Books have come late to the digital party, but change is now happening at such a furious pace that even conservative members of the trade are starting to realize that their industry is being snatched away from them before their eyes. The undisputed leader in the race to sell digital books is Amazon. Its Kindle e-reader was a late entry into the race, but it used its redoubtable marketing muscle to gain a 76 percent share of all digital books sold. It could have been much more but for the arrival of the iPad, which now has a 5 percent market share, though rising fast.
Traditional booksellers such as Barnes and Noble — which has just released a new WiFi reader — and the UK’s Waterstones are still in the race, but it looks as though book distribution is being sewn up by existing digital giants. Is this what we really want — a series of walled gardens controlled by corporate giants? Why hasn’t a horizontal model emerged in which networks of readers and authors can interact and buy and exchange favorite works on a global scale? Where is the Facebook of books?
This vertical model, of course, brings terrific benefits — having a virtual library of thousands of books you can read when and where you want. I do it a lot. But there are also very disturbing side-effects. Do we want reading, which ought to be a truly communal experience, migrating into a handful of digital silos, each imposing their own rules about what we can read, where we can read it and making it impossible to lend a book if you don’t lend the device as well? Some publishers even ask you to state that you won’t read the book aloud.
Illustration: Yusha
Amazon doesn’t just own Kindle. Its tentacles have spread out into a series of worrying monopolies. Instead of using its formidable base in selling traditional books to build up a similar position with second-hand books, it purchased the biggest existing seller of second-hand books on the Internet, abebooks.com. Instead of building up its own presence in audio books, it purchased audible.com, which had more than 90 percent of the audio market. It also bought a 40 percent stake in librarything.com, one of the admirable online book clubs, which has just released a kind of mobile public library in the US and Ireland.
There are lots of interesting experiments in the online book world, including Nick Cave’s novel Bunny Munro, which was sold as a multimedia iPhone app; Google’s massive scanning of out-of-copyright books; the now venerable Gutenberg project, which has more than 33,000 out-of-copyright books uploaded by volunteers; and numerous bookclubs, not to mention the Guardian’s own.
The video book publisher Vook.com has just celebrated its first anniversary. I loved Tim Wright’s geo-tagged retracing of Robert Louis Stevenson’s journey in Kidnapped. Still to come is 24Symbols, which aims to be the Spotify of books by streaming them for free over the web — with adverts paying — as well as traditional paid-for downloads.
If we are yearning for something to take books from “them” and give them back to “us,” we have to look a bit into the future to start-ups such as www.etherbooks.co.uk, which offers short stories to your phone at £0.59 (US$0.94) a pop but has ambitious plans to expand into a global horizontal model. Its founder, Maureen Scott, has a long history of involvement in disruptive start-ups. Quoting the mantra “Content is king, but context is queen,” she sees the literary future as networked, multi-platformed and inclusive — mainly through the mobile phone. Down with silos, up with communities, especially the community of writers, bloggers and fans. She sees the site as a forum for stories that will all be curated to maintain standards.
It is clear that the revolution in books is only just beginning. The interesting thing is that the product itself — the book — is not threatened, only the way it is read. It is pretty clear that more books will be read in future as out-of-copyright ones are reprinted and 18-to-24-year-olds, the drivers of mobile adoption, take to reading on their phones and other devices. More and more books will be read through dedicated e-readers, which can be read in daylight and on the beach, and back-lit ones such as the iPad, which can be read at night.
No one knows where all this will end up, but it will be nowhere near as revolutionary as the change from reading scrolls to reading books in the middle ages. The e-reader revolution merely lures the same people to read books in a different format. The move from scrolls to books turned an immobile activity enjoyed by a tiny minority of educated people into a mobile phenomenon that would eventually be enjoyed by all. The unanswered question remains: Who will control this revolution in knowledge, them or us? The answer, literally and metaphorically, is in our hands.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath