Notable Articles and The Future of the Book

Bandaids for Broken Book Sections

By posted at 6:28 pm on April 24, 2007 5

It’s no secret that newspaper book sections are endangered. Earlier this month, the Atlanta Journal Constitution eliminated its book editor position, placing the fate of the paper’s well regarded book section in question. Many are assuming the worst, that the newspaper will eliminate the section entirely. There’s even a petition to protect the AJC book review.

With newspapers increasingly under fire from investors as once robust profit margins sag due to unprecedented competition from the Web and other forms of media and entertainment, many of these companies are looking to trim their operations in order to cut down on the costs of newsprint and personnel. Viewed in this light, book sections are dead weight.

The problem is that the book section business model is broken. As The Wall Street Journal reported (sub. req.) last month, publishers, the natural advertisers for book sections, don’t spend much on ads because they find the ads to be too expensive or ineffective. This fact puts book sections at a big disadvantage as compared to other parts of the newspaper, all of which must pull their weight. Business sections, for example, do well because the financial profile of their readers inspires a willingness among advertisers to spend big bucks to reach them.

The broken business model of book sections has led a number of newspapers to take drastic steps. To this end, the LA Times recently unveiled a combined books/opinion section. The Chicago Tribune, the LA Times’ sister paper, has taken a different tack, announcing that it will move its book section from Sunday to Saturday. The Tribune says that this move will “usher in a new era of the Tribune’s coverage of books, expanding our coverage of books, ideas and the written word throughout the newspaper and across the week.” In addition, “moving the section to Saturday will separate it from the Sunday newspaper, which already is bursting at the seams with essential reading, and make a prominent place for it on a new day of the week.” This is all well and good – and certainly better than eliminating the book section altogether – but as the Chicago Reader noted over a year ago, when the book section switch was originally floated, “Saturday’s press run is some 400,000 copies smaller than Sunday’s. The annual savings in newsprint alone would reach half a million dollars.” When the Tribune realized that stuffing an extra section into the Saturday paper would require them to pay their distributors more, they backed off, and converted the section to tabloid format, another newsprint saver. Seventeen months later, the paper appears to have realized that a switch to Saturday makes financial sense after all.

Ultimately, however, none of these measures will be satisfying to book section readers, and the fact is, except perhaps at the New York Times, there is little future for book sections showing up with our Sunday papers. The future of newspapers isn’t in paper, and the same is doubly so for book sections.

I’ve been surprised that the many blogs that have decried the disappearance of book sections are the same ones that point out the obsolescence of newspapers – particularly their cultural coverage – in the face of a wealth of online alternatives. If our newspapers are going to be obsolete, our book sections will become obsolete as well. The tricky solution to all of this, of course, is the very medium that continues to beguile newspapers: online. There are still challenges here – as yet online ads don’t pay nearly as well as print – but as book blogs have in some respects shown, there is a big audience for online book coverage, and online allows the discussion of books to break out of the “review” mold that may be contributing to the decline in the viability of newspaper book sections. The important thing to remember, I think, is that the disappearance of book sections isn’t a book section problem, it’s a newspaper industry problem, and the solution to book section woes will come with the solutions to the larger newspaper industry problems.





Share this article

More from the Millions

5 Responses to “Bandaids for Broken Book Sections”

  1. Chuck Leddy
    at 6:30 am on April 25, 2007

    This is a fascinating post, filled with great (if worrisome) insights about trends in the media. For me, as a book lover (and book critic) who reads newspapers, magazines, blogs, and books, the trend toward shrinking book coverage in newspapers is deeply troubling. I do not think shrinking book coverage in newspapers is necessarily good for blogs, nor do I think the growth of blogging is necessarily bad for the MSM. This is not, in my view, an "either/or" situation, but perhaps better viewed as "both/and." Book lovers everywhere should act collectively to defend literary culture wherever & whenever it's under assault. The post makes a very strong (and elegantly argued) case that the economic model for book sections may indeed be broken, but that doesn't mean we can't fight against diminishing books coverage. Ultimately, the sqeaky wheel gets the grease, and I'd like book lovers to start squeaking so loudly that those who would eliminate book coverage will think twice. Thanks for highlighting these important issues, and please keep this crucial cultural conversation going.

  2. Sean Ferrell
    at 7:54 am on April 25, 2007

    I agree that the problem is the shrinking sales of newspapers. It's the shift in how people gather information, not whether they wish to gather information. The problem is how to generate revenue while consumers continue to find more and more ways to NOT watch (or even see) the ads.

  3. Mrs. Millions
    at 10:34 am on April 27, 2007

    I bet that business was boosted when Barnes & Noble added Starbucks to their stores. Other bookstores followed suit, and the interior look and feel of bookstores changed to accommodate the expanded consumer base. Maybe there's a solution like this to the disappearance of the book review from print journalism: something more multidisciplinary that's ultimately farther reaching.

  4. Laurie
    at 7:54 pm on April 29, 2007

    The irony here for me is that the AJC is the big paper in my region, but I only learned of Teresa Weaver's layoff via Max's blog, weeks after it was announced. Weaver's focus on regional subjects gave the paper a greater depth regarding issues affecting Georgians. Her loss is a loss to the paper's overall coverage and effectiveness. Will publishers shrink even further from sending authors our way now, or will they push more for regional appearances and/or online chats? Will bookstores come to the "rescue" and try to partner with newspapers for special "book review" sections? Ack.

  5. Richard
    at 2:22 pm on April 30, 2007

    Signing the NBCC petition will surely bring back big book review sections at the AJC (who knew the American Jewish Congress was so literary? go know!).

    But while you're at it, people, please also sign my petition to Fox to bring back "The O.C."! Thanks!

Post a Response

Comments with unrelated links will be deleted. If you'd like to reach our readers, consider buying an advertisement instead.

Anonymous and pseudonymous comments that do not add to the conversation will be deleted at our discretion.