Capitalizing on accessibility, the Authors Guild is out of touch

February 25, 2009 by
Filed under: Strategy 

bookToday I read a post on TechCrunch about an op-ed piece on the New York Times by Roy Blount, Jr of the Authors Guild.  Mr. Blount argues that the text-to-speech feature of the Kindle is infringing on his industry because even though Kindle owners pay to download the text version of a book, they do not pay for the audio rights.  Typically audio rights are paid for audio versions of the book read aloud by humans.  He goes on to say that computer voices are getting so good that they will eventually be indistinguishable from humans.

This all sounds to me like another industry fighting technology to maintain a monopolistic hold to try to extract profit for individuals at every opportunity.  If a person purchases a printed book and later the audio version of that book, do they get some sort of refund for owning the same work twice? Why is the inverse so reasonable then?  When I was at USC I was once told by a music executive that a music CD only gave you the right to listen to the music from that CD, not the right to transfer it to another device.  In essence he was saying I should have to pay them multiple times for the same content.  Why did this make sense to the guy?  Because in the past this is what the industry has lived by.  Get customers to build a library in one format and then purchase it again when a new format comes along,  Vinyl -> cassette -> CD -> digital (end of the road).  The issue here is a flawed business model which in the past was able to extract more profit from the release of new technology.  I still remember how angry I was when I learned how much more CDs cost relative to cassettes. We never saw a price decrease for music CDs even though they were cheaper to produce.

The real issue with text-to-speech…

By adding text-to-speech Amazon is not “infringing” on the book industry.  They are opening up a world of information to the blind and visually impaired.  Newspapers and magazines can now be consumed by this segment of the population the same day they are available to sighted individuals.  Mr. Blount points to the National Federation of the Blind taking offense to his stance, but they have every right.  Where has the Author’s Guild been when the blind and visually impaired could not access newspapers?  Did they make their professionally recorded audiobooks available to these individuals?  Did they help the Library of Congress or Recordings for the Blind by allowing them to distribute their books on standard CD, DVDs or Downloads which could be played on an ipod?  The short answer is no.  From the Recordings for the Blind website:

RFB&D now offers AudioAccessSM, which enables downloading of audio textbooks from the Internet for playback on either a Windows computer or a Windows–compatible portable media player. RFB&D’s AudioPlus® digitally recorded textbooks are stored on CDs, which hold more than 40 hours each of recorded materials.

In order to play RFB&D digitally recorded textbooks, you will need to use specially adapted CD players or software

The National Library Service for the Blind has the following:

Books and magazines loaned free by the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, Library of Congress, are available in recorded format on audiocassette. Cassette recordings require specially designed playback equipment (see Part I), which is loaned free to eligible individuals and institutions. Special accessories (see Part II ) are also loaned free. Cassette machines play at either 15/16 inches per second (ips) or the commercial standard 1-7/8 ips.

The above 2 services basically say that if you are blind or visually impaired there is no simple way for you to read a book.  You need special Windows only players, big cassette players, or special CD players to consume books.  This industry does not have a vested interest in solving accessibility issues, but they are quick to denounce a tool that could help those who are most in need.

Anyone who has ever used text-to-speech know that it is not the fastest or most enjoyable way to read. Most people use the technology because of a need, not as a superior replacement for visually reading text.

Publishers should be helping the blind…

Instead of condemning Amazon for the text to speech technology in the Kindle, the industry should be complaining because Amazon didn’t go far enough.  They should make the device more accessible by making menu navigation text enabled so that the blind could better use the device.  Apple has been making great strives in this area by making OS X very accessible with technologies like Voice Over and making iPod menu speech enabled, but more can be done in this area.

What some companies miss is that accessibility isn’t just about helping people, it makes business sense.  Text-to-speech does not take money out of author’s pockets, it adds to the bottom line because a whole new segment of the market can now purchase their content.  This is synonymous to closed-captioning which makes TV shows accessible to the deaf thus increasing the number of people an ad can reach.

A new era…

Target is in the process of settling a case filed against them by the NFB with regards to Target’s formerly inaccessible website.  Instead of capitalizing on a market segment which is in more need of online purchasing due to transportation limitations, Target locked those potential customers out.

The web and digital media is for the first time giving hope to millions of Americans which in the past could not get accessible books for pleasure or education.  Today these individuals can’t get access to college books because they change so often it is impossible for organizations to keep up with transcription to Braille or audio.  I would bet these individuals would pay for an accessible version of a text book were it available.  The Author’s Guild should work on capitalizing on this market instead of trying to close the door for these individuals.

Just like TV executives will not be able to stop the progress of internet TV, the publishing industry will not be able to stop text-to-speech. It’s already on every Mac.  Don’t fight progress, figure out how to capitalize on it.

Tags:

Comments

3 Comments on Capitalizing on accessibility, the Authors Guild is out of touch

  1. Noel Gomez on Thu, 26th Feb 2009 12:48 pm

    2. Engadget just published a review of the Kindle. Here is how they see the text-to-speech function:

    “Of course, there’s been a lot of controversy about one of the new functions of the Kindle 2, namely its “read to me” mode, or text-to-speech. This item has been the subject of a heated debate, sparked mostly by an accusation from the Author’s Guild that the technology infringes on author’s copyrights by turning your regular text into what amounts to an audio book. Something tells us if the Guild took a moment to listen to this voice, they might reconsider the accusation… because it’s an insult to voice actors. For our money, the text-to-speech option is a nice novelty, but not remotely useful for prolonged readings, or readings of anything but the most simplistic material. This is the “computer voice” we’ve come to know and love — nothing more, nothing less, and it’s not exactly pleasant. While it is available in male or female varieties, and can be slowed down or sped up, it’s hardly a stand in for an actual human (recorded or otherwise).”

    Original Article:
    http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/26/amazon-kindle-2-review/

  2. Noel Gomez on Fri, 27th Feb 2009 9:25 pm

    3. wil wheaton wrote a nice post on this issue and even recorded himself reading a passage from a book and then compared it to the computer’s rendition

    wil wheaton vs. text 2 speech
    http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2009/02/wil-wheaton-vs-text-2-speech.html

  3. Amazon caves on text-to-speech, a loss for accessibility | Caldeas Blog on Wed, 4th Mar 2009 5:07 pm

    4. [...] my previous post I mentioned how the Author’s Guild was putting pressure on Amazon due to the inclusion of the [...]

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!