Monday, March 31, 2008
More Googlization
I had not been aware that Google has entered the web bookmarks/social sharing arena until I noticed a link from my last post, "Share what you read: You can display your Google Reader shared items on your blog." Well, one can do that with their "Links" feature, too. Oh, this is soo tempting. Similar to the prospect of using the "Shoppers Card" at the grocery store. Google as the Wishmaster--"Just wish for it, and it can be yours." I'm still not certain what the price will be.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Copy Rules
It's Launch Season again, which means that I'm alternately irritated, amused, and enlightened by the wide range of titles that we have to learn and plan for in just over two weeks. We actually have a good copywriter, so these "rules" are not aimed at him, but were a way to blow off steam after reading frequently optimistic descriptions of many of our titles.
Denise (the Cynic)’s Academic Press Marketing Copy Rules (That Everyone Breaks)
1. Be realistic. Every academic title “examines,” “illuminates,” or otherwise “reveals” something, but they are rarely “riveting,” “exciting” or “groundbreaking,” let alone an “instant classic.” Only use the word “stunning” if a stun-gun is involved because chances are, at best, the “revelations” are plodding and coherent.
2. Don’t use words that hurt. “Extensive” and “exhaustive” exhaust extensively. And “painstaking” says the author was in pain as she wrote it, and intends to pass it on.
3. Every frontlist book in the catalog should be “new,” but then so should every piece of copy.
4. Use the news writer’s rule: Don’t “bury the lead.” The main point of the book should appear in the first two sentences of copy. If you’re unsure what the point of the book is--it should be the part of the book that is not already known by everyone in the discipline. If you’re still unsure, ask the author or acquiring editor “What prompted you to write/acquire this title?” (That always goes over better than “Why the hell are we publishing this crap?”)
5. Another gem from news writing: “Who, what, where, when, why and how.” If you can’t identify these, refer to rule #4.
6. Repeat the title, author, and other bibliographic information only if space is unlimited, because chances are the people who came up with the title think that it is.
7. If you have a say, do campaign for a title and/or subtitle that has some relation to the content of the book. Otherwise be prepared for the reader to be completely lost before the first sentence of copy.
8. Don’t use “the human condition,” or any variation thereof. It usually means someone else’s life sucks, but probably not in the same way that yours does, no matter what you think, and that you’re secretly glad that you’re better than they are.
9. Don’t ask the reader to make leaps of logic, even if the book does.
10. If a word that must be in the copy is not in the dictionary, first italicize, then delete.
If brevity is the soul of wit, I’m at wit’s end.
For more pointers, see:
http://alt-usage-english.org/humorousrules.html
http://www.ameinfo.com/34480.html
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/133379/2067029
Others?
Denise (the Cynic)’s Academic Press Marketing Copy Rules (That Everyone Breaks)
1. Be realistic. Every academic title “examines,” “illuminates,” or otherwise “reveals” something, but they are rarely “riveting,” “exciting” or “groundbreaking,” let alone an “instant classic.” Only use the word “stunning” if a stun-gun is involved because chances are, at best, the “revelations” are plodding and coherent.
2. Don’t use words that hurt. “Extensive” and “exhaustive” exhaust extensively. And “painstaking” says the author was in pain as she wrote it, and intends to pass it on.
3. Every frontlist book in the catalog should be “new,” but then so should every piece of copy.
4. Use the news writer’s rule: Don’t “bury the lead.” The main point of the book should appear in the first two sentences of copy. If you’re unsure what the point of the book is--it should be the part of the book that is not already known by everyone in the discipline. If you’re still unsure, ask the author or acquiring editor “What prompted you to write/acquire this title?” (That always goes over better than “Why the hell are we publishing this crap?”)
5. Another gem from news writing: “Who, what, where, when, why and how.” If you can’t identify these, refer to rule #4.
6. Repeat the title, author, and other bibliographic information only if space is unlimited, because chances are the people who came up with the title think that it is.
7. If you have a say, do campaign for a title and/or subtitle that has some relation to the content of the book. Otherwise be prepared for the reader to be completely lost before the first sentence of copy.
8. Don’t use “the human condition,” or any variation thereof. It usually means someone else’s life sucks, but probably not in the same way that yours does, no matter what you think, and that you’re secretly glad that you’re better than they are.
9. Don’t ask the reader to make leaps of logic, even if the book does.
10. If a word that must be in the copy is not in the dictionary, first italicize, then delete.
If brevity is the soul of wit, I’m at wit’s end.
For more pointers, see:
http://alt-usage-english.org/humorousrules.html
http://www.ameinfo.com/34480.html
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/133379/2067029
Others?
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Day JaVue
My recent post to "Denise the Idealist" referenced this article that points to the yet another report about the "University as Publisher". I need to read the whole thing, but can't get past the first couple of paragraphs and an overwhelming sense of deja-vu all over again.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Harvard OA Mandate: The Death Knell
Library Journal, and many others, reported last month that Harvard is mandating that any work by their scholars should be available for free (to paraphrase wantonly). I'm not sure whether to place this in "Idealist" or "Cynic." One would expect Harvard to be a leader in the Humanities and Social Science move towards electronic, and open access, publication. Given the power that the big publishers have over scholarship, the necessity of a mandate towards OA is unfortunate, but not unsurprising.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)