3 ms·

Surely CDs have become Spotify, tidal. Blu rays have become Netflix, Disney, etc. magazines have become websites, etc. The content is still there just the medi

Surely CDs have become Spotify, tidal. Blu rays have become Netflix, Disney, etc. magazines have become websites, etc. The content is still there just the medium has changed. Has the same been true for books though? eBooks do exist of course, but did they replace the publishing industry that existed 50 or a hundred years ago?

vundercind 3y ago
50 or 100 years ago, people read a hell of a lot more fiction than they do now.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  I suspect in the past they also read far more nonfiction.
  - vundercind 3y ago
    I wouldn’t bet on it, unless we’re counting user-generated posts online, and clickbait “articles”. Which, maybe we should. [edit] JFC I misread your sense of “read”, I think we agree.
    - constantcrying 3y ago
      Updated my post. I don't think I encountered that "bug" in the English language before.
- matwood 3y ago
  True for fiction books. But if you think about fiction generally, as the poster said, the medium has changed. People still love fiction, but now it's movies and shows.
sigio 3y ago
As I said, subscriptions, not buying
- constantcrying 3y ago
  What is the Spotify of books?
  - exe34 3y ago
    Amazon/Adobe DRM? They can stop working at any time.
    - constantcrying 3y ago
      Neither of these provides books as a subscription service as far as I am aware.
      - skydhash 3y ago
        Amazon has Kindle Unlimited and O'Reilly have/had Safari
KeplerBoy 3y ago
It seems obvious that books lost some market share. People have a limited amount of time for entertainment and have a lot more choice between Netflix, YouTube, Books and thousands of other things than they did back then.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  Yes, that is what I meant. Books as a medium is just a much smaller industry with far fewer customers.
paulddraper 3y ago
Ebooks and audiobooks.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  As far as I can tell eBooks aren't significantly more popular than physical books. Surely the publishers cited in the article wouldn't have neglected that topic if it was actually a major revenue stream. As far as audiobooks go I don't know. Do you have any numbers?

vundercind 3y ago

50 or 100 years ago, people read a hell of a lot more fiction than they do now.

constantcrying 3y ago
I suspect in the past they also read far more nonfiction.
- vundercind 3y ago
  I wouldn’t bet on it, unless we’re counting user-generated posts online, and clickbait “articles”. Which, maybe we should. [edit] JFC I misread your sense of “read”, I think we agree.
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    Updated my post. I don't think I encountered that "bug" in the English language before.
matwood 3y ago
True for fiction books. But if you think about fiction generally, as the poster said, the medium has changed. People still love fiction, but now it's movies and shows.

sigio 3y ago

As I said, subscriptions, not buying

constantcrying 3y ago
What is the Spotify of books?
- exe34 3y ago
  Amazon/Adobe DRM? They can stop working at any time.
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    Neither of these provides books as a subscription service as far as I am aware.
    - skydhash 3y ago
      Amazon has Kindle Unlimited and O'Reilly have/had Safari

KeplerBoy 3y ago

It seems obvious that books lost some market share. People have a limited amount of time for entertainment and have a lot more choice between Netflix, YouTube, Books and thousands of other things than they did back then.

constantcrying 3y ago
Yes, that is what I meant. Books as a medium is just a much smaller industry with far fewer customers.

paulddraper 3y ago

Ebooks and audiobooks.

constantcrying 3y ago
As far as I can tell eBooks aren't significantly more popular than physical books. Surely the publishers cited in the article wouldn't have neglected that topic if it was actually a major revenue stream. As far as audiobooks go I don't know. Do you have any numbers?