THE BUSINESS OF BOOKS
How International Conglomerates Too Over Publishing 
And Changed the Way We Read
by André Schiffrin
      This little book was the choice of our Men’s Book Club. Who ever heard of it? The title pretty much states his thesis. 
      When Schiffrin first started publishing, books were chosen “that often put ideas before profit.” When conglomerates absorbed the smaller publishers things changed. “Now five behemoths share 80% of the market and profit margin is all.”
      Part of the book tells how it all happened and how review boards that judged a book replaced professional editors's potential for “success.”
      The author’s core concern is what happens to ideas. Chapter 4 deals with “market censorship.” Publishers argued that they were “market driven.” They were obliged to focus on “the bottom line.” They said:
“It is not up to the elite [small publishers] to impose their values on readers…it is up to the public to choose what it wants.” (p. 103)
      Conglomerates, of course, have great advertising budgets and are intertwined with the chain bookstores that have largely displaced the independents. They can commission popular authors and books in ways the smaller publishers could not. They had little interest in whether a book was important, or whether a particular author had writing skills that would draw a readership if given a chance.
      Schiffrin points out the general conservative orientation of the conglomerates and their distaste for many of the ideas expressed by authors printed by the independent publishers. 
      He sees the unwillingness to publish books with diverse ideas as a form of censorship. By focusing on the most popular books and not publishing many others, the conglomerates are changing the way we read. He lists a number of important authors and books that would never have been published under such guidelines. Boris Pasternak’s Dr. Zhivago is an example.
      He includes a profound quote from a debate that took place in the 1930’s about whether radio should be entirely private or remain independent and non-profit:
“Freedom of speech is the very foundation of democracy. To allow private interest to monopolize the most powerful means of reaching the human mind is to destroy democracy. Without freedom of speech, without the honest presentation of facts by people whose primary interest is not profits, there can be no intelligent basis for the determination of public policy.”  (From Rich Media, Poor Democracy by Robert McChesney, p. 202)
      Schiffrin points out that the same thing that has happened to the publishing industry has happened everywhere. The neighborhood grocer, the family physician, the private attorney, and even university faculty have all been pressured and changed by “the bottom line.” In our own Willamette Valley, the same syndicate owns all of the newspapers. The same is true of the radio stations. The daytime radio talk shows are almost all conservative. They operate on the principle of “the bottom line.”
      There is special need, therefore, for books that can “go against the current, raise new ideas, to challenge the status quo.” Books are important to help us think and make us think. Even books we don’t like can cause us to think beyond where we are. 
      The author does not hide the fact that many authors and books he mentions are not favorites of conservatives and often run contrary to popular thinking. He thinks, however, that we are all the richer when everyone has a voice. It is especially important that we hear voices that would not be heard if their chance to say it depended on profit or the bottom line. Democracy needs ideas that go beyond those that are market driven.
      It’s a small book, and important, profitable or not.
- Art Morgan, September, 2001