eternal bureaucratese

Common characteristics of bureaucratic texts:

  1. Abstract -- Job titles indicating organizational position (major, manager) replace job titles associated with doing a specific job (scribe, librarian).
  2. Vague --  Contributions, superstatutory food-money, and "the usual" are used as names for taxes and bribes.
  3. Repetitive -- Virtually identical documents newly appear over time.
  4. Prolix -- A decree denouncing tomb desecration begins: "It was my duty, after considering with myself, to restore the ancient custom [about funerals].... For when they considered the matter, the men of old, who made wise laws, believed that there was the greatest possible difference between life and death....the sun is the cause of day and night ... by his departure and arrival."
  5. Passive -- Nouns replace verbs ("our thinking is" replaces "we think").  Passive verbs replace active verbs ("it was determined" replaces "the Council ruled").
  6. Assuring -- Colonial levies are called "happy shipments"; the army is called "our ever-victorious soldiers".
  7. Obsequious -- "by his mere passing-by, by the mere efficacity of his high dignity, recalled our city...to splendor."

All the examples above are from fourth-century Roman bureaucratese.[*]  Bureaucratic language is as universal and enduring as humans' social nature.   Enjoy the Carnival of Bureaucrats!

[*] See MacMullen, Ramsay. 1962. "Fourth-Century Bureaucratese," Traditio 18: 364-78.

Tags:

revenue diversification: the example of movie theaters

Movie (motion picture) theaters are not just in the business of showing movies.   In the U.S. in 2007, 29% of movie theater revenue came from food and beverage sales (concession sales).  Another 6% of revenue came from advertising services, rental of retail space, revenue from coin-operated games and rides, and other revenue.[1]

Shares of concession sales in total movie theater revenue are similarly large in other high-income countries.  In Spain from 2003 to 2005, concession sales amounted to about 25% of movie theater revenue.  In the U.K. in 2005, concessions sales also amounted to 25% of movie theater revenue.  Soda and popcorn made up nearly two-thirds of U.K. theaters' concession revenue.[2]

At least in the U.S., the movie theater business was relatively slow to recognize and exploit concession sales.   In the 1930s, concession sales amounted to only 2% of theaters' total revenues.   A factor contributing to theaters' focus on movie admissions revenue was probably the Hollywood studio system.  Vertically integrating production, distribution, and exhibition, five studios controlled about 50% of theater seats.[3]  Integrated studios managed the vertical value chain for movies.  Concession sales meant looking in an orthogonal direction at a geographically dispersed, retail business more complicated to control and monitor than the film exhibition business.

Competition from drive-in movie theaters may have promoted conventional movie theaters to expand concession sales.  Drive-in theaters numbered about 60 in 1945, but expanded rapidly to about 1,500 in 1949 and 3,611 in 1954.[4]   In an article published in 1951, a business professor noted:

drive-in theaters have experimented and pioneered in providing either restaurant facilities or almost complete snack bars, serving in the latter a wide range of hot and cold sandwiches, pastries, and ice cream specialties, as well as candy, popcorn, and soft drinks.  In some cases, these are served at booths or tables facing the theater screen so that the picture may be watched at the same time.  In other cases many of the commissary items are served directly to car patrons from small commissary wagons.  In all cases, the patrons are urged to utilize these services to the fullest extent, and most drive-in theaters prolong intermission periods for just this purpose.[5]

The professor reported estimates that drive-ins have concession sales "30 or 40 per cent (and sometimes as high as 75 per cent) of total admissions receipts",  "four times as much as the average conventional theater."[6]   Census data for 1954 show concessions sales as 28% of admissions receipts for drive-ins  and 12% of admissions for conventional theaters (both figures excluding admissions taxes).   While the professor may have somewhat exaggerated the contrast, drive-ins unquestionably did lead conventional theaters in expanding non-admissions revenue.

The movie industry changed significantly in post-war decades.  The share of U.S. households owning television sets rose from 9% in 1950 to 87% in 1960.   Along with the spread of television, average weekly movie attendance fell from 60 million per week in 1950 to 40 million per week in 1960. [7]  In addition, in 1948 the Paramount Decrees required the Big-Five studios to divest ownership in theaters.   From 1948 to 1972, the number of conventional movie theaters fell by half.

Despite these changes, concession sales as a share of movie theaters' total revenue remained about 12% from 1954 to 1972.    Because movie distributors take roughly 50% of admissions revenue, but movie theater owners keep 100% of concession sales, the Big-Five's divestiture of movie theaters increased newly independent theaters' incentive to pursue concession revenue.[8]  Perhaps movie theaters sought to differentiate themselves from television with high-value productions exhibited in a more formal, controlled setting.  Such a setting might disfavor the noise and disorder of food and beverage consumption.  Organizational inertia may also have been a factor.  In 1972, 44% of conventional theaters had been established prior to 1942.[9]   For whatever reasons, with major changes occurring about them, theater owners did not change their revenue structure.

Movie theaters' non-admissions revenue share began to rise about 1972.   From 12% in 1972, the non-admissions share rose continually to 28% in 1992 and 34% in 2007.  Judging by the Arlington Cinema 'N' Drafthouse, located in a historic art deco theater built in 1940, I expect non-admissions revenue to continue to rise in the future.

Movie theaters' revenue diversification  is an example that doesn't bode well for newspapers and television broadcasters.  Both newspapers and television broadcasters are well-established businesses.  They now need to diversify their revenue streams in order to survive in the new media environment.   Most importantly, they must do so much faster than movie theaters increased their revenue by selling soda, popcorn, and other refreshments.

Notes:

[1] Based on the U.S. Census Bureau's 2007 Services Annual Survey.  I've compiled Census data on movie theater revenue sources from 1935 to 2007.  Subsequent cited figures, unless otherwise noted, are from that compilation.

[2] Gil and Hartmann (2007), p. 335, gives the Spanish figure, which is based on a dataset described in detail in that paper.  Id., p. 330, cites the U.K. figure, which comes from Screen Digest.  Across Europe, 78% to 87% of movie patrons purchase soft drinks in theaters, and 59% to 78% purchase popcorn.  Id. p. 327, citing Research Business International, Food and beverage usage in cinema, report prepared for Coca Cola (London: 2000).

[3] The Wikipedia entry on the Paramount case cites an authoritative figure: "By 1945, the studios owned either partially or outright 17% of the theaters in the country, accounting for 45% of the film-rental revenue."  United States v. Paramount Pictures Inc., 334 U.S. 141, 167.  Various other, undoubtedly not independent, secondary sources on the Internet suggest the theater-seat figure cited above.  These sources also indicate that the Big Five controlled 80% of first-run theaters in major cities.  If you have good data pertaining to this issue, please let me know.

[4]  The figures for 1945 ("at the end of the war") and 1949 ("late 1949") are from Luther (1950) p. 42.   Id. notes that drive-ins began operating in 1933 and increased in number initially about 8 a year.  The 1954 figure is from the compilation of Census data on movie theaters.

[5] Luther (1951) p. 407.

[6] Id. p. 408, 401.

[7] Bicentennial Edition: Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Social Statistics, p. 400, Series H873.

[8] Gil and Hartmann (2007) pp. 329-330, describe the different incentives of a movie distributor and the independently owned theater.

[9] 1972 Census of Selected Service Industries, Vol. 1, Summary and Subject Statistics, p. 3-17, Table 4.

References:

Gil, Ricard and Wesley R. Hartmann (2007), "The Role and Determinants of Concessions Sales in Movie Theaters: Evidence from the Spanish Exhibition Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, v. 30, pp. 325-347, DOI 10.1007/s11151-007-9139-7.

Luther, Rodney (1950), "Marketing Aspects of Drive-In Theaters," Journal of Marketing, v. 15, n. 1 (July) pp. 41-7.

Luther, Rodney (1951), "Drive-in Theaters: Rags to Riches in Five Years," Hollywood Quarterly, v. 5, n. 4 (Summer) pp. 401-411.

Tags: , , ,

non-book items in U.S. public libraries

Here's a short paper on public library media formats, mainly based on various previous posts.  To support Table 1 in the paper, I've posted some aggregate data on U.S. public library holdings by media item category, fiscal years 1989 to 2005.

Did you know that in 1915, the Morrison-Reeves Library in Richmond, Indiana, had a collection of more than 2000 piano rolls?

Tags: ,

industrial organization for government communication

Concern about too much government control over technologically limited and costly communication channels has been enormously significant historically. With the Internet revolution, governments can own and control communication channels without significantly lessening the opportunities for non-governmental bodies to do so. Governments that broadly disseminate government-created content do not preclude others from broadly disseminating other content. Vertically integrated government communication now carries much less political risk for the over-all communications industry. This fundamental change, it seems to me, favors more vertical integration in government communication with the public.

A draft of a new scholarly article makes the opposite argument. It declares:

If the next Presidential administration really wants to embrace the potential of Internet-enabled government transparency, it should follow a counter-intuitive but ultimately compelling strategy: reduce the federal role in presenting important government information to citizens. ... Rather than struggling, as it currently does, to design sites that meet each end-user need, we argue that the executive branch should focus on creating a simple, reliable and publicly accessible infrastructure that exposes the underlying data. Private actors, either nonprofit or commercial, are better suited to deliver government information to citizens....[1]

The idea essentially is to have more vertical disintegration in government communication. Government would focus on providing a large amount of detailed, machine-interpretable data that other organizations' technologies would search, aggregate, re-organize, and re-use. The anticipated benefit is more rapid innovation in the provision of information services to citizens.

Some efforts to promote vertical integration clearly are silly. The Yale Journal of Law and Technology (YJOLT) will publish the draft article quoted above in Fall 2008. The draft is freely and publicly available from the websites of SSRN and YJOLT. Yet on the top of every page of the article appears the bolded imperative "Do NOT cite." That literally implies that everyone can read the draft article but no one can discuss it. Many blogs have simply ignored the draft's pagely imperative (see, e.g., here, here, here, and here). One sheepishly declared: "it kindly asks us not to cite the draft, but - since it's out there for everyone to read - I assume a little quoting in a blog post like this is in order."

Wanting to respect the authors' wishes, I emailed them to ask if they would mind if I were to discuss their paper, cite it as a draft, and link to it. One of the author's responded graciously. He thanked me for my note, explained that YJOLT required the header, and welcomed me to discuss the draft and link to it. That's a good response. Allowing persons to discuss what they read increases the value of the time they spend reading. Moreover, the value of publishing an article in YJOLT isn't reduced by allowing discussion of the draft. Attempting to deny readers the freedom to cite a publicly available draft is an absurd product of an organizational silo-mentality. Fortunately, the specific issue is relatively easy to deal with in practice.[2]

The more general and important issue concerns supply incentives. With respect to government data, more important than the allocation of resources between government data infrastructure and government provision of data to individual end-users is the extent of investment in producing, cleaning, organizing, maintaining, and studying data. Government data collection typically is initiated to serve a narrow political purpose. Concern about specific statistics and the use of the data to produce specific reports drives investment in ensuring accurate reporting, finding and resolving data inconsistencies, and maintaining the data over time. A data collection effort that expands over time to serve diverse political interests within government has a better chance of enduring. To the extent that government data collection mainly serves non-governmental information intermediaries, governments will invest less in collecting data and ensuring high data quality.

Governments have significant advantages as suppliers of web content and services to end-users. Most adults know the names of the governments to which they are subject, have experience with those governments' services, and are concerned to make those services better. Governments typically spend little on user acquisition (many even aggressively discourage immigration) and relatively little on advertising and promoting themselves and their services. For example, U.S. federal government expenditure amounts to about 20% of GDP, but U.S. government advertising spending probably amounts to less than 1% of total U.S. advertising spending. Governments have a highly differentiated position within the space of user trust, and governments generate distinctive information flows. Eliminating governments from the ecology of end-user web content and services would waste their special institutional advantages.[3]

Stimulating end-user demand for government information is likely to make more government data available through information intermediaries. In academia, scholars who generate and share large amounts of data typically get relatively little academic credit, prestige, and status. Not surprisingly, only a small number of heroic academics pursue this unpropitious path. Even initiatives to require scholars to share data and algorithms necessary to replicate their published results have not been widely successful. However, the small share of scholars whose results attract considerable attention naturally generate demand for the data that they used. Moreover, these scholars then have some interest in ensuring that the data they used are widely available. The same dynamic is likely to be operative for governments. But the information flow is likely to be larger, because governments have a greater responsibility to supply demands for data and are less capable of controlling access to it.

Useful government data will get out one way or another. More important is to ensure that governments have an incentive to generate it.

Notes:

[1] From abstract of Robinson, David, Yu, Harlan, Zeller, William P. and Felten, Edward W., "Government Data and the Invisible Hand" . Yale Journal of Law & Technology, Vol. 11, 2008 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1138083

[2] I didn't try to contact YJLOT and get permission from YJLOT to cite the paper. When I'm not wearing my bureaucratic hat, I'm more concerned to respect the desires of human persons than those of corporate persons. That's particularly true when those desires seem to me silly or not in the public interest.

[3] As bright discussion of id. has highlighted, the distinctive characteristics of government also include distinctive forms of end-user political accountability.

Tags: , , ,

Applying Newton’s Third Law to human behavior: institutions have mass

Digital forms and ubiquitous networks are greatly increasing opportunities to circulate authored symbolic works. Digitization projects are creating huge online libraries of digitized books that persons around the world can access at zero incremental cost. Storage prices are dropping so rapidly that one small device will soon be able to store all the music that most persons listen to throughout their lives. Video sharing sites are collecting and distributing large amounts of video across the Internet. Many persons can now easily create a huge library of digital works. How persons respond to vastly expanding access to works will significantly shape the communications industry.

To understand better the circulation of works, consider U.S. public-library users’ book-borrowing behavior since the mid-nineteenth century. Measured relative to the unskilled wage, the dime novels that Irwin Beadle began selling in 1860 were almost five times more expensive than the twenty-five cent paperbacks being sold in 1950. A lower real purchase price for books increased the incentive to purchase rather than borrow. Average time spent reading, according to the best available estimates, fell 50% from 1925 to 1995. Less time spent reading implies less demand for borrowing books.

Other factors probably pushed toward more borrowing. The number of books in print, and the number of books in libraries, increased immensely from the mid-nineteenth century to the early twenty-first century. Perhaps such a change encouraged persons to read a larger number of books less thoroughly, and hence favored borrowing books relative to purchasing books. Library users’ travel costs, in time and money, probably fell with improvements in transportation technology since the mid-nineteenth century. Lower travel costs reduce the total cost of borrowing books from a library.

Library book circulation per user has no strong, long-run trend. From 1856 to 1978, library users borrowed from U.S. public libraries about 15 books per user per year. From 1978 to 2004, book circulation per user declined approximately 50%. The growth of audiovisuals circulation, estimated at 25% of total circulation in 2004, accounts for about half of this decline. These figures depend on estimates and disparate samples of libraries with varying circulation and user accounting methods. Nonetheless, these figures are of sufficient quality to suggest that historically established institutions significantly stabilize borrowing behavior.

circulation trends for U.S. public libraries

Users borrowing items from public libraries has plausible connections to a variety of institutions and values. Much of the pleasure from reading comes from discussing a book with friends who have also read the book. The desire to discuss books among friends may constrain the rate at which individuals will read books. At the same time, persons may value going to the library as an activity in itself. Borrowing library items may be in part a by-product of interest in those visits. On the supply side, libraries can counterbalance changing demand for books by shifting the distribution of book collections between popular and less popular works, by changing investments in promoting book borrowing, and by shifting collections from books to audiovisuals.

Media use that is connected to wider scope of behaviors and interests is likely to change more slowly. The shifts in music from vinyl records, to CDs, and then to digital downloads were format changes that required relatively small changes in behavior. Persons who read the same newspaper every morning while using the bathroom, or who watch a half-hour television news program every evening before dinner, have their media use connected to relatively stable patterns of life. Generational changes in patterns of life, rather than changes in relative prices, quality, or features, are more important for such media use. Established institutions, meaning both routine patterns of personal activity and indefinitely chartered organizations, can give media use considerable stability despite major changes in activity incentives and technological possibilities.

Note: Post edited and updated. For sources and data, see Book Circulation Per U.S. Public Library User Since 1856 (also on SSRN).

Tags: , , , ,

the Internet brain

There is no Chief Executive Officer neuron in a brain. In brains, the most general decision-making processes (top of the executive hierarchy) and the broadest and most abstract representations (top of the perceptual hierarchy) are physically instantiated in the broadest networks of neurons. That's rather different from the structure of a company in which the Chief Executive Officer is considered to be the highest decision-maker and the best representative of the company.

Joaquín Fuster, a leading neuroscientist, described this contrast:

The cortical structure and dynamics of the executive hierarchy, like those of the perceptual hierarchy, differ radically from the structure of social hierarchies. In social hierarchies, such as those of industrial and military organizations, representation -- like power -- is concentrated at the top; in cortical hierarchies, it is distributed at the top. Because both perceptual and executive hierarchies are formed largely by divergent connections, representations at the top are much more broadly based, in neural terms, than those at the bottom....[1]

The Neurocritic provides conceptual and anatomical diagrams from one of Fuster's earlier papers.

Note that this difference involves neither an absence of hierarchy nor a contrast between bottom-up and top-down control. The brain's executive and perceptual hierarchies are built upon anatomical gradients of memory formation:

Because the three gradients of memory formation -- phylogeny, ontogeny, and connectivity -- largely coincide temporally and spatially, we can trace them by focusing on any one of them, such as the ontogenetic gradient, as portrayed by the myelogenetic map of the cortex. The numeration of the map refers to the order of myelination of the various cortical areas in perinatal periods.[2]

Moreover, both top-down and bottom-up control are important aspects of brain functioning, each with somewhat different communications technologies.

The Internet is like a global brain. That global brain, like the one in your head, includes hierarchies and forms of top-down control. At the same time, the most general decisions about the goals of the Internet are a product of the relations of many active participants. Relations among persons, not one corporate person, represents what the Internet is.

Notes:

[1] Joaquín Fuster (2006), "The cognit: A network model of cortical representation," International Journal of Psychophysiology 60, p. 130.

[2] Id. p. 127, reference to figure omitted.

Tags: , ,

taking rights seriously

False or excessively broad claims to rights, if taken seriously, could have devastating effects on content businesses. For example, U.S. National Football League (NFL) broadcasts include the following statement:

This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience. Any other use of this telecast or of any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent, is prohibited.

The claim, "This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience," is absurd. Copyrighting a telecast is not necessary for the private use of it, nor is advancing that use a credible explanation for the NFL's copyright action. The problem is not just that the NFL has not expressed a credible business justification for its copyright. The second sentence of the NFL's statement seems to imply that football fans need permission from the NFL to discuss games ("accounts of the game") that they watch on television. That's an impressive anti-social business-destroying effort.

The NFL has not yet succeeded in destroying its business. Perhaps that's because because football fans recognize copyfraud. The NFL recently has shown no respect for copyright law. The RIAA has executed astonishing initiatives to destroy the music business. If the NFL is serious about destroying the football business, it might run a few plays from the RIAA's playbook.

Shrewd and successful new media businesses seek to become platforms for users to share and discuss users' works. YouTube's terms of service state:

For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. However, by submitting the User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube's (and its successor's) business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels. You also hereby grant each user of the YouTube Website a non-exclusive license to access your User Submissions through the Website, and to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display and perform such User Submissions as permitted through the functionality of the Website and under these Terms of Service. The foregoing license granted by you terminates once you remove or delete a User Submission from the YouTube Website. [first bold type in original; second, added here]

Google and BSkyB (Sky) have teamed up to produce SkyCast. This video service offers users a much different deal:

If you send us videos, messages or other content, we will be able to use your content in any way we like. So, we might decide to put your content on one of our other services, like TV, or give it to someone else to put on one of their services. We might even decide not to use it at all! If you decide to take your content off the Service, Sky can still use it in any way we like.

In addition:

You waive all moral rights in relation to your Content.

Moral rights, such as Article 6bis of the Berne Convention, apparently can be waived in some jurisdictions. While SkyCast filters submitted content, its terms of service declares "thou shalt not submit content" that:

1.1 is in breach or promotes the breach of any third party rights (including third party intellectual property rights);
1.2 is defamatory, offensive or libellous;
1.3 promotes racism, bigotry, hatred or harm of any kind against any group or individual or would subject any person to ridicule or cause other people to shun or avoid such an individual;
1.4 harasses or advocates the harassment of another person or persons;
1.5 promotes conduct that is abusive, threatening, obscene or distasteful;
...
1.24 refers to any arrest of an individuals [sic] or any active court proceedings.

Moreover, in conjunction with the opportunity to offer their work to SkyCast, users are required to accept liability to SkyCast and third parties:

5.5 You will reimburse Sky and any third party who provides services to you as part of the Service for any losses, costs or damages incurred by Sky and/or any third party, on demand, arising out of:
5.5.1 your use of the Service, or anybody else that your [sic] allow to use the Service using your SkyCast Profile; and/or
5.5.2 your breach of these Terms of Use.

How would one assess the financial risk of this liability given the terms of service?

I cannot imagine that any rational, informed users would actual agree to submit work to SkyCast. Put different, if users take seriously their rights as currently set forth in SkyCast's terms of service, I think SkyCast's business is worthless.

Tags: , , , , ,

novel content creation

In the middle of the eighteenth century, a new form of content creation grew rapidly in Britain. The new popular content was long, realistic but fictional narratives of ordinary individuals whose lives nonetheless were put forward as significant for everyone. These works were called "novels."

Novels were YouTube in the eighteenth century. Authors of novels included roughly equally men and women, "leisured gentlewomen, high-profile aristocrats, obscure vicars, and curates, sea captains, destitute merchants' wives, reformed and some unreformed prostitutes, over-archieving adolescents, and pious autodidacts." A leading novel publisher in Britain explained in 1769:

all we have hitherto published have been sent to us unsolicited from their authors, without any stipulated pay, promise of reward, or previous agreement whatsoever, either by ourselves or any other person for us.

Most authors didn't even have their names attached to their work: about 72% of new novels published in Britain and Ireland, 1770-1799, were published anonymously.[1]

Most novelists received little monetary compensation for their works. Sometimes authors funded publication of their works, or assumed liability for losses from publication. When authors sold their copyrights, the typical payment was low but payment variance was high. For example, in 1787 a publisher bought a copyright from an obscure novelist for £5, while in 1794 the same publisher bought a copyright from a well-known novelist for £500. The median payment to British novelists among surviving copyright sales receipts, 1770-1799, was about £29. That was about the annual earnings of building craftsmen. By 1860 in the U.S., only 216 persons declared their profession to be "author." In contrast, 3,154 persons declared their occupations to be the newer occupations of daguerreotypist and photographer.[2]

While authors of novels typically did not earn enough money to sustain themselves, novels quickly dominated popular book reading. In the late eighteenth century, purchasing books would have been a financial hardship for most persons. Social and commercial libraries, however, made books much more readily available. At the end of the eighteenth-century in Britain and in the U.S., novels comprised 40% or higher shares of titles in commercial circulating libraries. Limited evidence from circulation records suggests that the share of novels among books borrowed was probably higher than 50%.

Novels had well-recognized popular effects in the second half of the eighteenth-century. Commentators observed that a rage to read (Lesewut) was gripping the German lands. Reading the novel The Sorrows of Young Werther [Die Leiden des jungen Werther, 1774] prompted young men to dress like the character Werther. Reportedly about 2000 young men committed suicide in sympathy with Werther. In France, the novel Julie, or the New Heloise [Julie, ou la nouvelle Héloïse, 1761] created a large body of weaping readers. American readers of the highly popular novel Charlotte Temple (1794) tended her purported grave in New York City.

The prevalence of imitations, mock sequels, and parodies among late eighteenth-century novels marked them to contemporaries as a "faddish, superficial make of literature." Following Henry Mackenzie's popular Man of Feeling (1771) came the anonymous and forgotten Man of Failing (1789). Only one year after Hannah More's highly successful didactic work, Coelebs in Search of a Wife (1809) came Coelebs in Search of a Mistress (1810), under the likely authorial pseudonym Sir George Rover. Many now-forgotten novels of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were hastily written, poorly crafted works.[4]

Many influential persons in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries considered novels to be wastes of time, causes of ill health, and corrupters of virtue and morals. In 1794 a London reviewer described a new novel, Widow, as "fashionably vicious." The reviewer warned against reading such novels and implicitly proclaimed the importance of the reviewer's own work:

O! for a warning voice to prevent those, at least, in whom age has not yet destroyed the capabilities of improvement, from dreaming away their hours in turning over publications like these.

Another author more directly warned against reading for amusement and diversion:

To read a book merely in order to kill time is an act of high treason toward humanity because one is belittling a medium that was designed for loftier purposes.

Others described reading as a cause of masturbation and other injuries to good health:

the obligatory position, the lack of all physical movement when reading, combined with the violent alternation of imaginings and feelings [create] limpness, bloatedness and constipation of the intestines, in a word hypochondria, which has a recognized effect on the genitals of both sexes, particularly of the female sex [and creates] coagulations and defects in the blood, excitation and exhaustion of the nervous system, as well as conditions of langour and weakness in the whole body.

The effect of novels on manners and morals was an acute concern. Novel reviewers in London publications in the late eighteenth century described reviewed novels as "one of these pernicious incentives to vice that are a scandal to decency"; "utterly repugnant to every idea of delicacy and honor"; and, "Written solely for the use of circulating libraries, and very proper to debauch all young women who are still undebauched." A popular American author of conduct literature noted in 1831:

Of late years, the circulating libraries have been overrun with profligate and strongly exciting works, many of them horribly exciting. I have deep prejudice against the whole class. The greater the genius displayed, the more dangerous the effects. The necessity of fierce excitement in reading is a sort of intellectual intemperance; and like bodily intoxication, it produces weakeness and delirium....They have a most unhealthy influence upon the soul....

From a less evangelical, more republican position, novels were described as "murdering of freedom of thought and the press." Similarly quotations from late eighteenth and early nineteenth century sources could be multiplied endlessly. All the ill effects ascribed to television, video games, and the Internet in recent years apply equally well to reading novels two hundred years ago.[5]

Novels and tabloids changed persons' relationships to printed words. Historians of the book have described a "reading revolution" (Leserrevolution) -- a shift in the distribution of reading from intensive reading (reading a book, particularly the Bible, carefully and repeatedly) toward extensive reading (reading one new novel after another). More generally, the rise of empirical science shifted authority from a bounded text to an unbounded corpus of evidence. The expansion of print functioned like science in the realm of imagination and culture.

About 1854, a man who grew up in Ridgefield, Connecticut recalled his youth:

Books and newspapers -- which are now diffused even among the country towns, so as to be in the hands of all, young and old -- were then scarce, and were read respectfully, and as if they were grave matters, demanding thought and attention. They were not toys and pastimes, taken up every day, and by everybody, in the short intervals of labor, and then hastily dismissed, like waste paper. The aged sat down when they read, and drew forth their spectacles, and put them deliberatively and reverentially on the nose. These instruments [spectacles] were not as now, little tortoise-shell hooks, attached to a ribbon, and put off and on with a jerk; but they were of silver or steel, substantially made, and calculated to hold on with a firm and steady grasp, showing the gravity of the uses to which they were devoted. Even the young approached a book with reverence, and a newspaper with awe. How the world has changed![6]

Yes, the world has changed. The world continues to change.

The history of the novel helps to provide some perspective on current media developments. Today major media companies are struggling to set up user-generated content divisions to foster production of user-generated content. At the same time, author and blogger Andrew Keen is promoting his new book entitled, "The Cult of the Amateur." He recently changed the book's subtitle from "How the democratization of the digital world is assaulting our economy, our culture and our values" to "How today's Internet is killing our culture." Without a whiff of amusement, a leading blogger laments, "There's no food for thought in this book." Even more seriously, a business intelligence company recently reported that user-generated videos "made up 47% of the total online video market." The report proclaimed, "consumer usage exploded in 2006 but revenues will prove slow to develop. The honeymoon period for user generated content is over."

The entertainment business is as strong as ever.

* * * Notes and Sources * * *

[1] Raven, James (2000), "Historical Introduction: The Novel Comes of Age," in The English novel, 1770-1829: a bibliographical survey of prose fiction published in the British Isles, gen. eds. Peter Garside, James Raven, and Rainer Schöwerling (Oxford: Oxford University Press), vol. 1, pp. 17, 51, 42.

[2] Id. pp. 52-53, which records 51 copyright receipts. In 1757, a journalist complained that a bookseller-publisher "never paid to any author for his labour a sum equal to the wages of a journeyman taylor." Quoted in id. pp. 50-1. Building craftmen in Southern England, 1736-1773, earned about 24 pence per day, or about £30 for a full year of work. See B.R. Mitchell, British Historical Statistics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988) p. 165. The data on occupations is U.S. Census data, collated and discussed in Galbi, Douglas (2003), "Copyright and Creativity: Photographers and Authors."

[3] Raven (2000) p. 85-6, 93; Winas, Robert B. (1975), "The Growth of a Novel-Reading Public in Late-Eighteenth-Century America," Early American Literature, IX.

[4] Raven (2000) pp. 15, 34. Garside, Peter (2000), "The English Novel in the Romantic Era: Consoliation and Dispersal," p. 58, in Garside, Raven, and Schöwerling, vol. 2.

[5] Raven (2000) p. 119; Wittmann, Reinhard (1999), "Was there a Reading Revolution?" in A history of reading in the West, eds. Guglielmo Cavallo and Roger Chartier (Amherst : University of Massachusetts Press) p. 301, quoting J.A. Bergk, Die Kunst, Bücher zu lesen (1799) p. 69 and Karl G. Bauer, Über die Mittel, dem Geschlechstrieb eine unschädliche Richtung zu geben (1791) p. 190; Raven (2000) pp. 17, 114, 101; Lydia Maria Child, The Mother's Book (1831), Ch. VII; Wittmann (2000), quoting, original source not cited; see Dmitri Williams (2003), "The Video Game Lightening Rod: Constructions of a New Media Technology,1970-2000," Information, Communication & Society 6:4 pp. 523–550.

[6] Goodrich, Samuel G. (1857), Recollections of Lifetime (New York: Miller, Orton & Co.) vol. 1, p. 86, quoted in David D. Hall, "The Uses of Literacy in New England, 1600-1850," in William Joyce et al., eds, Printing and Society in Early America (Worcester, Mass.: American Antiquarian Society, 1983) p. 21.

Tags: , , ,

reverse caching saves trees

Energy is a significant cost of running data centers. Over a three-year operating period at typical U.S. power costs, a server's acquisition cost is about equal to its power cost.[1] One documented estimate puts the annual power cost of U.S. data centers at two billion dollars in 2003.[2] IT power costs should be incorporated into a sensible evaluation of IT budgets and considered in energy policy.

Reverse caching can significantly reduce data center energy costs. At the State of the Net Conference this past Wednesday, Dick Sullivan of EMC stated that 70% of data on high-performance drives in data centers hasn't been touched in the past ninety days. Caching traditionally moves some currently relevant data to relatively fast memory. Reverse caching goes the other way. Moving data unlikely to be used to energy efficient storage (a kinetically idle or unplugged drive, or a dismounted tape) saves significant costs.

At the far end of reverse caching are major issues of digital preservation. Reverse caching puts digital preservation into a framework of shorter-run operation and maintenance issues. That may be a valuable management reform. Digital preservation is probably a larger business opportunity than reverse caching. Reverse caching might help to make digital preservation more prominent in (short-run) management strategy.

Update:

1) I fixed a few mistakes in the earlier version of this post.

2) Chuck's Blog has a good discussion of data center power usage.

3) Jonathon Koomey, with AMD sponsorship, has recently estimated total server power consumption in the U.S. in 2005 as 45 billion kWh. That represents 1.2% of total U.S. electricity consumption, about the same amount of power that color televisions consume (Koomey (2007), p. i). At an electricity cost of $60 per MWh, that power costs $2.7 billion. Koomey's server power estimate includes power for cooling and auxiliary equipment associated with servers. It doesn't include data storage and network equipment power, which Koomey suggests accounts for 20-40% of data center power consumption (see p. 2). Koomey's server power estimate also does not include power for custom-built servers. Google's custom-built servers, if included, might increase the total power consumption figure by 1.7% (see p. 3).

Koomey, Jonathan G. (2007), Estimating Total Power Consumption by Servers in the U.S. and the World (pdf), Final Report, Feb. 15.

[1] The Real Story about Dynamic Smart Cooling, Fact 1, citing HP, Christopher Malone, PhD, Christian Belady, P.E., “Metrics to Characterize Data Center & IT Equipment Energy Use”, Digital Power Forum, Richardson, TX (September 2006).

[2] Jeffrey S. Chase, Darrell C. Anderson, Prachi N. Thakar, Amin M. Vahdat, Ronald P. Doyle, "Managing energy and server resources in hosting centers," ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles, Banff, Alberta, Canada, 2001, pp. 103 - 116, (available pdf). Citing Jennifer D. Mitchell-Jackson, Energy Needs in an Internet Economy: A Closer Look at Data Centers, Master’s thesis, Energy and Resources Group, University of California at Berkeley, July 2001. This estimate used a power cost of $100 per MWh. Where power supply costs are higher, the power consumption cost of a server would be proportionally greater.

Tags: , , , ,

case study of trade-off between control and distribution

Early in the sixteenth century, Martin Luther's work rapidly spread across Europe. Luther issued his Ninety-Five Theses in Latin on October 31, 1517. They became known across Europe in about a month. The Ninety-Five Theses and other subsequent works of Luther were widely reprinted. Between 1518 and 1519, there were about 1,350 reprintings of Luther's tracts. By 1524, over a million copies of Luther's writing were in circulation in Europe.[1] An obscure monk in 1517, Luther by 1521 was one of the most famous persons in the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.

No one directed or controlled the distribution of Luther's work. Luther wrote in Latin and in German. German was the language of most persons in German lands. Latin connected Luther to an educated elite across Europe:

The educated élite who could understand Latin and theological debate was no longer composed only of churchmen and professors. [Luther’s theses] were initially read by a small group of learned laymen who were less likely to gather on the church steps than in urban workshops where town and gown met to exchange gossip and news, peer over editors’ shoulders, check copy and read proof. There, also, new schemes for promoting bestsellers were being tried out. [2]

Without the constraint of legal doctrines of copyright or any other controlling authority, religious and commercial innovators and entrepreneurs freely shared, reprinted, adapted, translated, and sold Luther's work. Their interests and Luther's interests were loosely joined:

The printers at Wittenberg at times even published material that Luther did not want to have published. This aspect of the matter annoyed him no end, but on the other hand he was glad to have their services and had no serious objection to these sometimes overly enthusiastic colporteurs of his message.[3]

Luther's writing and ideas were appropriated and incorporated in works directed at popular readership outside German lands:

very few of Luther's writings were translated into non-German vernaculars -- a few into Dutch, and two or three into English and French. On the other hand, many of Luther's early German writings were translated into Latin and, as the case of William Tyndale so tellingly shows, he was extensively plagiarized.[4]

The interpretations and presentations of Luther's ideas in non-German vernaculars were not authoritative, but they had great communicative effect.

The institutional Church controlled communication much more tightly and communicated much less quickly and much less widely. The Council of Trent, an important response of the Church to the religious turmoil of the early sixteenth century, met three times from 1545 to 1563. Pope Pius IV's bull accompanying the concluding decrees of the Council set out a tightly controlled communication system for the decrees:

that these things may come to the knowledge of all men, and that no one may use the excuse of ignorance; We will and ordain, that, in the Vatican Basilica of the prince of the apostles, and in the Lateran church, at the time when the people is wont to assemble there to be present at the solemnization of masses, this letter be publicly read in a loud voice by certain officers of our court; and that, after having been read, it be affixed to the doors of those churches, and also to the gates of the Apostolic Chancery, and to the usual place in the Campo di Fiore; and be there left for some time, to be read by and to come to the knowledge of all men. And when removed thence, copies being, according to custom, left in those same places, it shall be committed to the press in our good city, that so it may be more conveniently made known throughout the provinces and kingdoms of the Christian name. And we ordain and decree, that, without any doubt, faith be given to copies thereof written or subscribed by the hand of a public notary, and guaranteed by the seal and signature of some person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity.[5]

Interpretative and derivative works were also controlled:

in order to avoid the perversion and confusion which might arise, if each one were allowed, as he might think fit, to publish his own commentaries and interpretations on the decrees of the Council ; We, by apostolic authority, forbid all men, as well ecclesiastics, of whatsoever order, condition, and rank they may be, as also laymen, with whatsoever honor and power invested ; prelates, to wit, under pain of being interdicted from entering the church, and all others whomsoever they be, under pain of excommunication incurred by the fact, to presume, without our authority to publish, in any form, any commentaries, glosses, annotations, scholia, or any kind of interpretation whatsoever of the decrees of the said Council.[6]

By the early sixteenth century, an independent, decentralized, commercially oriented, competitive printing and book-selling business had developed in Europe. The Church organized communication of the decrees of the Council of Trent so as to keep it outside of the new printing and book-selling business.

In retrospect about five hundred years later, the split between Luther and the Church seems to have been mainly a communication problem. Communication problems are difficult problems. For a communicative endeavor to succeed, it must have actually necessary and feasible control within a sufficiently effective communication system.

* * *

[1] Hillerbrand, Hans J., “The Spread of the Protestant Reformation of the Sixteenth Century: A Historical Case Study in the Transfer of Ideas,” The South Atlantic Quarterly LXVII (Spring 1968) p. 275.

[2] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L., The Printing Press as an Agent of Change, 2 vols. (Cambridge University Press: 1980), vol. I, pp. 308-9.

[3] Hillerbrand, "Spread," p. 275.

[4] Ibid. p. 282.

[5] Bull of Pius IV, February 7, 1564, printed after canons and decrees in The Council of Trent, The Twenty-Fifth Session, ed. and trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848).

[6] Ibid.

Tags: , , , , ,
Next Page »