<\/p>\n
The lending of eBooks by libraries remains an area of controversy, with libraries often facing high prices and difficult licencing conditions, while publishers worry about impacts on sales and revenues to authors.<\/p>\n
A key challenge in this has been the relative newness of the format, and the lack of a shared evidence-base for understanding both eLending itself, and its interrelation with wider markets. The Panorama Project<\/a> is aiming to address this. We interviewed Guy LeCharles Gonzalez, Project Lead, to find out more.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n How well does anyone understand the eBook market and the place of libraries within it today?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The answer really depends on your perspective and priorities. The size of the overall consumer ebook market is difficult to measure because Amazon owns a significant percentage of it, especially on the self-publishing side, and they don\u2019t publicly share any useful data. OverDrive is the dominant player on the library side, but NPD Bookscan doesn\u2019t track ebook sales the same way they do print, and the American Association of Publishers (AAP) doesn\u2019t break out library sales at all, so there\u2019s no authoritative industry source for context.<\/span><\/p>\n Individual publishers generally have a good sense of where their ebook revenue comes from, but it\u2019s mostly \u201clast-click attribution\u201d which heavily favors Amazon and OverDrive, and they generally don\u2019t have a good sense of which factors might be impacting their consumer sales. They also don\u2019t have deep data on what drives those sales, including the role of discoverability through libraries, nor any useful insights into print circulation. The combination of fragmentation and lack of transparency is one of the primary reasons the Panorama Project was initiated.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Why do you think that there is relatively little data out there?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Trade book publishing is a notoriously opaque industry, for a variety of reasons, including private ownership of most major publishers and intermediaries. Movies, music, and video games all have relatively transparent sales data that\u2019s shared publicly and regularly dissected by their respective media outlets, but we rarely learn how many copies the latest <\/span>New York Times<\/span><\/i>\u2019 (NYT) Bestsellers actually sold in any given week or year\u2014unless it\u2019s the rare breakout hit\u2014despite it being one of the industry\u2019s primary, albeit heavily curated and proprietary, measuring sticks. There are <\/span>NYT<\/span><\/i> Bestselling authors who\u2019ve sold fewer copies of any book than the average middling video game, but they get to wear the badge anyway.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n What impact has this had on the decisions that are being taken by different actors?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n It\u2019s led to some publishers making \u201cdata-driven\u201d decisions about ebook pricing and access that lack proper context, potentially resulting in unintended changes to consumer behavior. <\/span>Assuming<\/i><\/b> library access is impacting consumer ebook sales and making strategic decisions based on that assumption is a risky bet\u2014especially if Amazon is the primary source of the data driving that assumption. What if it\u2019s not just library availability, but consumer ebook pricing, competition from other traditional publishers and self-publishers, or other forms of media, that is impacting your sales?<\/span><\/p>\n When you limit libraries\u2019 access to your books, you cut off an important discovery and consumption channel for a segment of your audience. And when you do that purposefully, you\u2019re as likely to drive readers to either wait until it\u2019s available or borrow another book they\u2019re interested in that is available, as opposed to converting them to buyers in another channel. If there was more transparency around sales data, and more understanding about discovery and purchase paths, the question of libraries\u2019 actual impact would be a much easier question to answer. That requires purposeful, good faith collaboration.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Where do you see the Panorama Project as making a difference?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Our primary goal is to encourage more productive, good faith conversations about public libraries in general\u2014from discovery and engagement to direct and indirect impact on sales\u2014so the industry can come to a collaborative consensus on how to measure their impact, whether it\u2019s positive or negative. Our various initiatives are designed to provide data-informed insights on that impact in specific areas, while building a foundation for more effective collaboration moving forward.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n How does the Panorama Project work?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n A cross-industry Advisory Council with <\/span>members from Penguin Random House, Sourcebooks, Open Road Media, American Library Association, Audio Publishers Association, NISO, Ingram Content Group, and OverDrive, <\/span>serves as a sounding board for potential and ongoing initiatives. They offer insight and expertise in different areas to ensure those initiatives can have a measurable impact, and align with Panorama Project\u2019s mission. We partner with different publishers, vendors, and organizations on specific initiatives, and I personally consult with a number of colleagues and experts across the industry for feedback and insights to ensure we\u2019re on the right track.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n How international is it or could it be?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n We\u2019re currently focused on public libraries in the United States, but we have occasional conversations about potential opportunities to expand our reach as there is international interest in our work. There are no specific plans currently in development, although I\u2019d love to hear feedback from anyone who has ideas.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Clearly, support from OverDrive as one of the major commercial players in the market will raise some eyebrows. Should it?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n It\u2019s a fair concern and one I shared when I was initially approached to take on the role as Project Lead. OverDrive identified the need, helped convene the Advisory Council, and brought me on to run things\u2014but our work is never tied to any specific OverDrive agenda, and everything we produce is fully transparent and widely shared for the benefit of the overall industry. The Advisory Council includes members from Penguin Random House, Sourcebooks, Open Road Media, American Library Association, Audio Publishers Association, NISO, Ingram Content Group, and OverDrive. One of our primary research initiatives for 2020<\/span>\u2014the<\/span> Immersive Media & Reading 2020 Consumer Survey<\/span><\/a>\u2014is in partnership with the Authors Guild, ALA, Book Industry Study Group, Independent Book Publishers Association, and PubWest. I expect that kind of collaboration will become the norm for all of our future initiatives.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n What findings have you already established?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Some of our early initiatives measured the positive impact of library access on consumer sales on specific titles, most notably debut author Jennifer McGaha\u2019s <\/span>Flat Broke With Two Goats<\/span><\/i> (Sourcebooks, 2018), the subject of our <\/span>Community Reading Event Impact Report<\/span><\/a>. Our Readers\u2019 Advisory Impact Committee researched, documented, and analyzed the wide variety of RA title and author recommendation activities used in public libraries, and produced the <\/span>Readers’ Advisory Directory<\/span><\/a>. That initiative led to further research on <\/span>Public Library Events & Book Sales<\/span><\/a> which identified major gaps in publishers\u2019 understanding and valuation of the monetary value of those libraries\u2019 organic and purposeful marketing activities.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n What current work are you most excited about?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Our two main initiatives for 2020\u2014the <\/span>Immersive Media & Reading 2020 Consumer Survey<\/span><\/a>, and <\/span>Library Marketing Valuation Toolkit<\/span><\/a>\u2014grew out of the <\/span>realization that a lack of transparency around data in the publishing industry is a major obstacle to establishing an effective foundation for collaboration. I\u2019m particularly excited about the consumer research because it\u2019s been years since anyone\u2019s taken a good look at how book readers\u2019 behaviors have evolved in the wake of ebooks and audiobooks, not to mention other immersive media like streaming and gaming. We\u2019ve partnered with Portland State University and assembled a cross-industry committee to collaborate on developing the methodology and the survey itself, ensuring that the findings will not only be credible, but actionable. COVID-19 forced us to adjust our timeline, but we\u2019re expecting to field the survey in the early Fall and have initial findings published before the end of the year.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n How do you see COVID-19 changing the landscape of library eLending?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n In the short-term, we\u2019ve already seen reports of increased engagement with libraries\u2019 electronic resources which, of course, leads to increased spending to meet that demand. Unfortunately, few libraries are going to come out of this period with increased budgets, so hard decisions will need to be made about materials budgets across the country. The longer the pandemic lasts, the more likely temporarily modified consumer behaviors will become permanent preferences, so I suspect we\u2019ll see an acceleration in engagement with, and increased spending on, digital content. If schools face a prolonged period of remote learning through the Fall and into Winter, even if it\u2019s a hybrid approach, that acceleration will probably be even faster.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n What are the next big questions needing answering to your mind?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n <\/p>\n