Google Print: A Numbers Game

The following post is written by Andrew Grabois who worked with me at Bowker and has (among other things) compiled bibliographic stats out of the Books In Print database for a number of years. His contact details are at the bottom of this article.


On February 6th, Google announced that the Princeton University library system agreed to participate in their Book Search Library Project. According to the announcement, Princeton and Google will identify one million works in the public domain for digitization. This follows the January 19th announcement that the University of Texas libraries, the fifth largest library in the U.S., also climbed on board the Library Project. Very quietly, the number of major research libraries participating in the project has more than doubled to twelve in the last two years. The seven new libraries will add millions of printed items to the tens of millions already held by the original five, and more fuel to the legal fire surrounding Google’s plan to scan library holdings and make the full texts searchable on the web.

The public discussion has been mostly one-sided, with Google supporters trying to hold the high moral ground. Their basic argument goes something like this: The universe of published works in the U.S. consists of some 32 million books. They argue that while 80 percent of these books were published after 1923, and, therefore, potentially protected by copyright, only 3 million of them are still in-print and available for sale. As a result, mountains of books have been unnecessarily consigned to obscurity.

No one has yet challenged the basic assumptions supporting this argument. Perhaps they’ve been scared off by Google’s reputation for creating clever algorithms that “organize the world’s information”. This one, though, doesn’t stand up to serious scrutiny.

The figures used by supporters of the Library Project come from a 2005 study undertaken by the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC), the largest consortium of libraries in the U.S. According to the OCLC study, its 20,000 member libraries hold 31,923,000 print books; the original five research libraries participating in the Google library scanning project hold over 18 million.

OCLC did not actually count physical books. They searched their massive database of one billion library holdings and isolated 55 million catalog records describing “language-based monographs”. This was further refined (eliminating duplicates) to 32 million “unique manifestations”, not including government publications, theses and dissertations. The reality of library classification, however, is such that “monographs” often include things like pamphlets, unbound documents, reports, manuals, and ephemera that we don’t usually think of as commercially published books.

The notion that 32 million U.S. published books languish on library shelves is absurd. Just do the math. That works out to more than 80,000 new books published every year since the first English settlement in Jamestown in 1607. Historical book production figures clearly show that the 80,000-threshold was not crossed until the 1980’s, after hovering around 10,000 for fifty years between 1910 to1958. The OCLC study showed, moreover, that member libraries added a staggering 17 million items (half of all print collections) since 1980. That averages out to 680,000 new print items acquired every year for 25 years, or more than the combined national outputs of the U.S., U.K., China, and Japan in 2004.

Not only will Google have to sift through printed collections to identify books, and then determine if they are in the public domain, but they will also have to separate out those published in the U.S. (assuming that their priority is scanning U.S.-based English-language books) from the sea of books published elsewhere. The OCLC study clearly showed that most printed materials held by U.S. libraries were not published in the U.S. The study counted more than 400 languages system-wide, and more than 3 million print materials published in French and German alone in the original Google Five. English-language print materials accounted for only 52% of holdings system-wide, and 49% in the Google Five. Since more than a few works were probably published in the United Kingdom, the total number of English-language books published in the U.S. will constitute less than half of all print collections, both system-wide and in Google libraries.

So how many U.S.-published books are there in our libraries? Annual book production figures show that some 4 million books have been published in the 125 years since figures were regularly compiled in 1880. If, very conservatively, we add an additional 1.5 million books to cover the pre-1880 years, and another 1.5 million to cover books published after 1880 that might have been missed, we get a much more realistic total of 7 million.

Using the lower baseline for published books tells a very different story than the dark one (that the universe of books consists of works that are out-of-print, in the public domain, or “orphaned” in copyright limbo) told by Google and their supporters. With some 3 million U.S. books in print, the inconvenient truth here is that 40% of all books ever published in the U.S. could still be protected by copyright. That would appear to jive with the OCLC finding that 75% of print items held by U.S. libraries were published after 1945, and 50% after 1974.

If we’re going to have a debate that may end up rewriting copyright law, let’s have one based on facts, not wishful thinking.


Andrew Grabois is a consultant to the publishing industry. He has compiled U.S. book production statistics since 1999. He can be reached at the following email address: agrabois@yahoo.com

Clarification update from Andrew: My post is not intended to be a criticism of the OCLC study ("Anatomy of Aggregate Collections: The Example of Google Print for Libraries") by Brian Lavoie et al, which is a valuable and timely look at print collections held by OCLC member libraries. What I am attempting to do here is point out how friends of the Google library project have misinterpreted the paper and cherry-picked findings and conclusions out of context to support their arguments.


Related articles:
Google Book Project (3/6/07)
Qualified Metadata (2/22/07)

Google Book Project

Thomas Rudin the associate general council for Microsoft lambasted Google’s approach to copyright protection characterizing it a ‘cavalier’ in comments delivered at the Association of American Publishers conference in New York. Those of us in publishing have a first hand understanding of this opinion and other segments of media are rapidly coming to a realization that even obvious content ownership isn’t enough to preclude Google from adopting and more importantly making money off content under copyright. Google is probably the only company that was willing to take the significant legal risks associated with the purchase of YouTube for example.

Publishers have elected to sue Google to protect their content rights and the content rights of their authors. At the same time, publishers have engaged with Google in participation in the Google Scholar program. Here publishers are equal partners and (I assume) negotiations for the acquisition of content by Google was negotiated in good faith and the results have been good to great for both parties. (Springer, Cambridge University). It is also no bad thing that Google’s content (digitization) programs have spurned other similar content initiatives particularly those of some of the larger trade and academic publishers.

The continued area of friction is the digitization project that Google initiated to scan all the books in as many libraries willing to participate. This is where publishers got upset. They were not consulted nor asked permission, they cannot approve the quality of the scanning, they will not participate in any revenue generated and they can not take for granted that the availability of the scanned book will not undercut any potential revenues they may generate on their own. The books in question are the majority of those published after 1925 or so (It's actually 1923: thanks to Shatzkin for noticing my error) and which are still likely to be under copyright protection of some sort.

Having said that, lets get one thing straight; having all books which exist in library stacks (or deep storage) available in electronic form so that they can be indexed, searched, reassembled, found at all and generally resourced in an easy way is a good thing and an important step forward and opportunity for libraries and library patrons. Ideally, it would lead to one platform (network) providing equal access to high quality, indexed e-book content which any library patron would be able to access via their local library. Sadly, while the vision is still viable the execution represented by the Google library program is not going to get us there.

Setting aside the copyright issue, the Google library program has been going on now for approximately 24mths and results and feedback is starting to show that the reality of the program is not living up to its promise. According to this post from Tim O’Reilly, the scans are not of high quality and importantly are not sufficient to support academic research. Assuming this is universally true (?), the program represents a fantastic opportunity lost for patrons, libraries and Google. BowerBird via O’Reilly states:

umichigan is putting up the o.c.r. from its google scans, for the public-domain books anyway, so the other search engines will be able to scrape that text with ease. what you will find, though, if you look at it (for even as little as a minute or two) is that the quality is so inferior it's almost worthless

Could Google suffer more embarrassment as disillusion grows over the program – perhaps, but I doubt it will force them to rethink their methodology. It would represent a huge act of humility for Google to ‘return to the table’ with publishers and libraries to work with them to rethink the project with the intention of agreeing to the copyright issues, and agreeing a better way to process and tag the content. To suggest that they become less a content repository and more a navigator or ‘switchboard’ which is how O’Reilly phases it is beyond expectation; however, were they to change course in this way they would immediately reap benefits with all segments of the publishing and library communities. O’Reilly – a strong supporter of the Google program – believes the search engines (Google, Yahoo, Others) will ‘lose’ if they continue to create content repositories that are not ‘open’.

Ironically, the lawsuit by the AAP could actually have a beneficial impact on the process of digitization. As some have noted, we may have underestimated the difficultly in finding relevant materials and resources once there is more content to search (this assuming full text is available for search). Initiatives are underway particularly by Library of Congress to address the bibliographic (metadata) requirements of a world with lots more content and perhaps the results of some of these bibliographic activities will result in a better approach to digitization of the more recent content (post 1923). Regrettably, some believe that since there may be only one opportunity to scan the materials in libraries that we may have lost the only opportunity to make these (older) materials accessible to users in an easy way.


Tomorrow, just what is the universe of titles in the post 1923 ‘bucket’? The supporters of the Google project speak about a universe of 30million books but deeper analysis suggests the number is wildly exaggerated.

Shaffer Announced as Chairman of Knovel

Dave Shaffer (and old boss of mine) has been named as Chairman of the Board of Knovel. Knovel is an information publishing company that focuses on Science and Engineering. The company is in the process of developing an integrated platform of information products and integration tools that enable users to integrate their use of Knovel products into their daily workflow. This is little different than what most information publishers are trying to do.

From the press release:

Chris Forbes, CEO of Knovel said: "David brings Knovel years ofexperience in managing companies that have successfully delivered highvalue information and productivity solutions to end users. We look forwardto his guidance as Knovel takes the next steps to dominate the engineeringinformation market." David Shaffer continued: "I am excited to join acompany that is a passionate leader in driving value for end users in thislarge and important market. This new role is a natural extension of mycareer at Thomson."

Bear Sterns Media Conference

For those interested in the publishing company participants for the current (Mon/Thur) Bear Sterns media conference at the Breakers in Palm Beach here is the approximate schedule:

Monday 3/5
Moodys - 10am. Webinar
Meridith - 11.00am. Webinar
CBS - 12.20pm. Webinar
Thomson - 2.40pm. Webinar
McGraw Hill - 3.20pm. Webinar

Tuesday 3/6
NYTimes - 9.25am. Webinar
Primedia - 10:05am Webinar
Dow Jones - 10:40am Webinar
Scripps - 2:40om Webinar

Reader's Digest Closes Sale

RD announced over the weekend that they had closed the sale of the company to Ripplewood Holdings and announced that Mary Berner has been appointed President and CEO of the company. She had previously been at Conde Nast and Fairchild.

Press Releases: Berner, Deal

Social BookMarking

Many of you are more than familiar with Librarything and the similar sites that enable cataloging of book titles with tags that are meaningful and useful to the user. Tucked away in the 'Your Money' section of The NY Times was another puff piece about how great Librarything is for people like us who like books and reading. The likely origin of this article is a blog post by Tim at Librarything which looked at the comparison between tags of books at LT and tags of books on Amazon.com.

Amazon visitors have not taken to tagging Amazon's books in significant numbers. With thousands of times the traffic, Amazon produced a tenth as many tags as LibraryThing. What's going on?

He goes on to talk about the power of numbers that inevitably feeds on itself; as more people tag more people find it useful which leads to a larger community. Passion also plays a part because the overwhelming number of active 'taggers' also have more books. Those that have less than 200 titles rarely tag books. (Since fees kick in over this number the users are also more financially committed to librarything).

Critical mass is important, even if we can't pinpoint the line. Ten tags are never enough; a thousand almost always is. Unfortunately, Amazon's low numbers translate into a broader failure to reach critical mass. With ten times as many tags overall, LibraryThing has fifteen times as many books with 100 tags, and 35 times as many with over 200 tags.

It is a very interesting article on the power of community and worth a read.

Lorcan Dempsey suggests these types of sites also represent examples of the 'Network effect':

Regular readers of this blog will not be surprised to hear me say that they also highlight a structural issue for libraries, how to provide services at the network level. These new services are network level services. They are aimed at the general user, not an audience circumscribed by region, or funding or institution. And, additionally, they provide an integrated service, moving the user quickly through whatever steps are needed to complete a task.

The other component of interest to me is that sites like librarything are becoming sources of viable bibliographic information and indeed the NY times article suggests that Librarything maybe selling or licensing some of its tagging data:

For example, he is in the process of selling some of his recommendations data, which is based in part on tagging statistics, to other sites that sell books and book information.

At Bowker one of our most important and costly editorial tasks was to assign subject classification to titles so that they could be found either in our own products or in the products of our customers. With well over 200,000 titles per year this is an expensive excercise and while it can be automated (and was) the process suffers from obvious limitations. Firstly, the subject classification methodology is quite rigid and is not always intuitive. Secondly, subjects change over time and books previously categorized could benefit from additional or changed subjects. Thirdly, the application of subjects is subjective and can pose a limitation on the subjects applied to the title. A subject expert wants to be as accurate as possible in applying the subject classification for relevancy and integrity. In BooksinPrint, we had an average of slightly more than two subjects per title over approximately five million records. Many had more and a few had more than 15 but the average was two. Many users of Librarything, myself included, have placed more than two tags against most titles.

The ability of a community to supply a range of subjects that reflect the work, what's important about the book and what becomes important in the wider world may provide a vast addition to traditional bibliographic database work. I believe the social network applications and the structured approaches will work in concert but increasingly it is the social aspect that needs to be actively solicited for inclusion into the traditional bibliographic databases.

Self-Serving List Of Best Blog

Eoin Purcell has been kind enough to include me on his list of best Blogs. I hope I can keep up with the expectations. The list was also nicely picked up by Richard Charkin. I owe someone a Guinness....

Check Prices and Get Recommendations by Phone

If you are like me then you often find yourself in a bookstore looking at a selection of books wondering which to buy. Sure you have a list but perhaps the list is slightly out of date and doesn't reflect the most recent releases, or maybe you are in the basement of the Strand innundated with potentially fantastic books but confused for choice.

This little application enables you to access pricing information (if you see second hand titles at a yard sale that you think you can sell on Alibris) and customer recommedations using your phone. It iwll be even better if you could scan the bar code.

Rowling Suing EBAY

News from The Times via Richard Charkin that J.K. Rowling has initiated a suit against Ebay in India for selling pirated copies of her work. From The Times article:

Neil Blair, Rowling’s legal adviser at the Christopher Little Literary Agency, said that she welcomed the court order. “Over the years eBay has appeared to be unwilling to control sellers on their site offering pirated or forged Harry Potter items for sale to innocent fans,” he said. “We have asked eBay on numerous occasions to assist by taking preventative steps to avoid these sales – steps that we are aware they can introduce. As these requests were not heeded we had no choice but to seek judicial intervention.

Ebay has played the innocent in other similar cases - Tiffany in NYC and Dior in Paris - suggesting that it isn't partical for them to monitor every sale to ensure that the goods are legitmate. They just don't want to do the work.

Harlequin (Torstar) Reports

Things aren't going well for the Torstar Group publisher of The Toronto Star newspaper and owner of Harlequin Books. Reuters eloquently states that profit has slumped and attribute this to the decline in fortunes at The Star and also to restructuring charges. Things don't look too good at Harlequin either but results look worse than they may be because of exchange rate issues.

On full year revenue:

Book Publishing revenue was $471.8 million in 2006, down $49.3 million from $521.1 million in 2005. Underlying revenue growth of $9.4 million was more than offset by a $30.0 million decline from the strengthening of the Canadian dollar during the year and $28.7 million from lower gains on U.S. dollar hedges year over year.

and on Operating Profit:

Book Publishing reported operating profit was $56.3 million in 2006, down $39.1 million from $95.4 million in 2005. Underlying operating profit was down only $2.5 million in the year while the strengthening Canadian dollar decreased profits by $7.9 million and lower gains on the U.S. dollar hedges decreased profits by $28.7 million year over year. Underlying results were up for North America Retail and Overseas but were more than offset by lower North America Direct-To-Consumer results.

It is difficult to discern the true impact here as there may have been some currency impact in the operating profit in 2005. Nevertheless, taking the numbers at face value, underlying revenues were up $9.4mm versus 2005 but operating profit was down $2.5mm.

Here is the short version and the long version of the press releases.

Further detail on the publishing units performance is summarized as follows:

• North America Retail increased book sales in 2006 after stabilizing in 2005. Significant efficiency improvements were made to the series business in 2006 as fewer books were printed and distributed and more books were sold.
• The North America Direct-To-Consumer revenue decline in 2006 was due to both fewer shipments of a children’s direct-to-home continuity program and from shipping disruptions experienced early in the year associated with the bankruptcy of a key supplier. Improved sales through the Internet channel partially offset this decline.
• Overseas markets had mixed results in 2006 with improvements in the United Kingdom and the Nordic Group offset by lower results in Germany. Brazil, a joint venture launched in 2005, showed improvement in 2006 selling more books and making progress towards break-even.

As far as an outlook for the Harlequin business the company says the following:

• The outlook for 2007 is for stability. Harlequin has stabilized the total number of books sold over the past three years despite difficult trends in its direct-to-consumer operations.
• Investment will continue in innovation and new products including digital initiatives in 2007.
• Cost savings of approximately $3.0 million are expected from the restructuring undertaken in late 2006.
• Harlequin will continue to be subject to the impact of changes in the value of the Canadian dollar relative to the U.S. dollar and other currencies.

Regretably, that is hardly a glowing endorsement and one would hope that the business is able to do much better during 2007 than the above statement seems to indicate. I have said it before this brand, is so strong I can't understand why they are having so much difficulty: perhaps it's the owner

Wolters Kluwer Posts Full Year

Dutch publisher Wolters Kluwer posted a top line increase of 9% (0rganic growth of 3%) and an EBITA increase of 16% to €618million for the full year.

Following is are highlights from the company press release:

• Revenues increased 9% to €3,693 million (2005: €3,374 million)
• Organic revenue growth of 3%, in line with full-year outlook
• Ordinary EBITA increased 16% to €618 million (2005: €533 million)
• Ordinary EBITA margin of 17% (2005: 16%)
• Investment in product development reached €272 million (an increase of 9% over 2005)
• Structural cost savings of €128 million (an increase of 28% over 2005)
• Strong free cash flow of €443 million (2005: €351 million)
• Ordinary diluted EPS increased 16% to €1.23 (an increase of 15% at constant currencies)
• Selective acquisitions to strengthen leading positions and enter high-growth adjacent markets

Fourth-Quarter 2006:

• Revenues increased 8% to €1,003 million (2005: €932 million)
• Organic revenue growth of 6% (2005: 3%) Ordinary EBITA increased 17% to €173 million (2005: €148 million)
• Ordinary EBITA margin of 17% (2005: 16%)
• Investment in product development reached €74 million (an increase of 7% over same period 2005)
• Structural cost savings of €37 million (an increase of 32% over same period 2005)
• Strong free cash flow of €204 million (2005: €208 million)
• Ordinary diluted EPS increased 9% to €0.34 (an increase of 15% at constant currencies)

A more detailed review is in the press release. Most of the business units are doing OK with Corporate and Financial Services showing the largest percentage revenue growth. Of Education they say the following:

Organic revenue growth of 2% with particularly strong performance in the United Kingdom following new product introductions. The review of strategic alternatives for Education announced in 2006 is expected to be completed in the first half of 2007.

The company has announced that this group may be sold and the statement seems to indicate that will be completed by the middle of the year.

The company is looking to build on the gains they have made over the past two years to migrate revenue to online, attack their cost structure and reinvigorate product development. Margin improvement was seem 2006 vs 2007 - of 1.0pt - but they are suggesting their EBITA margin will grow from 17% to closer to 20% which is significant progress.

Another Day another Deal: Springer Science

According to sources Springer Science has hired Goldman Sachs and others to prepare the company for an IPO valued at over 2.0bill Euros. Springer Science is the result of a prior combination of Bertelsmann Springer and Kluwer Academic. The company publishes of over 1400 journals and 5000 academic book titles per year. The main subject areas for both are science, medical and technology.

Simon & Schuster Strong Finish

CBS reported fourth quarter and and full year numbers this morning with the publishing unit (Simon & Schuster) up 6% over last year and as a result helping to cover some of the decline in radio at CBS.

The publishing unit revenues were $252.5 and $807mm for the quarter and year respectively and operating profit was $38.9 and $78.0mm. A full year operating margin of just short of 10% is good going in the consumer market and is virtually unchanged from last years margin performance. Penguin reported yesterday (with Pearson) and their operating marging was slightly lower than S&S at 7.8% on higher sales.

Here is more detail from the CBS press release:

For the quarter, Publishing revenues increased 7% to $252.5 million from $237.0
million, reflecting sales from top-selling fourth quarter 2006 titles, including YOU: On a Diet by Michael F. Roizen and Mehmet C. Oz, Lisey's Story by Stephen King and Joy of Cooking: 75th Anniversary Editionby Irma S. Rombauer, Marion Rombauer Becker and Ethan Becker. OIBDA increased 8% to $38.9 million from $36.1 million, and operating income increased 7% to $36.3 million from $33.9 million, reflecting the revenue increase partially offset by an increase in bad debt
expense.

For the year, Publishing revenues increased 6% to $807.0 million from $763.6 million in 2005 due to sales of top-selling titles as well as higher distribution fee income. OIBDA increased 5% to $78.0 million and operating income increased 4% to $68.5 million, reflecting the revenue increase partially offset by higher expenses, primarily resulting from an increase in bad debt expense and higher production, employee-related and selling and marketing costs. Publishing results included stock-based compensation of$1.9 million and $.5 million for 2006 and 2005, respectively.

Sounds like the AMS situation had some impact but on the other hand it looks like the bonus' this year were relatively better than last year.

Rumor Mill and Thomson Learning

An interesting search string appeared in my site stats a few days ago: "Bertelsmann and Thomson Learning." What could that mean - if anything? Bertelsmann's foray into educational publishing could be quite interesting and given their achievements in the US with Random House it would be something that the other educational publishers would want to monitor closely. The company doesn't have quite the cash cushion that they had before they were forced to buy out a minor partner last year; however, it seems highly unlikely that if they wanted to make a purchase of this size that they wouldn't be able to find ready suppliers of financing. They recently restructured some of their debt to reduce interest payments and had little difficulty with the offering.

It is all speculation and you have to believe the betting is on pure Private Equity. Bertelsmann is a diversified media company but clearly not adverse to paper based publishing operations and in this case they may be especially interested in the electronic revenue potential that Thomson Learning could offer. Wait and see.

Pearson Post Record Results

Pearson have been cagy all year regarding where they would end up and downplayed the full year impact they expected even after they posted very strong half year numbers. As anticipated they have posted results at the top end of analysts expectations with profits up 19% over last year to 502million pounds. EPS slightly exceeded guidence at 40.2pence. Here is the Reuters release.

In the company's release they pointed to the strong performance of all groups including the education group (both higher ed and k-12) which has been strong all year, FT group ad revenues and Penguin. The Penguin numbers may be at or slightly higher than other consumer publishing companies may be expecting. Here are the highlights from the Pearson release:

Record results. Pearson reports its highest ever operating profits (adjusted operating profit up 15% to £592m), earnings (adjusted eps up 18% to 40.2p) and cash (free cash flow up £2m to £433m).

Sustained growth and market share gains. School sales up 6% and Higher Education sales up 4%, benefiting from leading position in content, assessment and technology; FT advertising revenues up 9%; Penguin sales up 3% despite tough consumer publishing market. Stronger margins and double-digit profit growth in all businesses.

Pearson margin up a percentage point to 13.4%. Education margin up to 14.1% and profits up 12%; FT Group margin up to 17.3% and profits up 18%; Penguin margin up to 7.8% and profits up 22%. Higher returns. Return on invested capital up to 8.0% (from 6.7% in 2005), above Pearson's weighted average cost of capital; dividend increased by 8.5% to 29.3p, the largest increase for a decade.

In their preview of 2007, it is basically more of the same with essentially the same outlook for education that they gave this time last year with growth in the 4-6% range with margin improvement in School and professional. Penguin margins are expected to continue to improve (and at 8% are already quite good for trade) and the FT group is expected to continue to benefit from the reorganization that they have implemented during the past 18mths or so. Margins are expected to improve there.

Naturally, there is no word on future acquisitions but growth from acquisitions has been critical to Pearson in growthing top line and margins recently - although underlying growth has been significant as well. Look for Pearson to continue to be active on this front particularly as Thomson Learning and Harcourt will be distracted by their respective divestiture processes.

Deals News: Harcourt, Reed, Riverdeep, Borders, B&N

It was a relatively slow week given all the excitment last week. Thomson are looking for a quick resolution to their Learning disposal; having made everyone wait until mid February for the deal book they now want responses in only a few weeks. It does reflect the fact that they have put some time and preparation into the documents having announced the disposal late last year. Perhaps the same cannot be said for Reed who are looking for a close in July.

In what could be construed as incredibly bad timing Riverdeep's accounting firm Ernst & Young resigned last week because they believed that "professional relationship between us and the company has irretrievably broken down." Too early to tell if this will be significant at all in Riverdeep's acquisition binge but Moody's is suggesting it will review their rating towards the end of March.

Martyn Daniels at the Booksellers Association reminds me of speculation (muted I would suggest) about a merger between B&N and Borders. Personally, nothing seems less likely. I think if B&N were to make any store related acquisition they would buy Chapters in Canada. That is if the government would allow and B&N decide going International would be a good thing.

Ebay Media Marketplace

Some may be aware that Ebay jumped into the advertising media market last year by agreeing to build a marketplace site dedicated to buying and selling media space. It will be a facinating thing to watch since I believe this initiative could have the same impact on media buying as going to electronic settlements (The Big Bang on the LSE) had on the financial markets. That is more transparency, more transactions, higher margins and more effectiveness.

The media buying process is fairly rudimentary, inefficent and process bound. Staffed by under-paid and over worked ad reps/media buyers who cut their teeth in the business by executing media buys the marketplace has been ripe for change for many years. Curiously, it is not the media venues (networks) who are avidly pushing this concept rather it is some high profile and powerful advertisers who see an opportunity to increase their reach and effectiveness while at the same time paying a market driven price for the space.

MediaPost describes what the first version (beta) version of this product will do:

A copy of a document detailing the beta version that's being circulated for review reveals just how detailed and thorough the system that eBay has developed is. The exchange can go in either direction, where a marketer submits an RFP for a network to respond to, or a network posts inventory out for sale.

A buyer's RFP allows it to request that a network offer it a deal based on desired GRPs or budget it has to spend. The buyer can also request preferences, such as a primary and secondary demographic target; length of spots it wants to air; programming genres it is willing to run in; flight dates; and dayparts it would
air in. Requests can even extend to offerings such as product placement,
corollary Web placement or billboards.

It is a little jargony but esentially the system will automate what is currently done via phone, fax and email with several potential 'networks' all at the same time. The media rep has to gather and analyse what is available from the multitude of available space, pick the right mix and then get back on the phone and do the deal. This system has the potential to inventory all available media space, with associated demographic and Gross Rating Point info, potential ad conflicts, etc. and enable a media buyer to create an appropriate plan that meets their goals and budget. Once the 'RFP' has been created by the media buyer they offer it to the market (networks) for negotiation/bidding.

Selected networks could then respond with an offer indicating GRPs and CPMs it
would go with, as well as the number of ad units and other benefits (product
placement, Web presence, etc.) it is willing to offer.

The program is very much in its infancy and will not replace any complex or first run (upfront) media buying that generally require one-to-one negotiation. Nevertheless, a considerable amount of media spending is made day-to-day across a wide array of outlets (scatter) and this Ebay led marketplace has the potential to create significant efficiencies and better ad buys for advertisers.

Pat Sommers

Is apparently out at Sirsi/Dynix which is a shock. You take a company from the brink of disaster and that's the thanks you get. Regretably, I can relate.

The tip came from Laura Dawson who has more details.

WorldCat Registries

The new product initiatives are coming fast and furious at OCLC; I mentioned WorldCat Identies last week and this week we have a WorldCat Registry product for library institutions. I suspect the concept will be extended to other topical areas. In concept, registries combine existing database information resident with OCLC (making data work harder) and wiki-like functionality or social networking. Additionally, bulk data import may also be possible such as USPO change of address information but the end result is a resource for anyone interested in information about (in this case) libraries: their address and opening hours, their IP ranges, a profile of their collection and the products they subscribe to.

There are many other elements and functions which at this early stage will not be populated consistently however, the possibilities exist to create a 'community' site for library information. Registered librarians are able to designate an editor or administrator who can validate information about specific libraries and the idea is to create valuable information that can be used by patrons, sales reps, publishers, and anyone interested in library specific information.

What is great about this is that it is a web product that gets a running start because it is taking information that existed for other purposes and reasons recasts it and creates something new that has both relevance and scale. In other words, there is reason to come to the WorldCat Registry because from day one there is material amounts of data in the product.

More details are available via Lorcan Dempsey's Blog.


Here is a sample screen shot:
Access is currently free but registration is required and for anyone currently subscribing to American Library Directory, this is an interesting alternative to keep track of.


This is the ALD marketing blurb for those who are not familiar with the product:

"This acclaimed reference guide has provided librarians and library users with the most complete, current, and easily accessible information on libraries across North America for over half a century. In this new Web version, subscribers can find and view detailed profiles for more than 35,000 public, academic, special and government libraries, and library-related organizations in the United States, and Canada — including addresses, phone and fax numbers, and e-mail addresses, network participation, expenditures, holdings and special collections, key personnel, special services, and more — over 40 categories of library information in all.Free registered users can view physical address information only."



I think the free WorldCat registry product may already have more information than the free version available from ALD. In the case of the OCLC product the librarian is both customer/user and editor so they become engaged with the product in two ways which can be quite powerful. It will be interesting to see how the social aspects of this product develop and whether we will see a real community of interest(s) develop with the introduction of further technology.

Chick Lit

Personally, I thought all the indignation expressed about Maureen Dowd's recent visit to a bookstore and exclaiming about pink covers was a little much. Here is a slightly more balanced view all the way from Australia.

Disney Wants the Honey Jar Too

Disney (although not the plaintiff) lost a court case to have the rights to the Winnie the Pooh characters returned to the family of AA Milne and illustrator E.H Shepard. Disney and the relatives were seeking to overturn an earlier case that said that Clair Milne could not void an agreement that renewed the license to Stephan Slesinger in 1983. Slesinger obtained the original rights in 1930 and in 1961 passed those rights to Disney in exchange for royalties. The Slesinger family have also been fighting Disney for more than 10 years for unpaid royalties which they estimate could exceed a $1.0billion. According to Reuters, Pooh generated over $6.0billion in retail sales in 2005 alone.

Missing News: NBC

I have commented on this before. The lead on the BBC broadcast news here last night was the battle plan that has been devised for Iran. No such story was mentioned on NBC 30 mins before. I guess it is not that important. BBC had a map showing targets. It's always good to be prepared....

Monday Presidents Day

Somewhat of a holiday here today. Markets are closed, streets are clear and MSNBC can't choose between psycho-analyzing Britneys' coif or ANS's will. And it was a slow weekend in publishing...

I mentioned Worldcat Identities last week and Tim O'Reilly had a nice plug for it as well. He also mentions the idea of some incorporation into wikipedea which has come up in conversation. Adding a resource like Worldcat to wikipedea would aid both authority and functionality. On any particular subject an editor or user has an ability to link to an appropriate and unambiguous data record - in this case a Worldcat Identity - via very simple linking functionality. They will add value to the item they are creating in wikipedea and can be confident in the accuracy and depth of the Worldcat Identity they have linked to.

This video from Librarybites. has been circulating the web for a few days and it is very well done. It comes from Kansas State University and attempts to show how rapidly our relationship with search, content and networking can change. It is about five minutes.

Google has an impressive list of employee benefits which includes inviting authors to speak to employees about their books. They also video the meetings/presentations and they are available to all here. I often wonder why B&N and Borders don't video their author readings....

There is a lot of hype about Second Life and just about everyone is setting up shop there or making some political announcement (that they could make just as easily on Speakers Corner), but is it all over-hyped?. Are there really millions of people populating the site or are there millions like me who tried it once to see what it was all about and have never been back? That and some other comments make this blog post from TeleRead thought provoking for any library(ian) or publisher that is thinking of setting up residence on the site. As he comments:

If libraries decide to invest in SL properties, they may suffer a virtual repeat of the Florida land boom of the 1920s. None other than Electronic Arts, the giant games company, is already bent on competing with SL.

Now don't get me wrong, experimentation is a great thing as is becoming simpatico with the customers/patrons you are trying to service. Just don't loose perspective that's all. Also the following warning is also relevant given the silliness around a recent children's book ban:

The real mainstays of SL at this point are gambling and sex. Don’t libraries and schools have enough problems with American ayatollahs? No prudery here, just practicality. A virtual library should be able to integrate itself well with the rest of its cyberworld, but currently, youth-oriented library areas have to be isolated from SL as a whole.

The European Commission is continuing a policy debate on the scientific publication system. Here is the text of their announcement. No word yet on any outcomes from the meeting last week.

In the context of the beginning of the Seventh Framework Programme, the research Directorate-General has launched a policy debate on the functioning and efficiency of the scientific publication system, understood as the practices, rules and mechanisms defining the process of scientific publication, as well as its exploitation. A first contribution to this debate is the EC-commissioned "Study on the economic and technical evolution of the scientific publication markets in Europe". This Study provides an economic analysis of European scientific publication markets and makes a series of policy recommendations. A public consultation was held from 31 March to 15 June 2006 on the basis of this Study.

An important milestone in the policy debate on the scientific information system is the joint Communication on "Scientific information in the digital age: access, dissemination and preservation" , presented by J. Potočnik, Commissioner for Science and Research, and V. Reding, Commissioner for Information society and media, and adopted in February 2007. This Communication offers an entry point for discussion within the Council of Ministers, at the Member State level, and within funding bodies and intergovernmental research organisations. Issues to be addressed include dissemination and access strategies (e.g. Open Access), publishing business models (e.g. reader-pay, author-pay), and the relation between scientific publication and research excellence. A further impulse was given by a conference hosted by the European Commission on 15-16 February 2007 in Brussels at the Charlemagne building.

No doubt the above is similar to a study the UK Parliament conduct two or three years ago. I wonder if the outcome will be any different.

Sunday Funnies and Giggles

Among the search queries that led searchers to the blog recently were:

"pronunciation Eoin" - This person would no doubt have a problem with "Dun Loughrie" or "Ioan"

"Lindsay Lohan bra size" - which had me stumped I must say, but I subsequently found some spam on one of my old posts.

"What is the city of publication for King Lear" - I think this was my favorite.

"Suicide poems + reasons why" - Not getting this one at all.

The good people from latex.org paid a visit but it was fleeting.

Lastly, Mrs PND is brunette otherwise I would be in trouble for showing this video for a Mercedes Benz ad. You may have seen it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAs8_N_tDoE

Deals: Harcourt, Reed, Riverdeep

The comment to the post yesterday regarding the divestiture of Harcourt from Reed made me recall the time when Reed bought the company in 2000. At the time, as an employee of Reed I think we all rejoiced in the acquisition because for at least the prior two years the company had meandered most notably in its efforts to find a CEO. Crispin Davis was finally appointed in 1999, and started to rapidly fix the company and set a new direction. (Bowker got sold as part of the 'fixing' which was no bad thing for us).

The acquisition signified in a way that 'we were on our way' and that the company was forging ahead and fulfilling a strategic direction. Acquiring Harcourt seemed at the time to be something of a hedge; it was entirely unclear where the journals electronic revenues were going to end up. Elsevier Science was nascent and the journals business generally was getting a lot of flak from the market regarding pricing, archiving and access. The market was in total flux. On the advertising side, the business publications of Cahners (now Reed Business) were also starting to show declines in revenues and this became a major management issue. In this context acquiring Harcourt seemed a strategic attempt to spread revenue risk a little wider.

In news reports over the past day or so some analysts have suggested the acquisition may have been a mistake but this seems doubtful to me. If anything, selling the business is smart business because in today's Reed business it is easier to see where their core strengths are and they are not in education. There is a little confusion (maybe it is me) regarding the original purchase price since some assets were shared between Thomson and Reed. I am not certain if the original purchase of $4.5bill reflects the total or the portion of assets Reed got from the deal. I believe it represents the total since Reed Education has a current book value of $2.6billion. (Reuters) .

The FT reports that Riverdeep are prepared to pay £2.0billion which would make for a tidy profit on the original purchase. (The FT article says the assets purchased were worth $2.0Billion and Reuters says $4.0billion). Analysts suggest the ultimate purchase price will be between £1.8 and 2.2billion and management suggests a sale to be announced towards July.

Reed Elsevier Selling Harcourt Education

Perhaps on reflection this is no surprise as the results at Education had been lagging for sometime. The motivation to sell is similar to that expressed by Thomson Learning in that online and electronic revenues are growing faster and opportunities there are greater than they are in education. Reed Elsevier has significant online revenue at Elsevier (Journals), Lexis Nexis and in Legal & Regulatory (Martindale).

During his analyst presentation Sir Crispin Davis said that Harcourt increasingly differs from the core RE business units in market growth expectations and revenue model and that the opportunities for electronic and online revenues are "less clear". This also comes in the context of a 20% drop in operating profit for the unit.

For the year RE Group revenues were up 6% with 5% from organic growth and operating profit (despite the 20% drop for Harcourt) was up 9% for the 12mths. Here is the analyst presentation. Here is their summary press release.

Davis went on to say that the divestiture would probably occur in the second half of 2007 and that the proceeds would be divested to shareholders. The unit would be expected to sell for over £1.0billion however, the market for large educational assets is a little glutted right now.

Importantly, Harcourt is focused on k-12 so revenues are focused and RE expects some key adoptions during 2007 - for which they have invested pre-pub expense - and if those are won then the company will be more attractive (obviously). They may have some advantage but we will see. Private equity has to be the prime candidate for acquisition.

Here is a Times article.
Here is a local Oxford Mirror article

Interestingly, I can't help thinking that because Thomson and Elsevier compete aggressively in certain areas that RE do not want to loose out if Thomson take their Education Divesture dollars and go after something big that places them either in greater competition with RE or takes off the market a business that RE could also logically acquire. Their stated strategic goals are similar - grow electronic and recurring revenues and provide integration tools for users of their products. Both see the last part of that strategy as vitial because achieving it can raise switching costs for customers and effectively embed the publishers products into the work flows. Once one of these players gets a leg up the market could become hard to crack for the "looser." Despite suggesting they will return the money to shareholders, RE has no reason to do this and watch as a prime asset goes (cheaply) to one of their primary competitors. It may be fun to watch.

WorldCat Identities: Making Data Work Harder

What is cool about this project that OCLC is announcing today is that the data was already in Worldcat and this is a new and different way to view the data. Worldcat is a bibliographic database of over 65million records and 120mm items. It is huge, and represents the data from some 60,000 local library collections. Making data work harder isn't a formal initiative but it should be a mantra any database manager would live by and in this case the results are quite interesting. It is represents the work of the OCLC office of research and principally Thom Hickey (blog) and it will be interesting to see how this initiative evolves and develops over time.

Especially interesting will be whether/if other database providers such as wikipedea or Amazon would value this representation of Worldcat. No word yet on how this would be effected in a formal way but any user can create a url string that creates a search of Worldcat and perhaps the Identities could be searched in the same manner. Lorcan's site (linked to above) enables you to search on 'canned' searches listed (including Kyle Minogue who seems to be a personal favorite) as well as a browse by subject which from a serendipity standpoint is fun to play with.

Here is a sample screenshot:

Rolling Stones Rock n Roll Circus

It was sweeps week on PBS last week which is patent made for TIVO and I happened to note that they were playing a restored version of the Rolling Stones 1968 TV show Rock and Roll Circus. Apparently most of the film of this show was lost soon after performance because some say the Stones were mediocre and The Who were fantastic. It was never broadcast. Others on the show include John and Yoko, Eric Clapton and Taj Mahal. The Who do indeed play a great set and there is also an adhoc super-group (The Dirty Mac) with Clapton, Lennon, Richards and Mitch Mitchell. Later Yoko joins in with an infamous wailing tour-de-force. (Townshend says in an interview on the DVD that this didn't bother him, but thank god for TIVO that's all I can say).

There is more on the DVD than was broadcast on PBS including a longer set from Taj Mahal. He still comes to NYC regularly and I hope to check out a concert the next time he is here. Watching the show inspired me to start reading According to The Rolling Stones published by Chronicle Books. It has been sitting on the shelf for two years gathering dust. So far it is incredibly interesting to learn how they all came together in Ealing and Edith Grove. Curiously, there is virtually nothing in this book about the Circus. (So, here is wikipedia). Maybe there is something to the notion that they thought they were out-done by The Who. I thought The Stones sounded great but I did notice that there seemed to be no interaction at all between the members of the band. Poor Brian was dead 7 mths later.

Tuesday Take-up

It took Books In Print over 130 years to get to 10million books. Here Librarything.com seems to have done it in two years. Of course, the databases are not directly compatible but it is nevertheless quite a powerful statement for croudsourcing and social networking.

Since it is coming into Academy Award season here is a list of popular books that haven't made it onto the screen. The list includes The Catcher in the Rye, Atlas Shrugged and Mein Kampf (Selznick produces and Hitch directs).

The posts on Hitwise are always interesting and here is a recent one on search terms.

From Public Lending Right in the UK is an annual listing of the most popular titles checked out of UK libraries. The winner is a children's writer Jacqueline Wilson.

Titles by the immensely popular children’s writer were lent almost two million
times between July 2005 and June 2006. Wilson’s nearest rivals are the adult
novelists, James Patterson, Josephine Cox, Danielle Steel and Ian Rankin who
each need to clock up at least another half million loans annually before they
can pose a threat to the "queen of library lending".

The article also notes the strength in lending of Dan Brown and J.K. Rowling which is interesting to me given the huge numbers of copies sold through retail, the abundance of second hand copies, continued strength of paper and mass market versions and yet they are still strong through the library. What does that mean?

When Martha Stewart published her first cookbook there were rumors the recipies hadn't been fully tested. I don't know if this was true or malicious however Mrs PND has never cooked a bad meal out of one of the MS books. Along the same lines is a cautionary tale from India. Do not include meat in your recipies.

New Shoes, New Music

Over at The Bookbar Jessica had a post today about shoes which ordinarily wouldn't have caught my attention other that the fact that I just heard about Paulo Nutini who has a song 'New Shoes' and was on the Today show. MRS PND can't seem to get enough of the song and the video. He as on the today show a week ago and she won't erase it from the tivo. The CD is actually pretty good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiXD2eAFxE0

As I understand it, Paulo's mum and dad live over a chip shop. Boy's definitely on his way.

Thomson Learning: Let the Auction Begin

Now that the year end numbers are out of the way, expect to hear more frequent discussion about the sale of the Thomson Learning unit of Thomson. Full year results were summarized by Reuters and the Thomson web site has more detailed information. Once the Learning segment is sold it will be interesting to see where Thomson spends the expected $5.0billion proceeds. It just means more deals to come as the company already has free cash over $1.obillion. They should be able to splurge and we may see them to execute a rights issue if they find something especially expensive (Bloomberg for example).

The Learning segment has been classified under discontinued operations and the overview comments are as follows:

Thomson Learning accounted for the majority of results in Discontinued
operations, with revenues of $672 million in the fourth quarter and $2.4 billion
for the full year of 2006. Thomson Learning’s operating profit was $161
million in the fourth quarter and $383 million for the full year. The
majority of Learning’s results were generated by the higher education, careers
and library reference businesses as well as NETg and Prometric, which were
announced for sale in the fourth quarter of 2006.

In their executive presentation the detailed results for Learning show decent results as compared with industry leader Pearson. Top line gained 5% and Operating Profit of $359MM was 6% better than prior with a very slightly higher operating margin. Pearson which will report at the end of February has consistently grown a 1-2pts better than Thomson over the past five years and their operating margin has steadily improved over the same period. It will be interesting to see the comparison at the end of the month.

It would be a big surprise if Thomson Learning does not go to a private equity buyer; there has been a lot of interest thus far.

Space Oddity

Which was one headline yesterday, but I think the winner for funniest headline was "Dark Side of the Loon" printed by The New York Daily News. The Post had "Lust in Space." More confirmation to me that the space program is both pointless and crazy.

Blogging In Baghdad

From the NYT via the British Library here is an article about and link to a web diary about the National Library and Archive in Baghdad. A flavor,

Written in a flat, unemotional style, the entries relate the bombings,
blockades, shootings, threats, shortages and petty frustrations that make up
everyday life for the cadre of civil servants working at Iraq’s main cultural
and literary storehouse. A complaint that heating fuel prices are 40 times
higher than in the fall is followed by a report on the assassination of one of
the library’s bright young Web designers and the need to ask the government to
keep the electricity on.

Tuesday Trivia

There was a 'Super bowl' this weekend and I have to confess it wasn't until last wednesday that I knew who was playing (meanwhile my team keeps scoring goals some of which are spectacular).

Unless you live in the Arctic with a million penguins (and New York feels that way at the moment) you will have heard of the wikinovel idea launched last week. They are jumping on the wiki band wagon and you have to give them credit for the experiement but it is hard to see how anything coherent is going to come of this. The construct of the novel - some lone guy sitting naked in a room for months writing - doesn't travel far and certainly not to the collaborative mess that a wiki novel could create. That doesn't mean that creative expression that results in some type of novel-like work can't be done collaboratively just not the way we know it as yet. To me, it may end up like some weird combination of Penny Lane and Second Life.

With all my filters set to capture publishing related news and stuff the announcement from Library of Congress regarding a grant they recieved to digitize some text material seems to have slipped through. Thanks to the millionsblog for finding it. Millions also has a list with covers of all the Booker Prize long list books. (I've only read one of them).

In a similar vein, here is an article from BBC News looking at how governments could build libraries that preserve both digital and print versions of content. The article is a case study of the approach Canada has taken to begin preserving digital content.

Instead, the rules focus on online material that is considered to be in "publication" form......As part of the deposit process, publishers can choose between open access, which allows the public to view and download the publication through the internet, or restricted access, which limits public access to selected computer terminals at the LAC's main building in Ottawa. The LAC encourages publishers to select open access whenever possible.

I am not sure if this means anything, but in 1980 a hardback cost $14.00 and Levis 501's about $20. This year the Harry Potter book will be $35 and 501's cost $45. What's the problem? Here is a perspective from SeekingAlpha. (Oh and I still wear the same size).

From mediabistro here is a longer review of the recent NY Public Google fest. Nothing hugely new here:

On went the catchphrases at the one-day event, carefully designed to tell attending publishing industry types that if you're not moving with the digital times, you're just not a 21st Century publisher. And as the day wore on, it seemed as if the audience had been completely lulled into submission by the overly positive mood and the plentiful supply of food.

It was by many accounts quite the love-in. Was is Devo that said Are We Not Ludites?

And then, the moderator cut off questioning and the conference returned to its shiny, happy, artificial equilibrium. But for that single moment, the tension between Google and the publishing world was on display -– as well as the larger sense that there's no holding back the tide of change to an industry still struggling to understand what the digital age is all about. "The publishing industry has become increasingly irrelevant," said author and UnBound speaker Seth Godin in a recent telephone interview. "They need to stop thinking about selling paper, when the last big changes to that model took place over sixty years ago with popularization of the paperback."

Here is a link to Seth's new book. Not too good for him are we?

And here is a longer review of the new Amazon product wiki from O'Reilly.

Amapedia is very tag focused. They can be used for searching, navigating, and comparing. There are two different types of tags fact tags (very similar to Flickr's new machine tags - Radar Post) and category tags )such as Real-Time Strategy Games). The fact tags are name:value pairs such as Number of Factions. Most articles when only have a couple of category tags; they are supposed to answer the question "What is this?".

That's it for a while.

Gather Looking Like Prodigy?

When I was at Berlitz we struck a deal with an internet portal named Prodigy to manage their language section and have it branded with the Berlitz name. It was reasonably successful; not that we made much money, but we exposed the brand to a lot of new people. Prodigy lost out to AOL and is barely heard of but when I saw this news story about Gather.com I immediately thought of the comparison with Prodigy. Gather.com is growing rapidly in popularity and has chosen to focus on the older generation (myspace for pensioners). Funny, that if they hit their demo some of these people will have had Prodigy accounts. They have announced some content deals with Publishers' Weekly, Columbia House and McGraw Hill and I suspect more will be on the way.



The announcement states that Publishers' Weekly will:

In the books category, Publishers Weekly will offer a behind-the-scenes look at the publishing world, while getting feedback from avid readers. "On Gather.com, our experts will not only share what they discover, but learn about what book lovers think and want to know," said David Nudo, publisher of Publishers Weekly, in a statement. "This information is invaluable to us."

And,

Columbia, meanwhile, is developing a site for Gather.com's music channel to promote the label's new releases and artists like Beyonce, Bob Dylan and John
Mayer. The label's recording stars will join in online sessions with users as part of promotional efforts around new records.

Currently the interface to books looks like this:

but I suspect they are going to have to change it to accomodate the new partners and give them brand space.

Perhaps more interesting to me will be the possible impact this alliance will have on Publishers' Weekly which has stuggled somewhat with their internet forays over the years and haven't effectively created a consumer profile for the brand. Their reviews program is the BIG exception to this. Meanwhile the significant B2B segment of their business has been diminishing which has place significant pressure on the company. If they are able to channel consumer interest, information, content, etc and extend their brand with consumers but also importantly creating new value for their B2B (Publishers, Booksellers) then they will really have accomplished something.

It's not Mr.Dewey's Search Engine Anymore

Read/WriteWeb is an excellent blog dedicated to all things web 2.0ish. You could spend a lot of time here catching up with whats new in web development, new companies and new approaches. Here is their description:

Read/WriteWeb is a popular weblog that provides Web Technology news, reviews and analysis. It began publishing on April 20, 2003 and is now one of the most widely read and respected Web 2.0 blogs. Read/WriteWeb is ranked among Technorati’s Top 100 blogs in the world. The site is edited by Richard MacManus, a recognized thought leader in the Internet industry.

I say check it out. And specifically look at this recent article on search engines - that is the other 100. It is facinating to look at some of the examples he links to and I recommend MsDewey (who is significantly more attractive than you might imagine) and LivePlasma. If you get to MsDewey search for book or books several times in a row and see what happens. It is facinating. (Note: I just went back to MsDewey is seemed to get stumped; regardless, a benefit is to remain transfixed on MsDewey).

Feedburner

I am attempting to consolidate RSS feeds of this site to Feedburner.

Here is the new RSS url:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/Personanondata

If you are using MS Explorer you may also be able to see two RSS choices clicking on the RSS icon on your nav bar. Please switch over from the .atom feed to Feedburner

Thanks,

Jimmy Wales Discusses Wikia Search

Against the back drop of a very friendly audience Jimmy Wales gave his first public talk this evening about his new search project. In fairness, given his work with wikipedia it would be difficult to image a non-friendly audience at any occasion, and when the topic is basically giving stuff of real value away for free then its unlikely there will be too many boos and groans. Jimmy wasn’t particularly controversial; he is on a quest to make search transparent, participatory and free. (Nice picture of someone's head - sorry).

The meeting at NYU was both a official class meeting and a hosted meeting of the FreeCulture society. Purely by chance, I found out about it by glancing at a copy of AM New York this morning as I came back from a breakfast meeting. This is the great thing about New York that these types of things go on all the time like no other place on earth. (I will have another post tomorrow about another meeting I attended earlier in the week).


Wales suggested that he was taken aback by the attention given by the media world on this initiative and he claims that he accidentally dropped the hint about it at the end of last year. I have some doubts about the story. As he explained the search ‘tool’ will become a legitimate competitor to the commercial providers particularly Google and Yahoo. He even suggested that some second tier search providers have approached him to offer assistance and support and he reasons that these companies recognize that a legitimate competitor to Google et al is good for all the non-major players. He didn’t directly state that an objective is to make basic search a commodity but this does seem to be the central objective of the initiative. Value-added services then would ride along or on top of basic search thereby providing unique business offerings.

With respect to the three core criteria he views as essential to the initiative all algorithms will be published, testable and researchable which supports his transparency goal. Establishing a participatory environment will be dependent on the relevancy and usefulness of the engine. As one student suggested, if the tool sucks then no-one will participate to which Wales noted that he is in the process of hiring the best researchers in search technology and is well aware that the first release has to be impressive. He also went on to say that they want to include the best elements of wikipedia participation coupled with the trusted network of key participants. Within wikipedia there is a core group of 1000-2000 contributors who are unlike gatekeepers and more like collaborators. Lastly, the search tool will be free which he defined by reciting the four freedoms of software. These are the ability to copy, modify, redistribute and redistribute with modifications.


Other than the fact that I was in a room full of under-graduates and feeling very old this was a very interesting discussion. Questions towards the end reflected concern over privacy issues and why Google and the other services are not ‘free’. I was curious about why the wikipedia model hasn’t yet transferred well to the world of educational publishing and journal publishing because so far those initiatives appear indifferent but I didn’t get the chance to ask.

Google TV: Is it for real? UPDATED

Update:

I think the following YouTube video from the same source as the GoogleTV episode proves GoogleTV is a hoax. This video is about recharging alkaline batteries and to quote "it is called electrical tape because it conducts electricity."

Well it was fun to think about....

In the run up to the law suit by US publishers against Google, an article was circulated (and I forget where it was published) to all of us on the AAP board which described a meeting between Google execs and NBC in Los Angeles. Apparently, Google had been storing the NBC feed for months and presented their proud new ideas for TV over the internet. NBC were not similarly impressed and the idea was buried.

Now comes word of GoogleTV which if true could be the resolution of this earlier idea to deliver on-demand television to your computer. How cool will that be. Just think in six months you can use your browser on your new iPhone to watch the program of your choice when and where ever you want. Extending that your iPhone becomes the distribution device for your own tv, radio/music, movie channel. The YOU channel.

Again it could all be a well constructed hoax. It could also be a hoax but very close to the truth.

Here are links:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNjlGm-YIKg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MulSMSJV-U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-eCO5L9wXQ

Joining the Network

Ebay and Amazon.com are network level applications. What defines them as network level applications is that they raise to the level of a platform fundamental processes, data pools and transaction information that previously existed at a local user or store level. In doing so they achieve radical economies of scale which is made available to all comers. Their benefit in doing so is to create a market place from which they receive transaction fees and charges across a huge network. Participants (vendors) benefit because they get access to state of the art applications, databases and the marketplace itself for a fraction of the cost of developing these assets themselves.

Ebay and Amazon are the most obvious network level players but others are becoming increasingly prevalent and increasingly have at their core a set of integrated web service applications. Google, for example is known mostly as a search platform; however, they are investing in many types of applications from calendar functions, to spreadsheets, to blog software that in effect creates a potential network level desktop. It is entirely possible in the Google environment to become completely untethered from your traditional 'physical' desktop and increasingly this will be the way people work. As a consequence of the developing Google network we will benefit from more integration of communication - calendars, email, blogging, - between users. Who knows the level of integration that may result once browser type, hardware, productivity application don't matter.

The beauty of the Network level application is that it can function as a component of work flow or as the work flow itself. The applications are built to standard specifications and are interchangeable, upgradeable and reusable. Web services applications are the most common facility by which modular component software applications are brought together to produce a work flow application. By definition, these web service applications are not tied to any specific operating system or programming language.

Amazon.com has aggressively promoted (and was an early adopter) of web services. Most online booksellers would face much higher monthly operating expenses and would also not have access to other seller tools (comparative pricing, availability information, etc.) were it not for Amazons web services. Simple cover art is available to all online retailers via the Amazon web services widget. It would be difficult and time consuming for a small book retailer to scan and upload cover art and the fact that this and many other functions have been removed from the local store level to the network is an example of a network effect. Anyone who has sold on Ebay over the past ten years will recognize how the process gets easier and easier as Ebay has added content, applications and services that the average garage sale seller could never develop by themselves. As Amazon has done, they to have developed web services applications that others can use on their own auction or retail sales sites.

The Network effect is coming to the library, publisher and bookseller market. (There is still some opportunity in book selling despite Amazon). It is interesting to think further about the Network effect on publishing but I think that we are seeing the first stages of a radical change in publishing with the development of self-publishing houses (AuthorHouse, Lulu, iUniverse), publishing applications (Blurb, Picaboo) and blogging tools (wetpaint, Wordpress, Blogger) all of which represent a very different way of publishing. I think it is the beginning of the death of publishing as we know it but by no means the death of publishing.

Similarly, in the library community software vendors sell expensive software implementations for local catalogs (OPAC) which are proprietary and often islands of information with only minimal integration with the outside world. More often than not the applications themselves are filled with features and gee wiz stuff that no one needs or uses. Rise up to the network level all of this functionality and the libraries is able select the applications they want as components parts and assemble them as they please. Due to the increasing strength and decreasing cost of communications and bandwidth the library can run the critical tools they need via a set of network level applications. Importantly they do this without a large expensive investment in hardware or software and they get continual access to software development improvements.

It is an interesting time and I think I will think more about the network-level impact on book selling and libraries.

Spooky Cry for Help? All the books Art Garfunkel has read

Unfairly a part of me thinks this is the work of a troubled mind. On the other hand, I am having difficulty remembering what books I read back in the 1970s and if I had been this diligent then I wouldn't be having this problem. He presaged Librarything by decades.

Interestingly, 52 people have tagged this web page in delicious. I think most are in awe.

A new take on personal cataloging of books etc is gurulib which I have yet to test out but it has a similar purpose to Librarything. We all need a little competition. This site is free for the moment although Librarything was hardly expensive.

Google News and Other News

The Sunday Times reports that Google is looking a developing 'a system' to allow e-book downloads to laptops and PDAs. Hummm. Not too revolutionary other than if they put their weight behind it will it blast e-books into the stratosphere?

Pearson were cagey all year about their results suggesting that the second half of the year would be much harder. Well they are on target for record earnings. Their stock declined.

Here are the Edgar Award nominees.

The French apparently love James Bond.

There was a Google love in at the New York Public Library last week. Predictably publishers are wrong and Google is right.

If you see the local Barnes & Noble windows filled with Chocolate in a few weeks you will know why. In these competitions they never say where the people who live in New York get to go if they win. I guess the presumption is we get to go to Omaha. It's just not fair.

Archiving Special Collections.

Visit the British Library web site and page through some amazing texts coupled with an audio recording about the work. It is very cool.

As more and more libraries start to digitize their 'special' collections (and not via Google either) it will be interesting to see how they 'display' these collections in the on-line context. I believe small thriving businesses will be developed that help libraries create on-line or electronic shows. The online version of the material that typically shows up in the glass display cases in the library lobby.

It is great to have all this 'special' collection material available for research and access but for the casual library patron some filtering and explanation/analysis is important for enjoyment and value. This is why I think you will find digital archivists selling their services to libraries to create these representative packages or shows of the material. These digital archivists will present the best parts of the collection and 'design' or curate these online shows. Viewers will be able to access the material via the web but perhaps they could also view the material in the library via web enabled kiosks.

There is so much of this material coming on-line. (OCLC has three different programs designed to collect this material). I think only a small percentage of stuff has thus far been digitised and we run the risk of having a glut of material that if not organized and presented to the typical patron may never be seen. This would be akin to the local public library collection that sits undisturbed in the special viewing room that isn't open to the public.

The need to create logical presentations of this valuable material does draw attention to the importance of the local librarian in selecting or editing this material. The process also creates new opportunities to add to the material in ways that perhaps was discouraged or difficult. This is especially the case with oral histories. Creating a visual respresenation of the material in a special collection and then encouraging some long lived local patrons to add their vocal history to the presentation would add significantly to the relevance and importance of the collection.

As I said, I think this is coming because I think there is an obvious need for services to support this type of activity.

Private Equity Deals

If you have the cash to invest in publishing company why not go for the best one. Which in my opinion would be Pearson.

With Thomson Education on the market, Houghton Mifflin sold, Wiley purchasing Blackwell Publishing, Wolters Kluwer Education for sale, there is a lot on offer and this week the rumors were flying around Pearson. Pearson has made no public comments regarding selling any of the company yet the PE bankers and the equity analysts think something is a foot. The Pearson stock closed at a four year high today (CNN). No doubt this is very pleasing to all the management options holders.

Last week, Reed Elsevier was also touted as a non-too-obvious PE candidate and it would seem you are not worth your salt as an equity analyst in the media industry if you don't declare one of these conglomerates as an ideal candidate for Private Equity players. Reed have a complicated ownership structure which, while simpler than when Reed and Elsevier were put together, seems to be a concern. When (or if) it comes down to it I doubt this will be an issue. As with Pearson, I suspect that the managers with options will be very happy with the stock price escalation. Last week the stock was at 600p now it is at 611p. When I was at Reed in 2000, the stock was over 700p and this was before they purchased Harcourt and the significant slump in advertising revenues that hit their trade publications business. Point is, I wonder if a valuation will push the share price up a lot higher?

In recent years Pearson has been chastised for under-managing a collection of valuable publishing assets but this died down a little over the past 12 months. Their financial results and forecasts have been on target and results in the Education group have been particularly strong. This is especially true when Pearson education is compared to Thomson in terms of acquisitions made, growth rate and operating margin. In Thomson's defence, I am sure that it has been difficult operating in within the Thomson corporate environment when reservations may have been expressed about Education for a while. Thomson relative to Pearson has probably lost momentum which a sale will quickly fix and we will see a renewed Thomson Education as a result.

Currently, the PE bankers see an opportunity to buy a large 'holding company' put some lipstick on it and sell parts off in short order. In selling the parts - The Financial Times, Pearson Education - they would expect to make a killing. (Pearson Education could be split into College and School). Management is clearly not happy with the current debate but if an offer is made then they obviously need to consider it. What may result is some appeasement resulting in the sale of one of the tastier chunks. As I predicted for 2007: Murdoch will buy The Financial Times.

News From Australia

SYDNEY(AP) - A seven-year-old boy was at the centre of a Parramatta, NSW courtroom drama yesterday when he challenged a court ruling over who should have custody of him. The boy had a history of being beaten by his parents and the judge initially awarded custody to his aunt, in keeping with child custody law and regulations requiring that family unity be maintained to the degree possible. The boy surprised the court when he proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly refused to live with her.

When the judge then suggested that he live with his grandparents, the boy cried out that they also beat him. After considering the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented
step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.

After two recesses to check legal references and confer with child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the English Cricket Team, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.

Mr. Charkin had a recent post along the same lines. Dispair.

Spare a thought for my parents who have taken to spending the English winter in Australia but this year they got torential rains on Christmas Day, the Cricket team sucked and this week brush fires caused a power outage in Melbourne. Oh well...

Worst Cover Award & Australia Week

I don't spend much time watching Martha Stewart but this morning I happened to catch her interview view Aussie chef Neil Perry, author of The Food I Love (Atria, $50, 0743292450). Here is the cover:





















And I think that is prettty ordinary. I think they are selling linens not excellent Aussie food. And using the light green lettering means you can barely make out his name against the grey background.

Incidentally, it is Australia week here in New York; who knew? Many events but no book related ones and doesn't that figure. With a little concentration you could just about see that table top display of Aussie authored books at the Union Square Barnes & Noble. I guess not...

More thoughts on book covers generally visit http://nytimesbooks.blogspot.com/index.html.