the ironic relationship: teen markets and pirating
on
Chained Melodies
·
· Score: 1
IMHO, one of the biggest reasons for the apparent decline in the quality of popular media (mainly music and movies) is that most of the management folks in these businesses have been targeting the billions of dollars in potential sales of the "lucrative teen markets". I'm no market analyst, but my guess is that teens make up a large portion of all movie ticket and music sales - possibly because most of their income is truly disposable, or because their buying habits are more impulsive and/or less discriminating (and therefore more succeptible to advertising and marketing schemes). Whatever the case, I don't feel that I'm going too far out on a limb in saying that many industries, but especially the movie and music industries, have made billions off sales to teens and their largely adolescent tastes.
The reason I bring it up is that I seems ironic to me that the biggest audience for movies and music is the same audience that would probably make up the largest segment of "pirates" (due possibly to ignorance, ambivilance or other more malicious intentions).
Your post seems to confuse the roles of both the publishers and contributers for a particular journal, and neglects the involvement of the editor completely. To summarize:
Contributor: The true author of the actual journal article (i.e. content) in question. Usually, but not limited to, an academic scholar publishing the results of an original body of research. Contributors receive
NO monetary compensation, and I believe they even have to pay a significant fee in most cases for the privilage of getting their work published. The work itself was probably funded by a 3rd party, either public or private, but definitely separate from the publisher.
Editor: Governs the overall content of the journal and handles the review of works which have been submitted for publication. Many sumissions to academic journals are peer reviewed by members of the academic community (i.e. university faculty) who may receive a modest fee for their services.
Publisher: Owns the journal title & copywrights; employs the editor and staff. Provides the typical publishing needs of printing and distribution. Handles the finances.
As far as I can figure, most of the actual costs of producing a journal come from the publishing side (i.e. printing and distribution) since the bulk of the content is essentially provided free of charge. The only costs associated with the content come from the editorial and review work, but I can't imagine that these would be anywhere comparable to the publishing costs unless the process was extremely inefficient.
So why the hell do journal subscriptions cost so damn much? I think some people in the publishing industry are getting awfully rich off all those dead trees...
Slashdot Mirror
IMHO, one of the biggest reasons for the apparent decline in the quality of popular media (mainly music and movies) is that most of the management folks in these businesses have been targeting the billions of dollars in potential sales of the "lucrative teen markets". I'm no market analyst, but my guess is that teens make up a large portion of all movie ticket and music sales - possibly because most of their income is truly disposable, or because their buying habits are more impulsive and/or less discriminating (and therefore more succeptible to advertising and marketing schemes). Whatever the case, I don't feel that I'm going too far out on a limb in saying that many industries, but especially the movie and music industries, have made billions off sales to teens and their largely adolescent tastes.
The reason I bring it up is that I seems ironic to me that the biggest audience for movies and music is the same audience that would probably make up the largest segment of "pirates" (due possibly to ignorance, ambivilance or other more malicious intentions).
As far as I can figure, most of the actual costs of producing a journal come from the publishing side (i.e. printing and distribution) since the bulk of the content is essentially provided free of charge. The only costs associated with the content come from the editorial and review work, but I can't imagine that these would be anywhere comparable to the publishing costs unless the process was extremely inefficient.
So why the hell do journal subscriptions cost so damn much? I think some people in the publishing industry are getting awfully rich off all those dead trees...