Hayley Tsukayama urges consumers to be honest with themselves about their reading habits before signing up for Amazon’s new literary service:
Kindle Unlimited is $9.99 per month. So you’ll be paying Amazon, whose chief executive Jeffrey Bezos owns The Washington Post, around $120 per year for the unfettered e-book access. If you’re habitually spending money on more than one book per month, then it’s a service to think about. It has its perks for big book buyers – namely that don’t have to worry about spending money on a book you end up hating.
But, chances are, you aren’t reading more than one book per month. In January, the Pew Internet and American Life Project asked how many books the typical American had read in the past year.
The answer? Five.
Maria Bustillos contends that “it shouldn’t cost a thing to borrow a book”:
For a monthly cost of zero dollars, it is possible to read six million e-texts at the Open Library, right now. On a Kindle, or any other tablet or screen thing. You can borrow up to five titles for two weeks at no cost, and read them in-browser or in any of several other formats (not all titles are supported in all formats, but most offer at least a couple): PDF, .mobi, Kindle or ePub (you’ll need to download the Bluefire Reader—for free—in order to read ePub format on Kindle.) I currently have on loan Alan Moore’s Watchmen, Original Sin by P.D. James, and The Dead Zone by Stephen King.
Alison Griswold concentrates on the business angle:
Kindle Unlimited will add a new layer of complexity to negotiations between Amazon and publishers. So far, it seems that most of the big-name publishers haven’t agreed to let their titles onto the subscription platform. Books published by HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster aren’t offered and those from Penguin Random House are notably absent. Amazon has not said how authors and publishers will be paid for participating in Kindle Unlimited, but it’s unlikely that the models currently used for e-book sales through its store will do the trick.
Brian Heater is concerned that writers like him will get screwed:
We’ve all heard the horror stories of the fractions of cents being doled out by Spotify, with the justification that many musicians make their mint touring anyway. For one thing, that’s hardly a universal and for another, where’s the author’s analog to touring? Unless you’re, say, Hillary Clinton pulling in $200,000 per speaking engagement, no one’s paying big bucks to watch you read. You’re there to sell more books.
The other justification for music-streaming services is the notion that people who really love a record will go out and buy it. Perhaps I’ve just become too immersed in the world of e-books too quickly, but I’m having difficulty imagining a scenario in which I run out and buy a hard copy of a book after reading the electronic version. It certainly hasn’t happened to me yet – I also haven’t found myself going back and re-reading too many e-books to this point.
Joshua Gans fears that Amazon’s new service will discourage the creation of long books:
Amazon’s payment to authors is similar to its payment to them for the Kindle Owner’s Lending Library. There is a fund (amount = F) that is set monthly by Amazon. If there are a certain number of books downloaded that month (N) and your book is downloaded n times, you receive (n/N)*F in payments that month. That’s for lending. For books under the Unlimited plan, they have to be at least 10% ‘read’ (on the assumption that flipping 10% of the pages is the same as reading them). And so your share is based on how often your book is minimally read. Basically, people can try before they buy with their attention.
Now this plan isn’t all rosy because while it rewards books that are readable, it does so asymmetrically. For instance, Piketty’s recent book has 696 pages whereas mine most recent one has 93. Suffice it to say, Piketty will receive the same payment for another book read this month beyond 70 pages as I would get for 10. That strikes me as amiss.
Konnikova, meanwhile, looks at the impact digital devices have on the reading experience:
When Ziming Liu, a professor at San Jose State University whose research centers on digital reading and the use of e-books, conducted a review of studies that compared print and digital reading experiences, supplementing their conclusions with his own research, he found that several things had changed. On screen, people tended to browse and scan, to look for keywords, and to read in a less linear, more selective fashion. On the page, they tended to concentrate more on following the text. Skimming, Liu concluded, had become the new reading: the more we read online, the more likely we were to move quickly, without stopping to ponder any one thought.
The online world, too, tends to exhaust our resources more quickly than the page. We become tired from the constant need to filter out hyperlinks and possible distractions. And our eyes themselves may grow fatigued from the constantly shifting screens, layouts, colors, and contrasts, an effect that holds for e-readers as well as computers.
The Dish 