GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-05 > 1020278891


From: Kay Allen AG <>
Subject: Re: Off-Topic Reply to RE: On Douglas Richardson's new books
Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 11:51:50 -0700
References: <c9.218334e7.2a018b99@aol.com>


wrote:

> In a message dated 4/30/02 11:14:05 PM, writes:
>
> << (a) How much do you pay the authors who write in your publication?
>
> (b) You have claimed that you make no money (pushing it so far as to claim to
> be nonprofit--which is a completely different thing) >>
>
> I wish I could regularly pay and would if the circulation was high enough to
> afford it. I suppose all small circulation journals cannot afford to pay and
> would like to. I do pay for translations and sometimes for special articles
> or assignments.

But those other "badly managed" journals offer complimentary issues. You don't!
Or at least, I've never seen any.

>
>
> I never said that no money is made. It has to be or it would be a loss.
> Printing, postage, office expense, advertising, free copies, packaging --
> this all adds up, of course. For every thousand paid subscribers at $25 a
> year, that means $25,000 gross, obviously. Production costs certainly eat up
> at least half that amount. If a journal does not have a thousand subscribers
> -- and the vast majority of non-slick genealogical publications do not, then
> you can easily see it is shoestring stuff.
>

Snipped

>
>
> The so called small "scholarly" publications are run by people who are
> terrible business persons -- me among them -- who cannot figure out how to
> make it pay well enough and how to make it interesting enough to appeal to a
> greater subscriber base and thus make good advertising dollars and an
> expanded advertising staff a part of the solution -- thus being able to
> afford to pay scholars for contributions and translators for their services.

The offer advertising. It is mainly genealogists offering their services, but it
is advertising.
Maybe, that's how they can afford to give complimentary issues. :-)

>
>
> I find it very hard to understand a 'professional' writer who proudly
> announces that he is not paid anything at all for the contributions he has
> made to many successful journals. This is not a matter for pride -- it is a
> matter of bad management and the failure to have good enough business vision
> to make it pay. If one is that good at what one does, then one should be
> able to eek at least a living out it. This lack of the ability to make some
> financial reward from one's life work translates to bitterness toward those
> who can and says a lot about the temperaments evidenced in this forum.

Paul probably doesn't consider himself a "professional" writer. He is a
professional genealogist. There is a big difference. I doubt his bitterness is
aimed at thise who make money in genealogical writing. It is aimed at those who
take the writings of others and make a profit, even if it is a modicum, with out
a thank you of, by first having gained permission. FYI, If you take a piece of
300 works or less, which is in it's entirety, you are still commiting plagarism
and copyright theft.

>
>
> I am thankful to the amateurs that allow me to use their material in my
> journal. They can get a voice there that they cannot get in other journals.
> They do not expect to rise to great heights as genealogical writers. They are
> thankful to be quoted and to give something back to the world and their
> descendants.

But you also take from professionals [yes, you do give attribution], but without
permission.
Amateurs who really have something to say can be published in the scholarly
journals and be heard. If giving back garbage to the world is paying it forward,
give it up. There are always a multiplicity of serious, stupid, incompetent
errors in your publication. I could correct them, but why should I? I wouldn't
even get the courtesy of a thank you for your generousity. We are talking
symbiosis, not parasitism.

>
>
> I am also thankful to people like John Parsons -- a professional -- who
> willingly contributes for the advancement of knowledge and out of concern for
> the much less-than-professional readership that form the backbone of most
> journals circulation. John gets added name recognition and sells a few books
> for his publisher, in turn, but it is not a fair trade. He relied on his pay
> as a professor to pay the real bills for years and is now facing a tough
> time. I wish I could help him more than I do -- and I could with a larger
> circulation, but I will not get a larger circulation from _this_ list with
> these unpaid "professionals" backbiting me at every possible turn.

You could get a larger circulation, by exercising a higher grade of scholarship
and not alienating the "professionals". But why should they help you, when you
have such utter contempt for them and their professionalism. After all, you are
biting their wallets. And you are not helping their "unpaid" status.

>
>
> Most 'pro' contributors and editors rely on academia to provide their real
> living. They teach and lecture -- these kinds of things. Obviously, the
> colleges and universities that they work for suffer from the lack of getting
> much less than 100 percent effort to the profession that sustains them.

That is also untrue. The only academic editor I know is Dr. David Greene and I
think that it is scurrilous that you should say that his school is not getting
its moneys worth.
I also assure you that those who have other forms of income, besides genealogy
and genealogical writing, do not stint their other obligations or shirk them.
There is such a thing as "spare time". I do hope you have the grace to
apologize.

Kay Allen AG and Mrs.

>
>
> Kenneth Harper Finton
> Editor and Publisher
> THE PLANTAGENET CONNECTION
> __________________________________________
> HT Communications / PO Box 1401 / Arvada CO 80001
> VOICE: 303-420-4888 FAX: 303-420-4845
> <A HREF="http://htcommunications.org/homepage.html">;
> http://htcommunications.org/homepage.html</A>;
>

This thread: