Technology

Amazon’s Kindle e-book reader is curdling the blood of some newspaper and magazine publishers who feel the device offers a poor substitute for the look and feel of turning pages, lacks the ability to handle on-page advertising, and has a stranglehold on setting subscription prices.  So they’re going to take their business elsewhere.

The Wall Street Journal reports that several newspaper and magazine publishers, including industry titans like Hearst Corp., Gannett Co., and Pearson PLC, are forging alliances with Kindle alternatives that will be more amenable to their needs.  Hearst, which publishes the San Francisco Chronicle, the Houston Chronicle, and Cosmopolitan, is backing a venture with First Paper LLC to create a new software platform that supports the digital downloading of newspapers and magazines on devices with a bigger screen and the ability to display ads.  Gannett and Pearson have hitched their wagons to Plastic Logic, a start-up company that’s building a letter-sized reading tablet that can display books, periodicals, and work documents—and will also be able to display ads.  And Apple, the elephant in the room, is reportedly readying a device capable of reading digital books and periodicals—a device that will undoubtedly make newspaper and magazine publishers take notice.

The move towards subscription-based download offerings on portable electronic reading devices offers some hope for newspaper and magazine publishers, who, in the digital age, chose not to charge online readers for delivered news and other forms of content.  Today, in the face of flagging subscription rates and dwindling ad revenues, one can hardly open a newspaper without reading a story of the printed newspaper’s impending demise.

So why haven’t newspaper and magazine publishers embraced the Kindle?  For one thing, many claim the device’s screen is too small, and therefore cannot display a newspaper or magazine page properly.  Nor will the Kindle show the display ads which newspapers and magazines rely on for income.  Nor does the Kindle’s retail price—$359—offer a savings for the reader.  Nor does Amazon allow newspaper or magazine publishers to set the subscription price for their own periodicals.

While competition in the e-reader market is certainly good, in the end, having many different types of e-readers on the market capable of interacting with content from only a select number of publishers isn’t going to do the consumer any good.  A reader, say, isn’t going to purchase one device to read one set of content, and another device to read a different set of content.  Once the dust settles and a true winner emerges in the e-reader marketplace, publishers of all types would be best served altering or developing their content to be displayed on that one device.  And that one device, itself, raises even more questions.  Is a separate e-reader device really the best solution?  Or would consumers really prefer one mobile device that can serve many different purposes—phone, email, portable music device, mobile web device, camera, video camera, etc.

iPhone, anyone?

By Robert Pothier