Erika’s Comments (group member since May 28, 2012)

Erika’s comments from the Q&A with Kindle Single authors Adam Piore, Erika Hayasaki and Marc Herman group.

Hi Alan,

Great questions. I have been discussing and thinking a lot of these topics with my literary journalism students at UC Irvine and so I have some thoughts:

To your first question: "Could you three authors have produced these works without the Single program? Or do you foresee that possibility down the road?"

I do not believe my story would have reached as many readers as it did without Kindle Singles. It involved first-person and science reporting around the sticky, and sometimes taboo topic of near-death experiences. The only place I pitched it to was Kindle Singles, partly because I had already been in conversation with its editor, David Blum, about another story idea. Blum is a journalist who was worked as an editor for the Village Voice, and he proved to be an excellent editor. At the time, I did not believe any magazine would have touched this 10,000-word story. (Although Salon.com came out with a good long research story on the subject about two months after mine: http://www.salon.com/2012/04/21/near_...).

I was surprised that Dead or Alive sold as well as it did (though other Kindle Single writers have done far better -- http://paidcontent.org/2012/03/12/419...). Mine has been downloaded around 6,000 times since February.

Question 2: "So with the Single concept, which in concept and length seem to straddle the lines between book and article, does the future rely on distribution through a centralized platform with a strong consumer identity such as Amazon?"

One mistake that I believe newspapers and magazines make when they enter into the E-Single market is not partnering with Amazon’s Kindle Singles, as The Atavist, Byliner and some other publications have smartly done. It seems editors at some longstanding, respected publications think they can slap a long story on Amazon as an e-book and sell thousands based on their name recognition alone. But I bet that’s not enough for them to see success — most stories will inevitably get lost among the millions of other titles. How will readers know they exist? The other mistake that these publications make is selling a story on Amazon that is already available for free online. How does that make marketing sense?

Like it or not, Amazon is a major marketing machine. The Kindle is a one-stop shopping center for people who like to read – the target audience. Just making it onto the Kindle Single storefront means readers are seeing your story, and this alone drives sales. I did no other promotion for my Kindle Single, besides sending a few emails, tweets and Facebook notes.

Yes, this means Amazon editors have a lot of power right now, deciding who gets past the gatekeepers. But I see other e-single markets emerging, like Apple “Quick Reads” and Barnes & Noble Nook “Snaps.” I am interested in seeing how longform journalism will be received in these markets too, even though I know Amazon is the major player at the moment. I have signed a contract to do my next longform nonfiction narrative story for Byliner Originals, which also has incredible editors and it markets across these companies. I would love to one day do one for The Atavist, which has set itself apart from the others with its multimedia elements.

Question 3: "I’m wondering about the atomization of ebook publishing in the sense of organizations, university programs, research tanks, etc. producing their own publication programs without the need of a major consumer publishing brand behind them."

What I love about the changing landscape of longform journalism in the digital age is that it is providing more opportunities for a diversity of stories on everything from near-death experiences, to Tripoli, to an accidental terrorist from Long Beach, Calif. Beyond that, the digital age is popularizing new lengths for stories — this 5,000 to 20,000-word niche.

Recently, Jonathan Karp, executive vice president and publisher of Simon and Schuster, was interviewed on C-SPAN about the future of books and ebooks, in which he said: “I wonder whether digital will result in some books being shorter and perhaps in longer form journalism having more of a place in the culture than it does right now. Magazines have cut back on their longer stories so maybe the publishing industry can step in there at the 20 to 40,000-word length. I hope that can happen.” (http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/30...).

From the perspective of someone who loves reading and writing longform journalism, this is all exciting stuff.

When it comes to organizations, programs and think-takes publishing their own stories, I think it’s important to note that longform pieces still need great editors, like the ones mentioned above. What gets lost in the excitement over the resurgence of longform journalism now, also with the popularity of #longreads or longform.org, is that these are often the most difficult kinds of stories to report and write. Just because it’s long, doesn’t mean it reads well. Good editors are essential. And reporters, when it comes to practicing longform, have to raise their game. It’s not just about grabbing a quote and writing a catchy lede or nutgraf. It is about unspooling a story with themes, characters, scenes and action. These pieces need texture and emotion. This is why producing longform journalism takes time and patience.

You will notice that many of the stories that sell well as Kindle Singles, besides the fiction, have to do with death, murder, crime, and Hollywood. This is the other complication with this rising genre. Less sexy topics are a harder sell. Does that mean they won’t sell? I don’t think so. Like all stories, I believe it will come down to the quality of the writing, reporting and presentation, and this means going back to studying some of the great literary journalists like John McPhee, these writers who often turned seemingly mundane topics into brilliant reads.