
Posted November 18, 2009 to Digital, Media Appearances, Print
Motoko Rich of the New York Times wrote an article that examines the use of iPhones as reading devices titled Library in a Pocket , and quoted me talking about my use of both the iPhone and the Kindle during my commute:
Indeed, Sarah Wendell, an administrative assistant in Manhattan who blogs about romance novels, said that although she used the iPhone to read while on a coffee or lunch break, she still used her Kindle during her one-hour commute from New Jersey.
For long reading sessions, she said, the iPhone is “a small screen, and my eyes would start to hurt, even though I crank the text up to grandma or great-grandma size.”
Author Shannon Stacey and fellow blogger Keishon Tutt were also quoted, though my look at the iPhone as a reader counters theirs. They prefer one device that does everything and like reading on the iPhone. I don’t – for one thing, the iPhone is so small it hurts my eyes after awhile, and for another, I prefer to have one device that does one thing for reading. With so much other stuff on board, I’m more likely to be distracted. Reading is a complete cessation of multi-tasking for me, and I like the single-use device for that purpose.
Of course, I bought my Kindle refurbished and used a few gift cards to bring the cost down; without those factors I wouldn’t have paid that much for Kindle II: Matzoh Man.

Posted November 16, 2009 to Digital, Media Appearances, Print
In an article that makes me want to weep and rage for the sexist ignorance of the headline, I’m quoted along with Angela James, Jane Litte, and Malle Vallik. When it comes to format, romance readers are promiscuous examines the romance reader as the biggest consumer group adopting digital books, and how publishers like Harlequin are eager to help that audience read more.
Really, Publisher’s Weekly, “promiscuous” is the best you could come up with? What kind of sexist crap is that?
I’m quoted on the topic of DRM and the absence of the reader’s needs and wants when it comes to development of digital reading tools:
Romance readers and publishers remain sharply divided on the question of encryption and digital rights management (DRM), however, and many consumers continue to hold out for a low-priced e-reader and a single standardized format. “Sadly, the reader is often the missing element in the development of books and devices,” says Sarah Wendell, a romance blogger at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books. “Whether it’s DRM security on the books themselves, or devices that have some but not all of the features we prefer, time and again manufacturers and publishers are standing between the reader and her book.”
Carina will be offering DRM-free e-books, delighting readers who want content to be immediately and perpetually available and easily shared. Other publishers are concerned that infinitely replicable books will destroy their bottom line. “Kensington will only deal with retailers that use DRM,” says Steve Zacharius, president and CEO of Kensington Publishing. “The authors have dedicated their lives to writing a book and deserve to earn a royalty from every copy that is downloaded. The slight inconvenience that might exist to the reader in having to put up with DRM is worth the effort to make sure that the e-publishing business is a viable model.” Wendell says that inconvenience not only discourages readers but reduces valuable word-of-mouth promotion: “We can’t say to a friend, ‘Oh, my gosh, you have to read this—here, borrow my copy.’ [Readers and bloggers] are the newest marketing and promotional team for an author, but our ability to share the very thing we love most is hobbled because we are seen as potential thieves and pirates.”
“Slight inconvenience” – sounds like someone who’s never wrestled with DRM and a device that won’t authorize itself not matter how many times you ask nicely.
Breathtaking awfulness of the headline aside, reporter Rose Fox did an amazing job of interviewing Angie, Jane, and me, and as usual I’m proud to be quoted alongside them, as they are some knowledgeable women who rock the digital world.

Posted November 09, 2009 to Digital, Media Appearances, Print
I’m quoted in an article from Information Today on the LibreDigital efforts to create AllAccess platforms that allow digital books to be readable for a variety of devices. In other words: digital books will be accessible from a whole ton of different devices like phones, digital readers, and computers, and will be formatted correctly for each. In OTHER other words: more books to read=yay!
My quote addresses the need for publishers to embrace the idea that a digital book can be read on a multitude of devices because most of us have more than one device:
Sarah Wendell, who blogs about romance novels as Smart Bitch Sarah at the Smart Bitches, Trashy Books blog (www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com), points out that the accessibility and portability of the AllAccess approach is hugely appealing to women readers, who not only comprise the biggest percentage of fiction readers (romance fiction alone generated $1.37 billion in U.S. sales in 2008) but tend to read in small chunks of time. “Women are the biggest multitaskers around. The danger to publishing isn’t that readers will choose something else to read if they can’t access a particular book. It’s that they’ll choose something else to do entirely,” Wendell says.
For LibreDigital, AllAccess represents an evolution in the services it has provided to publishers over the past decade. Six of the top 10 book publishers use Digital Warehouse, LibreDigital’s solution for storing, accessing, distributing, and repurposing published content and for tracking its data; and BookBrowse, a technology that replicates the offline experience of book buying by allowing readers to flip through the pages of a book. Additionally, 175 periodicals including newspapers, magazines, and trade journals are using LibreDigital’s iBrowse to provide a digital replica of the classic news reading experience.
Women multitask. Women read. Often, reading is the only time when we’re only doing one thing – and publishers need to make books easier to get, not harder.