Login  |  Register          Free Newsletter Subscription
Sara Nelson   


Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (4)


More on Review Sections
July 31, 2008

Far be it from me (!) to add to the bloviation on the demise of newspaper book reviews, but this video, from the pbs program Newshour on Monday accomplishes two opposing tasks:  it manages to break absolutely no new ground while managing to make  old-think editors sound pompous and  new-think bloggers seem inarticulate.  Am I missing something?  Which contestant do you think is the winner? 

Posted by Sara Nelson on July 31, 2008 | Comments (4)


August 1, 2008
In response to: More on Review Sections
Gregory L. Morris commented:

Print media dropping book reviews is, to my way of thinking, wrong headed.They do not make money, true, but neither does the sports or wedding sections. I suspect that this decision is based on the fact that readership is dropping. The generation M(edia) culture has adopted the screen mentality, i.e. cell phones, text messages, IM, Youtube, my space, etc., it's not a good thing but it's the way it is. I suppose newspapers have recognized that fact and are bailing on literature. We'll see.




August 1, 2008
In response to: More on Review Sections
Kassia Krozser commented:

Sara -- I think (despite my admitted foray into inarticulateness, a place I'm going to try to avoid in the future!) I won. Yeah, of course I'd say that. Last week, Wasserman et al issued a "sky is falling" letter to the press about the Los Angeles Times Book Review. It was received pretty much as you'd expect -- some coverage, a lot of shrugging. This week, however, we're finally getting thoughtful discussion, on my site (booksquare.com) and across the web, about the future of book reviews, the role of newspapers in book coverage, and, yes, the fact while some bloggers bloviate, a whole lot of good writing about books is happening online (including active participation by Steve Wasserman). The Golden Age of newspaper book coverage -- if it every really existed -- is over, but the Renaissance of book discussion is happening online, in face-to-face discussions, and in print. If you love books, then this has to be nothing but good.




August 4, 2008
In response to: More on Review Sections
Sara Nelson commented:

Hi, Kassia -- I agree, and have written on PW and elsewhere, that the Web interest in books has been explosive and for the most part, good, and good for books. I'm so aware of it that the debate makes me tired. The whole notion that there can only be one kind of criticism is wrong headed. There's deep, where does this fit in the cultural landscape? kind of criticism, and then there's I want to read this on the train reviews. Anything that convinces people to read and steers them in the direction of a bookstore, virtual or otherwise, is fine with me. ps I thought you were good on PBS. I thought they were putting you in a defensive position, and you handled it well.




October 9, 2008
In response to: More on Review Sections
Gale Laure, Author commented:

I think the world has room for all kinds of reviews. Reviews are just opinions---some are good and some are not. However, I always appreciate ever review I receive. Gale Laure, Author of "Evolution of a Sad Woman"





POST A COMMENT
Display Name or Registered Users Login Here.
Please restrict submissions to less than 7,000 characters (including any HTML formatting).

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above. Note the letters are case sensitive:


Advertisement

Advertisements



VIRTUAL EDITION


Virtual Edition



©2008 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Please visit these other Reed Business sites