The 15th Edition of the 21st Century: The Chicago Manual of Style Online, by Michael McCutcheon

by Brenna McLaughlin

Unbound: Advancing Book Publishing in a Digital World

One of the newest acronyms in electronic publishing is DAD, for digital asset distribution—a new name for the electronic storage and distribution infrastructure that’s been developing in the industry over recent years. Klopotek brought together presenters from a number of DADs, including codeMantra, BiblioVault, Value Chain, HarperCollins, and Ingram Digital Ventures, to give publishers a crash course on DAD.
    Each DAD representative took 15 minutes to present their services and opinions about what publishers could and should expect from a digital asset distribution partner. The vendors ranged from LibreDigital, a book-focused division of NewsStand, which manages electronic newspaper content for media companies around the globe; HarperCollins, which is now offering their digital warehousing services (described at the Books Unbound seminar, see above) to other publishers; to the familiar nonprofit BiblioVault, which is evolving into a full-service DAD.
    Many presenters also had general advice for publishers, regardless of what service provider one might choose.  Kate Davies of BiblioVault reminded the audience that working with a DAD can’t mean walking away from digital content distribution tasks entirely—strategic publishing decisions remain with the publisher. Choosing a vendor you can build a relationship with is vital.  LibreDigital’s Craig Miller’s mantra was “convert once, publish many”—publishers should aim for a solution which ensures that content need be digitized only once for all of the many new content distribution channels available.
    The day was extremely informative, presenting a wide array of options to consider as publishers search for the right—scalable, flexible yet stable—infrastructure for new electronic publishing models. Most usefully, however, the presentations from each DAD are now freely available online for publishers’ review. A white paper on the topic, prepared by Kloptek for Mike Shatzkin of Idea Logical and Mark Bide of Rightscom is also available for purchase.
     Presentations and white paper are available here: http://www.klopotek.de/en52235.htm

The New Imprint of the University of Michigan Press

As digital technologies transform traditional business, publishers of all walks are being swept up in the shift. It is against this backdrop that current debates over the future of scholarly publishing are set. In the words of Phil Pochoda, Director of the University of Michigan Press, “We are on the verge of a paradigm shift in publishing…. Although difficult to forecast concretely, it’s important that presses play a significant role in this transformation, otherwise we’ll be left out of building our own future.” This thinking is the impetus behind the University of Michigan’s latest online project—digitalculturebooks.
    The new imprint, affectionately known as dcbooks, employs a partnership between the University’s press and library in pursuit of a more advanced online publishing model. Developing this relationship between the University of Michigan Press and the Scholarly Publishing Office (SPO) at the University of Michigan Library has been a great advantage for the Press. The partnership allows for the pooling of resources and sharing of technical expertise that is vital to an online project. Maria Bonn, Director of the SPO, explained that, “[The SPO and the University of Michigan Press] have had a long history of friendly but generally non-productive overtures toward each other, looking for collaboration opportunities that really made sense…. This time the idea took.” Pochoda wrote the initial proposal and discussions played out over the course of the next year to determine the form and content of the imprint.
    The division of labor is traditional yet collaborative. The Press plays the primary role in acquisitions, while the SPO office manages the online portal. However, as Pochoda says, the “idea is that neither [the Press or the SPO] are treated as a service agency. Both are fully informed and involved in all phases of the publication process. The relationship is fully transparent.” This ongoing consultation means, for example, that the Press discusses the online functionality of projects with the SPO, while the SPO consults on titles selected for publication. There is some tension between the two cultures, as Pochoda describes, “[The Press] has to be a revenue producer and the Library less so. They get much of their revenue upstream, and we get it downstream.” In light of this difference, one of the goals is to develop a “revised business model with which both sides can be comfortable.”
    The imprint debuted online with The Best of Technology Writing: 2006, edited by Brendan I. Koerner. Comprised of twenty-four articles, the series lends itself well to the online model. On a single web page the articles are listed with hyperlinks that take the user to another HTML page where they can be read for free. In this fashion one could read the entire book without ever having to open a wallet. A link at the top of the screen allows the user to add it to their “bookbag” if they would like to purchase it in print. Currently, the book is not offered in PDF format, although the HTML allows printing and cut-and-paste. Operating under a Creative Commons non-commercial, non-derivative license, both the press and the authors agree that there must be a free version of each title available to readers.
      In some ways the dcbooks model is similar
to other endeavors in online publishing, such as those at the National Academies Press. The NAP offers many of their books for purchase in hardcopy, as a PDF (including single chapters), or to be read online for free. In a study published by the NAP in 2003, they note that, “A cursory analysis of the sales figures…suggests that online print orders have grown steadily since free browsing became available. However, it was not clear whether the increase could be attributed to free browsing or the increased presence of consumers on the web.” Good news for online publishing, with the caveat that more research is needed.
    Part of the purpose of dcbooks will be to collect qualitative and quantitative data from users, to better understand “how reading habits and preferences vary across communities and genres.” The data will be helpful in better understanding the online reader—who they are and how they would like to see online models develop. It will also be beneficial in investigating the economics of Open Access publishing. All of this data will contribute to the discussion over the future of scholarly communication, and the question of how presses are to remain both financially viable and true to their purpose of disseminating quality scholarship far and wide.
    As the entire project is relatively new, there are a lot of people waiting to see whether the model being tested is a viable one. Bonn described the feedback she’s received thus far as “limited but positive. Authors are intrigued, libraries and publishers are interested, and administrators are tracking to see if we develop a successful publishing model.” It seems it will be a success if the free, online component helps to generate buzz and interest in the print versions, which will drive up revenue. This would allow for the model to be both financially stable and lead to increased access. Pochoda says, “There is no question in my mind that sooner rather than later university press publishing will migrate to primarily online dissemination. We’re testing that proposition somewhat with dcbooks, but being very cautious at first.”
    The imprint’s reception among authors may be divided depending on their area of scholarship. When asked how she would like to see the project develop, Alison Mackeen, Acquiring Editor at the University of Michigan Press, said, “I would be thrilled if it helps to expose otherwise reluctant scholars to the advantages of online publishing, and thereby improves the visibility and prestige of online publishing, among humanists in particular.” And here is perhaps where the division is most clearly seen. “It is nevertheless clear that humanities authors are more conflicted about the possibility of a parallel online edition than, say, academics in information schools or media and communication studies.”
    Over the course of the next year the imprint will be publishing at least eight titles, and in the process testing the economics and viability of the model. The recently launched New Media World Series is edited Professor Joseph Turow of the University of Pennsylvania Annenberg School for Communication. A Digital Media and Youth series will be launched in August, to be edited by Mimi Ito and Ellen Seiter of the USC Annenberg School for Communication.
    As dcbooks continues to develop definite outcomes remain up in the air. Pochoda says, “When the dust settles, the press won’t be the press we knew and the libraries won’t be the libraries we knew. We’re curious to see where we turn out, and no one can predict that yet—meanwhile, we’re enjoying the ride.”

The Book Industry Study Group (BISG) and the Green Press Initiative (GPI) have launched the first survey of the environmental impact of the full U.S. publishing industry.
     AAUP is a supporter and sponsor of this effort. The survey results are scheduled to be published in December 2008.

Read more about the survey: http://www.bisg.org/publications/environmental_benchmarking.html

The 2006 Whiting Week-in-Residence Reports

Each year mid- and upper-level staff, supported by the AAUP and Mrs. Giles White Foundation, visit other AAUP members to learn from an expert in their field. This year, many of the grantees were interested in the workflow at their host presses, hoping to compare approaches and test methods. After all, it’s only through others that we come to better know ourselves.
In 2006 an electronic editor, an administrative assistant, an art director, an acquisitions editor, and an assistant marketing manager all took advantage of this unique professional development opportunity.
Hope LeGro, Electronic Editor at the Georgetown University Press, visited the much larger University of California Press and spent the week shadowing Laura Cerruti, Acquisitions Editor and Editorial Director for Digital Publishing. LeGro had two goals for the week: “I wanted to see how California is tackling electronic publishing and I wanted to learn about their workflow.” What she found were two interesting models for digital projects. Ms. LeGro noted that in building their digital reference materials, for which there seems to be a natural market, California “decided to focus on a subject that produces revenue and in which they have a strong presence.” It was especially helpful for LeGro to see this model in action as Georgetown is considering something similar, although in a subject that fits their own strengths. Regarding the week-in-residence overall, she noted that, “the biggest asset of the program is the freedom to explore a variety of issues over an extended period of time and in person.”
The University of California Press also hosted another visitor, Patty Van Norman, an Administrative Assistant from Duke University Press. Over the course of the week she met individually with 15 members of California’s staff. This allowed for an inside look not only at the overall workflow and structure of various departments, but also provided the opportunity to discuss individual projects with the staff members assigned to them. Van Norman also attended a production launch meeting and a production department meeting, “both of which gave [her] a great deal of valuable information about how [California] operates and the channels of information between acquisitions, editing, production, and marketing.” At Duke, Patty hopes to offer ideas to improve efficiency and interdepartmental communication based on what she took from the University of California Press. In summing up the exchange, Ms. Van Norman said that in addition to “taking in a great deal of valuable information, I was also able to give information to my host press that may benefit them.”
Marianne Jankowski, Art Director at Northwestern University Press, traveled in the opposite direction to Columbia University Press, where she was most interested in catching a glimpse of the workflow procedures between editorial and design. Once there, it was Columbia’s mastering of XML files and the accompanying time and cost savings that provided the most valuable insights. Jankowski got an inside look at the intricacies of XML and how it plays out in the workflow process as a document goes from raw manuscript, to an XML coded document, to PDF, to the printer. At the end of it all, Ms. Jankowski said, “In conclusion, my observation of [Columbia’s] XML typesetting methods leads me to believe they are frontrunners in this mode of production and that Northwestern University Press, although not poised at this point in time to adopt the same workflow procedures, has gotten a glimpse of the future and can now plan for it.”
Theresa May, Assistant Director and Editor-in-Chief at the University of Texas Press hosted Lisa Chesnel, Acquisitions Editor at SUNY Press. In describing the week, Chesnel said: “I got to ask [Theresa] 101 questions all about UT Press and in return she got to ask me a great deal about SUNY Press.” Throughout the week Chesnel attended three editorial meetings, “all eye-opening experiences,” providing a behind-the-scenes opportunity to compare SUNY and Texas’s different approaches. Chesnel also reviewed Texas’s press-wide database, similar to what SUNY is in the process of creating, and met with their development officer, a position that SUNY is looking to create at their own institution.
Ginger Tucker, Assistant Marketing Manager at the University Press of Mississippi, visited the University of Minnesota Press and Stacy Lienemann, Direct Response and Scholarly Promotions Manager. “I found it very useful to work with a person at another press for an entire week,” Tucker said. “This week became very interactive, and Stacy and I reviewed each other’s programs and asked questions…that in answering enabled us to examine our own programs. I was able to reaffirm some of Mississippi’s standard practices and was able to find alternatives for some others.” As a result of the experience Ginger presented a proposal for changes to their direct mail program based on her week at Minnesota. “In summary, [Mississippi] will be able to incorporate many of the elements of [Minnesota’s] successful direct mail campaigns into our own to create a direct mail program that will help us to locate and reach the audience for [our] books.”
This Week-in-Residence program is one of AAUP’s most successful professional development programs, giving rise to new strategies and a stronger community. In 2006 not only did grantees learn from the experts they shadowed, but host presses got to query their visitors and receive input from an objective outsider. In the words of Lisa Chesnel, “it truly was a professional exchange.”

Michael McCutcheon is the Communications Assistant at AAUP.

Since 1965, the AAUP Book, Jacket, and Journal Show has honored the design and production teams who further a long tradition of excellence in book design, and—through the traveling exhibition and catalog—has visually taught the tenets of good design. Of the 293 books, 335 jackets and covers, and 6 journals that were entered, the 2007 jurors chose 51 books, 32 jackets/covers, and 2 journals as the very best examples of university press design.
     The 2007 jury included Linda Gustafson, principal, Counterpunch Book Design; Patricia Curtan, Graphic Designer/Illustrator; John Gall, Vice President & Art Director, Vintage/Anchor Books; and Cameron Poulter, former Design & Production Manager, University of Chicago Press. Lynn Werts, University Press of Florida, chaired the 2007 Design and Production Committee.
     Complete details on selected titles, as well as information about the designers and companies who donated time, paper, and printing to the 2007 Show, can be found at http://www.aaupnet.org/programs/marketing/designshow/winners2007.html.

For the first time, an AAUP Pavilion was home to more than ten AAUP member presses at the London Book Fair, held April 16-18. Representatives from seven presses attended in person, ensuring that the meeting tables were almost constantly in use. Foot traffic was steady, but the tables in the well-laid-out booth made it feel more like a mini-rights center than a static display area. After positive reviews from Pavilion attendees, AAUP and Reed Exhibitions are planning to continue the AAUP Pavilion exhibiting option for LBF 2008.

Contact Reed’s Marco Labbate for more information: mlabbate AT reedexpo.com

Discussions of the concept of open access to scholarly information are increasingly marked by highly charged rhetoric and an unfortunate polarization of opinion. In late February 2007, AAUP released a statement outlining the association’s perspective on what has become known as open access, in hopes of steering the debate towards productive solutions that will best serve the entire scholarly community.
      The statement sparked a number of active, thoughtful conversations online after it was released, often in response to articles about AAUP’s stance in such media as the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, ACRLog, and the If:book blog.

Read the complete AAUP Statement on Open Access.

Minneapolis, MN

The 2007 AAUP Annual Meeting was a great success, bringing approximately 600 scholarly communications professionals together in the Twin Cities. While the cocktail parties are long over, the knowledge-sharing that the annual meeting is known for continues.
     * Talks, session notes, and presentations are available through the AAUPWiki: http://aaupwiki.princeton.edu/
     * The inaugural presidential address by Sanford Thatcher, Director of the Penn State University Press and 2007-08 AAUP President is online: http://www.aaupnet.org/programs/annualmeeting/2007/pres.html
     * A list of volunteer mentoring contacts was compiled by Laura Westlund (Managing Editor, University of Minnesota Press) and distributed at the Newcomers’ Reception. The list can be accessed by members: http://www.aaupnet.org/members/mentor07.html
NOTE: this is a members-only resource. A member ID and password is needed to access this. Members may request login information here: http://aaupnet.org/pwrequest.html
     * MP3 recordings of almost all sessions are also available for purchase: http://www.conferencemedia.net/

Paul Murphy, RAND

Read more: http://www.aaupnet.org/news/press/murphy.html

by Kim Miller

On Friday, May 11, 2007, Michael McCutcheon and I attended
Professional, Scholarly & Academic Books: The Basic Books Boot
Camp. Organized by PSP (the Professional and Scholarly Publishing
Division of the Association of American Publishers), the Books Boot
Camp is a one-day intensive overview of the book industry intended for
people with less than three years of experience in the professional and
academic publishing sector.

    Attending this program was a great opportunity for
Michael and I to both gain insight from some of the leading
professionals in the area of academic publishing; and to interact with
our publishing peers. The seminar was moderated by Beth Schacht
(Director of Marketing, McGraw Hill), who did a great job of keeping
things timely and in order. John A. Jenkins (Senior Vice President and
Publisher, CQ Press) presented an overview of the industry and the
differences between publishing sectors.

    Gregory M. Britton (Director, Minnesota Historical
Society Press & Borealis Books) was one of several AAUP members
sharing their experience. Britton explained the role of acquisitions in
academic publishing, taking us through the stages of manuscript
development in a way that was both informative and entertaining. Cathy
Felgar (Associate Production Director, Academic, Cambridge University
Press) spoke openly on what the production department typically does
and introduced some information on the changes to come in the area of
production. Elizabeth Sheehan (Marketing Manager, EE/Technology,
Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishing, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.) gave a spirited talk on what a marketer does, and explained
marketing through a book’s lifecycle.

    Paul G. Manning (Vice President, Book Sales,
Springer) had the arduous task of having to speak to us directly after
lunch, but in spite of that, was still able to convey valuable
information about sales. Molly Venezia (Assistant Director and CFO,
Rutgers University Press) spoke, as many in AAUP will be familiar with
from her work on various “Finances for Non-Financial Folks,” quite
candidly and in layperson’s terms about her work in the area of
business and finance.

    A personal highlight for me, was participating in a
group project. Like at the higher-level and longer-format PSP Journals
Boot Camp, attendees divided into teams over a working lunch to create
a plan in response to various hypothetical publishing problems. My
team’s assignment was to deal with a potentially disastrous situation
with an author. Has this ever happened to you? There’s a meeting, and
it is very important for the author to be in attendance with his or her
latest title; but to everyone’s horror, there are no books available in
the warehouse or anywhere else to send to the meeting. What would you
do?

    Our solution involved a range of activities that a
publisher might pursue to rescue this scenario from disaster. A large
size poster of the cover, with special order forms, was the first
priority, along with—if possible—a galley for browsers to flip through.
An innovation to this was the idea of offering autographed copies of
the book to anyone who ordered at the meeting. Scaling up the plan in
case this author’s assuagement is an absolute necessity, we also
suggested an in-booth reception with the author and the book (or
poster, at least) as a centerpiece.

    The team challenge was key to making this a valuable
learning experience, allowing us to combine our own experience of
publishing with the day’s presentations.

    The next Books Boot Camp will be offered in San
Francisco, November 9, 2007.  For more information go to:
www.pspcentral.org. The intensive four-day Journals Boot Camp is also
being offered later this year, September 26-29, in Philadelphia.

The Chicago Manual of Style Online
by Michael McCutcheon
Communications Assistant, AAUP

Books and e-books may sound like rivals, but it doesn’t mean they always are. The text of The Chicago Manual of Style went digital in late 2006 and is one of the latest electronic resources on the web courtesy of university presses. Although still a work in progress, the project has been well received and proven complementary to its hardcover-cousin.
      Although there was already an online Q&A that accompanied the 14th edition, according to Carol Kasper, Marketing Director for the Books Division at the University of Chicago Press, they decided to put the complete text online after receiving a lot of feedback from users who said that “they would welcome an electronic edition.” And, in this case at least, the press agreed that the customer’s always right.
     Published in 2003, the 15th edition went live 3 years later as a subscription-based service. Now, the content of all 956 pages is online and fully searchable with the click of a button. Individual users can have access to the entire text for an annual fee of $25 with different pricing models for libraries and corporations/institutions. Yet accompanying the full text are a number of tools that can still be used for free. Subscribers and non-subscribers alike can peruse the online Q&A, which is both informative and clever, and the citation guide, which provides clear examples of Chicago-style citations. Users have responded with extremely positive feedback.
     When the Manual Online was launched in September 2006 there was an initial surge of traffic that has since slowed, but Kasper notes that they are “steadily adding customers…and have tripled since the first big wave of subscribers.” What may be a little surprising is how this electronic resource has affected sales of the print version—it hasn’t. Sales of the book are “behaving the way they did before the electronic version appeared online.” What’s new is that a lot of people seem to be using both resources at once. Kasper said that the University of Chicago Press has done market research and of online subscribers “80% still use the book as well.”
     The primary purpose of the Manual Online is not to sell books nor is it meant to drive traffic to the University of Chicago Press website. Although there is some overlap, Dean Blobaum, E-marketing Manager at the Press, states that the Manual Online “intends to be, is on the way to becoming, a self-sustaining online subscription product and destination.” And as with any online project, the work is never really done.
     The Manual Online is still being developed as Chicago seeks input from users and focus groups in order to improve future versions. Currently, they have plans to add additional features such as bookmarking, electronic notes, and the ability to create custom style sheets that can be emailed to other users. These features will further personalize the online version and improve the user experience. For those that want an electronic project of their own, be prepared to work both backwards and forwards to develop it.
     The difficulty, as Kasper notes, is that the development of an online project isn’t linear like that of a book where it moves from one department to the next. Instead, it is “three dimensional and a lot things have to be done simultaneously.” This requires the “business and development know-how” along with a “revised work flow and chain of responsibility” that can keep up with the continual process of updating the site, responding to users, and marketing the product year after year. Kasper acknowledged that the online Manual was a “long and complicated project” despite a good IT staff and experience with online journals. She recommended hiring a consultant for any first-timers, but the results are worthy of the effort.
     Although there is a big learning curve when undertaking a project like this for the first time, afterwards the capacity is in place to do it again. When asked about any closing thoughts Kasper laughed and said, “It’s hard work. It really changes how you’re used to working.” When asked if Chicago had plans to do more projects like this down the road she responded quickly, “Yes, we certainly have plans to do others.”

Chicago Manual of Style Online: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/

Other AAUP member electronic publishing projects: http://aaupnet.org/resources/electronic.html

A Review of the MLA Report on Evaluating Scholarship

by Lynne Withey
Director, University of California Press

It would be hard to overstate the significance of the task force’s
work. After years of debate about the “crisis in scholarly
publishing,” finally, a thoughtful group of scholars has moved beyond
the now-familiar laments about declining sales of monographs, strapped
library budgets, and vanishing subsidies for university presses to ask
the hard questions: do we really need all those monographs? Are there
other, equally valid, ways to evaluate faculty for tenure? Are
tenure requirements becoming unrealistic? The fact that one of the
largest and most prestigious scholarly societies has framed the
questions and offered hard-hitting recommendations is especially
welcome. It increases the odds that the academy will pay
attention. Bravo to the leaders of the MLA who initiated this
project and to the task force members who accomplished it!  We
scholarly publishers are in your debt.



The central theme of the report is concern about the future of junior
faculty and, by implication, the future of the profession. The
task force studied the percentage of newly minted PhDs hired into
academic jobs; the percentage of those jobs that are tenure track; the
requirements for attaining tenure, variations in requirements among
different types of institutions, and changes in requirements over time;
and the nature of the tenure process itself. Among the most
interesting conclusions are the following:

• Publication
  requirements for tenure have been increasing over time, especially in
  colleges and masters degree granting institutions, most of which now
  emulate PhD granting institutions in requiring a book for tenure. 
  Increasing numbers of institutions require a second book or significant
  progress toward a second book.*
• Despite these
  increased expectations and the widespread perception that publishing a
  monograph is getting harder to do, most junior faculty are meeting the
  stiffer requirements.  The percentage of candidates who attain
  tenure hasn’t diminished over time, although there is a great deal of
  anxiety that this situation will soon change.
• BUT—the
  proportion of faculty in tenure-track positions is shrinking as
  institutions increase their use of part time and adjunct faculty. 
  The biggest threat to aspiring literary scholars, beyond the generally
  lackluster job market, is the trend toward hiring non-ladder-rank
  faculty.  Escalating tenure requirements are a major concern, but
  not—so far—a barrier for those who manage to get into the ring in the
  first place.

Notwithstanding these conclusions, the task force did not shy away from
recommending changes in the current system, even to the point of
challenging the accepted definition of “scholarship.” The
report argues that scholarship should encompass teaching and service to
the profession as well as research. “Scholarship in the
humanities,” the report states, “constellates three activities:
research, interpretation, and reflection. Research is not to be
equated with scholarship; it is a component of
scholarship….Furthermore, scholarship should no be equated with
publication, which is, at bottom, a means to make scholarship public,
just as teaching, service, and other activities are directed toward
different audiences. Publication is not the raison d’etre of
scholarship; scholarship should be the raison d’etre of publication.”
(pp. 23-24) Following from this definition, the report
argues for “multiple pathways to tenure.” Institutions should
establish tenure standards commensurate with their missions and
values. The monograph should not be the only route to
tenure. (See recommendations 2 and 3, p. 70 and in the executive
summary.) The report also recommends that institutions recognize
the legitimacy of scholarship published in digital format (including
collaborative work) but, thankfully, understands that digital
publication is not a solution to the economic challenges of scholarly
publishing. (See recommendation 4.)


The report offers a perceptive analysis of dissertations and their role
in launching the careers of junior faculty. The primacy of the
monograph has ensured that dissertations are viewed as “larval
monographs”—the first step in the book-for-tenure process.  But
the trend toward digital publication of dissertations may make it even
more difficult to get that lightly revised dissertation published in
book form, thus adding to the pressures faced by beginning faculty
members. If the revised dissertation is no longer publishable,
will departments require a second, entirely new book-length work for
tenure? The Task Force argues instead that the dissertation
itself and the graduate curriculum should be reconceived.

Read the report here: http://www.mla.org/tenure_promotion

David Nicholls, MLA Director of Book Publications, will chair a session
at the 2007 AAUP Annual Meeting to discuss the Task Force’s findings
and recommendations. The session will be held Friday, June 15, 10:45 AM
to 12 Noon, at the Hilton Minneapolis.