In this project I talk about electronic media, and, more specifically, what my research and experience leads me to believe its effect will be upon independent publishing. Simple enough, you would think, but when you start from there—with terms like "electronic media" and "independent publishing--you soon realize that a well-rounded discussion might involve explorations of all of the following topics:  writing; reading; speaking; listening; changing technologies; literacy; telecommunications; computers; commercialization; corporations and conglomerates; the economy; distribution of wealth and influence; the academy; education; government regulation; journalism; censorship; distribution; access; privacy; propaganda; marketing, advertising, conflicting ideologies, cultural domination and oppression; hegemony; politics; government regulation; and various issues surrounding the concept of diversity. Are we done? No. What about questions of communication in general, and the exchange of ideas? And what about the meaning of these ideas? What about the different contexts in which we might assign these meanings? Add to this the multiple power relationships involved in relating these factors, and the entropy surrounding the core ideas of "media" and "publishing" becomes mind boggling. What does it mean to publish? Can anyone publish? 

     It is not my intent here to address all of these areas. I begin by simply pointing out the complexity involved. We can’t easily say what constitutes publishing. This is especially true as more and more people "publish" online.

     Emerging--and merging--technologies raise questions that cannot yet be answered. For instance, as Charles T. Meadow suggests in Ink into Bits, it is very likely that soon worldwide telecommunications conglomerates will own the digital means by which we distribute and receive books, magazines, television shows, radio programs, movies, telephone service, electronic conferences, bank statements, contracts and bills of all sorts, and most text-based mail that doesn’t involve the shipping of durable goods. Is a downloaded book a "published" product, and not a telephone conversation? What about movies and conferences? If films, pictures, and conversations can be published electronically, are they published the same way electronic books and magazines are? 

     Also consider this: if satellite and "hard-wired" digital technologies replace our current forms of broadcasting—which are heavily regulated (indeed censored) by governments—will the digital "transmissions" also be regulated? To what extent will the new medium--and regulations affecting the medium--affect the breadth and scope of content? Will content change outright with the introduction of new forms of media and criticism? Will it change our interpretation of information?

     When we start to accept the idea that all forms of communication once adapted to an electronic system of distribution can be: 1) assigned ownership; 2) digitized; and 3) quickly located, downloaded and re-created on the spot (all for a fee), instantly, at any location where we happen to have a modern computer available, we enter an area of very broad speculation about the future of publishing. It would seem, at the present time, that hedging your bets in answering any questions about the exact nature of publishing seems to be the best option. Yet we encounter theorists, thinkers and writers who offer tremendous insight into the above issues, questions and concerns, as well as into the nature of publishing as it now exists and as it might soon evolve.

     This project is an exploration that has developed largely along personal lines.  As a person who has worked independently in publishing and distribution for many years, I have developed a great concern over the advent of electronic publishing. I am not really too concerned that the new John Grisham novel, or the latest issue of the Wall Street Journal be made more widely available to all who desire to read these publications and might benefit from the contents. These publications, and many others, already more than meet adequate criteria for availability, represent dominant cultural forces, and appear as if they will continue to do so, electronics or not. But, anything that looks like it might help independent publishers succeed appeals to me greatly.

What do I mean by independent publishing?

• Independent publishing is publishing undertaken either by the disenfranchised, the oppressed, the radical, the marginalized, the nonconformist, or, it is publishing specifically designed to reflect the views of these groups. It represents thoughts and ideas not often (if ever) expressed in cultural institutions like schools, or over the so-called "objective" corporate controlled popular media.

• Independent media is definitively democratic. Why shouldn’t all voices be heard?   Why shouldn't those voices call for action when necessary?

• Much independent publishing is explicitly political, anti-authoritarian, or even irreverent.  Independent writers and publishers question the status quo and contemporary ideological assumptions about the world.  Much of the work being produced seeks to present progressive solutions to modern social and economic problems. 

• Independent publishing is often grass-roots and not often generated by those with officially sanctioned credentials or large sums of money.

     In other words, with a little perspicacity, you know independent publishing when you see it.

     Many people, in my experience, either through an ingrained dominant ideology, or through simple ignorance, have absolutely no ability to grasp the value of independent media. There is an old biker saying, "If you have to ask, you wouldn’t understand." I have found that this applies to many people when it comes to independent publishing.

     Some independent publications like local music magazines, calendars of events, and entertainment guides are simply underappreciated.  A lot of work goes into putting these out on schedule, and (where it applies) maintaining decent quality. These, of course, have little potential to question or harm any real kind of dominant cultural authority. Others, like The Baffler, and Z, which question and challenge mainstream political and social assumptions, are misunderstood, mistrusted, maligned, or completely ignored in the homogenized, generic, heavily marketed popular cultural landscape.

     Textfiles

     d|i|s|i|n|f|o|r|m|a|t|i|o|n|

     Drudge Retort 

    Factsheet Five

Note:  while still an excellent overview, FS5 is has stopped publication in print, and the website has not been updated in quite a while.   As is often the case in the indie publishing world, publications may stop publishing after encountering financial troubles, only to re-emerge at a some later date.  

     Electronic publishing makes things easier and less expensive that print. But what about making it easier to find readers? I would like to consider whether electronic publishing has any potential to make independently published materials more appealing and accessible to more people. 

     Some theorists argue that the Web will democratize communication once and for all-- others, like Neil Postman, point out that technological change produces winners and losers.  There are many intermediate positions, as well.

     Throughout this document, I strive to keep things together by relying on the following questions:

• Will things pretty much stay the same in an electronic environment, with independent publishers and their views existing only on the fringe of the corporate dominated market?  

• Can independent publishers gain wider acceptance and appeal in an electronic envoronment, and thereby enliven democratic debate and bring more voices into the political process?

• Will independent publishers succumb to the marketing power, and concomitant allure and distraction that will no doubt be presented by the consolidating electronic mass media?

• Will the web be regulated, and what might this mean to the small publisher? 

     The focus of this project is to examine possibilities in Web publication. It is not an attempt to review a rigidly accountable set of observations. Neither is it an attempt to display the results of a positivist, "hard and fast" empirical study. I don’t approach this as a series of specific lessons to teach, or facts to uncover. This project is an exploration of ideas.
       

Cook, Philip J. and Frank, Robert H. The Winner-Take-All Society New York: Penguin Books, 1996.

Read next section.                View site map.