Now that Amazon’s Kindle 2.o offers a text to speech function, I’m worried about audio books.
I don’t think audio books will be immediately elbowed out, which is why I’m not too alarmed by Authors Guild’s warning that text to speech cheats authors out of audio book royalties. It’s hard to imagine anyone preferring a computerized reading of Harry Potter to Jim Dale’s entertaining and richly musical voice acting. Plus, my anxiety over the issue has been tempered by Amazon’s announcement that publishers will be able to opt out of allowing text to speech for their titles.
But what will happen when this feature improves? I haven’t heard the Kindle’s tecno-voice yet, but I imagine it will only get smoother and more nuanced. When that happens, will readers/listeners decide a computerized reading is just good enough to prevent them from shelling out for audio books? By that time, will publishers be prevented from opting out from text to speech?
If that does happen, not only will writers miss out on royalties, readers will miss out on amazing storytelling performances–the kind that make me happy to sit in traffic, the kind that make me lose myself in something that is both communal and personal.
Are you worried about this issue, or do you think people are overreacting?
Parker Peevyhouse
lindajoysingleton
Joni Sensel
Chris Eboch
Nick
Greg R. Fishbone
I’m a huge audiobook fan, and I think the whole text to speech thing has a long way to go until it would sway me to listen to it instead of the purchased audiobook. The narrators that read these books are truly talented. Did you ever listen to any Terry Pratchett on audiobook? Hilarious!
I don’t think people are overreacting. At some point, the speech version will become very good, and audiobooks will have to adapt. Already audiobooks are very expensive.
Just another way technology’s democratization of our culture works with the free market to provide more to those with less.
Too often the free market has worked against those with less. As long as Kindle’s price structure doesn’t negate that progress I say, “Go Amazon!”.
What about writers with less who need more?
I actually have been wondering how this will affect those who poor eyesight who might use this function instead of audio books. I can see how that would be helpful to them if it’s cheaper in the long run.
You’re right, everyone could use a bit more $$ these days.
But the larger issue really is about how technology’s ability to democratize societies.
In terms of capitalism vs. democratization, I think the balance as already been tipped in favor of democratization. A (mostly) free and (mostly) open internet is a herd of cats not likely to be corralled. The end of newspapers is a perfect example of this trend.
For those in the business of producing or reproducing digital content, making money is only going to become tougher. I believe it’s a reality better grasped with today rather than tomorrow.
Which isn’t to say I believe authors, illustrators, and all other producers of content shouldn’t be paid. They most certainly should, and well. Coming from the world of education, I know too well the consequences of not attracting bright minds with fair wages.
The question is how to get the most money for your work in an increasingly open society that feels decreasing amounts of responsibility to pay.
I’m in Houston, and I heard that The University of Houston recently began the process of eliminating physical textbooks and going to “on-line” texts!
…I GET that cuz honestly, in college, I didn’t read ALL of a text book and it would be helpful to search for keywords and such when I’m studying, but what does everyone think about “digital books”?! I’ve heard there’s a little device you can get that looks like one of those hand video game things but it’s 2 screens and u can read books you’ve downloaded from it.
I’ve said in the past that I wouldn’t go there because I read in bed and in the tub and I wouldn’t want a digital book in those cases, but people are telling me that the digital screen on these things doesn’t hurt ur eyes, is light, and will change the industry…………..I don’t like it, but as a writer–I’d WANT to be able to keep up with the future of the industry.
Thoughts?! ANyone?!
I’d love to have a digital reader, and I think it’d great for studying. It’s true that the Kindle and the Sony reader use technology that makes the screen look like a printed page.
It is hard to completely let go of printed books, though. I don’t think I would.
An actor or a skilled reader will always be better. I really can’t imagine a digital reader understanding the text or characters well enough to beat a person who understands the text.
Think of the variety of characters within a well written book that has varieties of dialects or personalities. You have to understand the story to read those folks.
Imagine a kid listening to their digital reader reading a Dr. Seuss book. I don’t think it would get the rhythm or the emphasis that builds the comic effect of his books.
In some way, really, audiobooks are a performance and people are willing to pay more for a good performance.
I agree! It just wouldn’t be the same to hear a computerized voice. But I wonder if people will be willing to give up better performances for the sake of saving money.
I supposed there’s always the library–that’s where I get a lot of audio books.