ad-free version of a textbook is available in print and electronic form then I think that his primary objection is deflected.
Yes, Garson, I love the idea of vanishing books. What a bargain (sarcasm alert). Oh, shades of Sony’s original biz plan for the Librie. I don’t object to low-cost rentals, but somehow the cost-benefit ratio for the studetns is not what one would expect with the “subscription plan.” Seriously, that’s a great reply to Stross. What’s more, I agree with your rec re affordable ad-free versions. In fact, yesterday, I made a similar suggestion to Freeload Press, and so far Tom seems pretty open-minded. Thanks. David