Page 2

Page 2 ?; "t should come as no surprise that publications such as this one—review collections based on -paper and ink—are dwindling in number. The Wall Street Journal (March 6, 2007) recently reported that currently there are only a handful of book review sections in major metropolitan newspapers . Whereas ten years ago there were nearly a dozen, today there are only five separate book sections in major Sunday newspapers. The U)s Angeles Times Sunday book section was the most recent to go, while the Philadelphia Inquirer'1?, section folded decades ago. The story also reported that the reason for the discontinuation of these Sunday independent review sections was not because of a lack of interest in book reviews by the readership. Rather, it was because the review sections were not able to generate enough ad sales. Why? Because book publishers that used to run advertisements in these weekly book review sections are now using their limited marketing funds to purchase prime real estate in chain bookstores. Given that the average Barnes and Noble stocks between 125,000 and 150,000 books, the publishers feel that a big pile of their favored new title positioned near the front door or the cash register is a better investment of their marketing dollars than an ad for their book in the Chicago Tribune Sunday book review. These publishers believe that folks are more likely to buy their book if they are attacked by a big pile of it in a chain bookstore than if they see an ad for it in a book review. Hence, the birth of the "book monster"—a pile of books so large and obvious that it is impossible to pass through the bookstore without falling over it. The Wall Street Journal story can be viewed as a cautionary tale for the editors and readers of ABR. Dwindling ad revenues are hastening the death ofpaper and ink book reviews. And as someone who would like to see ABR thrive for years to come, I feel obligated to take note ofwhat is happening to the Sunday newspaper book sections. Andeven though there is at least one fundamental difference between the Sunday newspaperbook reviews and ABR-they are for-profit organizations, and we are not—we still have bills to pay. Moreover, the publishers that we feature—small, regional, university, ethnic, avant-garde, and women's presses—generally don't have the budgets to purchase a Barnes and Noble "book monster." Rather, they rely on us to get word out on their books through quality reviews of their titles and affordable advertising in our pages. Charlie Alcorn—our managing editor—and I heard this time and time again at the AWP meeting in Atlanta last month, and we are taking this advice to heart. The health of this publication must always be gauged by the quality of its reviews. But we need to recognize that our longevity is connected to the number of ads you see in our issues. It's a pretty safe bet that with a stable, if modest, base of advertising, we will have the material conditions to run a quality publication. Without advertising, we place ourselves in the fickle hands of external support and thereby risk going the way of the Sunday book review. Some believe that advertising in itself brings down the credibility of a publication such as ours, while others insist that ads increase our perceived value. But credibility is always on the shoulders of the persuasive, professional, thoughtful, and detailed reviews we publish. And I would want it no other way. I think that those of us who know and love and support ABR have to remind ourselves what a special publication this is. We also, however, have to be cognizant of the fragile environment in which it exists. The future of paper and ink publications such as this one is not guaranteed based on past success. You can help us by taking every opportunity you can to share ABR with your friends, colleagues, and students. Let them know what we do. Encourage them to subscribe, or give them a gift subscription. And most of all, encourage those of means to support...