Digital Media

NEW YORK--Manhattan is the center of book publishing, all four music labels have headquarters here, and it's home to the country's largest general newspaper.

(Credit: New York magazine)

But even in the Big Apple, many people appear unwilling to pay for media.

New York magazine conducted an apparently unscientific poll of 100 pedestrians in Manhattan's SoHo district and it revealed some startling and humorous results.

Few of those polled are willing to pay for The New York Times. Asked whether they subscribe to the paper, 79 said no. Asked how much they would be willing to pay to read the paper online, 63 said "nothing." To the question of how charging a fee to read the paper online would affect The Times, 65 answered that it would make it less successful.

The good news for the music industry was that 34 of the respondents say they pay for all their music. The bad news is that 61 acknowledged obtaining at least some of their music illegally.

As for downloading TV shows illegally via BitTorrent files, seven of those polled said "all the time." Five said never." 38 said only if they miss a show on TV. 12 asked "What the hell is a torrent?"

When it came to books, the respondents were much more willing to pay and don't appear to be Kindle fans. Check it out.

Maybe Ben Huh really could solve all of Gourmet magazine's problems.

(Credit: Caroline McCarthy/CNET)

The bittersweet jokes write themselves.

Ben Huh, the CEO of funny photo hub "I Can Has Cheezburger," who has been known to show up at black-tie events with a giant hamburger hat on his head, on Monday offered via Twitter to purchase Gourmet, the seven-decade-old, high-end cooking magazine that will be ceasing publication in November as part of budget cuts at parent company Conde Nast.

Huh was probably kidding. We think.

The recent ax job at Conde Nast, long a symbol of print media's most egregious of excesses and more recently the ultimate case of a postlapsarian publishing-industry crisis, received quite the reaction from the blogging and Twittering masses--a crowd that's notoriously easy to ignite with debate and banter over the death of print and future of the media. Along with Gourmet, the company announced the closing of titles Cookie, Modern Bride, and Elegant Bride on Monday.

Management consulting firm McKinsey had been enlisted earlier in the year to help Conde Nast handle its increasingly dire financial problems, so many people had been anticipating magazine closures (the fledgling business title Portfolio and home decor magazine Domino were silenced earlier this year).

But it was beloved industry mainstay Gourmet that really set off the blogosphere. Easy way to tell: the title became a "trending topic" on Twitter.

Media critic Rex Sorgatz offered his tongue-in-cheek take on the Conde Nast magazine shutterings.

(Credit: Twitter)

Reactions ranged from "Is it strange that Gourmet folding feels like losing an old friend?" to "So. I'll never be Editor in Chief of Gourmet. Time to reassess my life goals" to "Wow. I guess I'll be eating more TV dinners now."

Twitter's ubiquitous celebrity users weighed in, too; pop singer Michelle Branch tweeted "First Domino and now Gourmet. What the hell!!?? Let's have a moment of silence."

It's sad to see such a long-lasting magazine disappear so quickly. But in the grand scheme of things, it's not surprising. Recipes are easy and convenient to put on the Web, not to mention searchable--and indeed, Gourmet recipes will live on at the Conde Nast-owned Epicurious.com. And food news has increasingly shifted to the Web with the growth of the food blogging craze, something that was exemplified in a snarky publicity stunt last week when restaurant industry blog Eater, which had just launched a "national" edition to go along with its regional sites, offered to pay any of the Web's "about 1,000,000 cutesy food blogs" $25 to shut down.

"Gourmet probably took the $25 to stop writing about food," one Twitter user quipped on Monday.

(Credit: Plastic Logic)

So far, Amazon's Kindle has been in a safe position as one of the dominant electronic readers on the market. However, this may be changing because its rival, the Plastic Logic e-Reader, has been busy gaining prelaunch partners.

Plastic Logic, the start-up maker of the possible Kindle "killer" e-reader, announced Thursday that Olive Software will be a key service provider and partner for the Plastic Logic Publishers Program. The partnership means the two companies will develop content-publishing solutions for newspapers, magazines, and Web content providers, as well as other publishers that distribute their content via Plastic Logic's e-reader.

Olive is a prominent digital publishing company that produces hundreds of newspapers and magazine titles across multiple platforms--including electronic reading devices, smartphones, browsers, and Internet-enabled TV.

Plastic Logic e-reader photos

The Plastic Logic e-reader is an electronic reader designed specifically for mobile users. The device will be about the size of an 8.5-inch by 11-inch pad of paper and weighs less than most magazines. It seems to be an ultrathin, simple, and strong device, gauging from a recent demo.

Differentiating the new e-reader from the Kindle is the fact that it supports both 3G and Wi-Fi. This means you can download new content via wireless on the go, and from your home and office Wi-Fi networks. In addition, apart from published contents, the Plastic Logic e-reader supports popular document formats, including PDF, Word, PowerPoint, and Excel documents.

Recently, Plastic Logic also hooked up with Barnes & Noble and announced that it will use AT&T's 3G network.

The Plastic Logic Reader is due to launch early next year. For now, it's still unclear how much it will cost.

For the second time in five months, Wired.com, the Internet arm of Wired magazine, has trimmed its staff.

(Credit: Wired.com)

According to a Twitter post from Evan Hansen, the Web site's editor in chief, the company laid off 3 out of 25 full-time staffers or 12 percent of its workforce.

"Reports of Wired.com 'gutting' greatly exaggerated," Hansen wrote on Twitter, presumably referring to published reports about Wired.com's layoffs. "We cut three staff, five contractors, (and) still have 45 people working for us overall."

Among those who lost their jobs was Eliot Van Buskirk, a much respected digital music reporter who authored the blog ListeningPost for the Web site for over three years, according to multiple people within the company. Van Buskirk was a part-time contractor for Wired and is a former CNET employee. Leander Kahney, Wired.com's managing editor, also lost his job, but he requested that he be let go, the sources said.

In November, Wired.com laid off 10 percent of its staff. Wired magazine was once a must-read for the cybergroovy but has since had to contend, like all print publishers, with more competition from online sources of technology stories.

The British newspaper the Guardian announced Tuesday it's launching an open platform designed to offer third parties free access to its content and data, in exchange for carrying the publication's advertising.

With the platform, the Guardian aims to ease the process for third-party developers to design applications and services using free Guardian articles, videos, photo galleries, and other content.

One partner, for example, has developed a service to encourage Guardian readers to geotag all of the publication's content, with the goal of making it easier for readers to find news, video, and other related information in their area.

The Guardian is also offering a free data service to third parties, allowing them to use the publication's statistics and data for use on their own Web sites.

In exchange for the free content and data, users would be required to carry Guardian advertising.

Newspapers and magazines have seen a pullback in advertising revenue over the years, as readership has dropped. Advertising rates are tied to circulation levels, which reflect the number of readers who subscribe to a publication.

The recession has compounded the problem for the newspaper and magazine industry, which has seen an acceleration in the rate of decline for advertising revenue.

Apple did indeed say that if it couldn't make a profit, it "most likely" will not continue to operate iTunes. You can find a copy of the statement here on page 4 (PDF).

Fortune magazine published a bombshell of a story on Tuesday by reporting that Apple once threatened to close iTunes if forced to pay more for music royalties. A more careful reading of the statement from an Apple executive shows that it was more of a veiled threat. Regardless, it's possible Apple could shut down iTunes.

But is it likely? No. Here's why:

Screen grab of the document Apple filed with Copyright Royalty Board

First, the comment was made by Eddy Cue, vice president in charge of Apple's iTunes Store, in a written statement to the Copyright Royalty Board sometime before April 2007. The CRB is a three-judge panel that determines rates for statutory copyright licenses. On Thursday, the CRB is supposed to rule on a proposal by the National Music Publishers' Association to make download stores pay more for the songs they sell. The publishers want an increase from 9 cents a track to 15 cents, a 66-percent jump.

Representatives from the NMPA could not be reached.

In his letter to the CRB, Cue said he had no doubt that raising music prices at iTunes would reduce the number of purchases, stifle customer growth, and shrink payments to artists. If iTunes were to absorb the increase in royalty rates, then the store would likely lose money and the company wasn't interested in that.

Here's the meat of his statement: "Apple has repeatedly made clear that it is in this business to make money, and most likely would not continue to operate (iTunes) if it were no longer possible to do so profitably."

Cue's comment that the company has "repeatedly made clear" is something else to look at closely. I can't find another example where Apple has said it will shut down iTunes. Two music industry sources told me that at no time have iTunes' representatives made such a statement to the record labels--not in negotiations, not in passing, never.

Still, there's no denying that Cue told the CRB that the company might shut down iTunes if forced to pay higher royalties. I have to question why it has taken 18 months for Cue's comments to come to light, and why they're popping up just two days before the board is scheduled to rule on a possible rate hike?

Maybe it's coincidence. Or maybe Apple is firing a public-relations shot across the bow of the music industry and CRB. When it comes down to mass appeal, Apple holds all the cards. If word gets out that music publishers are trying to stick it to consumers, and Apple is fighting to keep prices down on their behalf, well, there's liable to be public backlash against the record industry. If this thing follows the normal course, there would be calls for boycotts, protests, and so on.

The other possibility is that Apple could pull the plug on iTunes. But how likely is that? Would Apple CEO Steve Jobs leave iPod owners without anything to watch or listen to? In such a scenario, consumers would be predictably angry and direct much of it at the music industry. Then, I suspect, they would go out and buy music from Amazon.com or someone else.

Apple has sold more than 160 million iPods, and iTunes has sold over 5 billion songs. The store is now the country's largest music retailer. Apple isn't going to throw that away, and the music industry isn't going to risk losing its largest distributor.

Look for a deal to get done soon.