Broadly endorsed. Although it seems worth noting relatively explicitly that following this pattern can often still involve pirating things.
More specifically: the principle here isn't "pay for fiction"; it's "pay for *good* fiction". Often, going into a work of fiction, one won't know yet whether it's good; that's a thing one learns as one reads / watches / etc. And thus, in many cases, it can be sensible to take an approach of "pirate a work; see what sort of impact it leaves; if the impact it leaves is positive, *then* go back and buy it". Because otherwise your money is going to end up being allocated, not based on which works contain good storytelling, but based on which works are advertised particularly well, and this is likely to produce less incentive towards creation of works containing good storytelling.
Good post! (Of course, I am biased in favor of writers being paid.)
I would also like to note that, particularly if you are a subscriber to a short fiction magazine, it is incredibly beneficial to write to the editor and tell them when they publish a story that you liked! Editors are of course mostly publishing based on their own taste, but they do take reader and particularly subscriber feedback into account in terms of future purchasing and publication decisions.
Very few people send letters to editors, and most of those letters are angry. There is an opportunity here.
(It's also good to write to the author and tell them although it's not always as directly impactful on publishing for structural reasons. But it's nice to read, which makes a difference in terms of "author I like continuing to write.")
As an author who made* $331 off my debut novel, and about that much weekly for writing boring articles about financial advice, I strongly support what you're saying. I have to make money in some of my time, and if it all goes to boring financial advice, you don't get as many space pirate books.
*that is, I wrote the book in 2020, sold it in 2022 and I will HOPEFULLY get paid for it in March. My second book, being self pub, pays out more often and a larger percentage, but I've only sold 19 copies, so that's even less 😛
Borrowing an ebook from the library is a great thing to do. Different services have different pay structures, but the library has either one copy they can only lend out to one person at a time, or a copy they can lend out infinite times but pay the copyright holder *per borrow.* Either way it's a sweet deal for me. I don't need YOUR money, I just need somebody's 😅
A big problem is that it's hard to buy digital media: you can buy the right to read a book or watch a movie, revocable at any time by the seller. If you want a copy you actually own, you need to pirate it. Some publishers, like Tor, sell DRM-free books, but your favourite author is probably not on there.
Indeed, your favourite author is probably on Amazon, and is forbidden (explicitly or in practice) from selling their ebooks anywhere else. I very much want to support my favourite writers and their publishers, but encouraging Amazon's rent-seeking seems bad. So I end up buying a bunch of physical copies that I don't want, as a convoluted way to recompense the author and publisher and support local bookshops. Adam Smith is crying.
Likewise, itch.io sells video games, but most game authors only publish them on platforms like Steam. At least this is their own choice, not a monopoly forcing their hand. (I feel very righteous when I buy multiple copies of the same game on itch so I can gift some to people, even though nothing stops me from copying the files.)
For television, the situation is even worse: I have no idea how to support a TV show without supporting outrageous DRM practices.
Small artists with a donation page are probably the easiest case, especially since even small amounts of money have a much bigger impact. (Though you still have to contend with payment processors being awful.) I should check out more of those.
> I think that if you have spare income such that this is realistic, and you like fiction, you should give money to people who create the fiction, because then you’ll get more fiction you like.
This, like arguments for voting, only really works from some kind of Hofstader-ian "Superrational" logic. It is inconceivably unlikely that my giving money will materially influence content creation (or, in the case of a small indie creator, just unlikely). So from a strictly rational, selfish perspective, it's always better for me not to pay. I certainly want people like me to pay for the sort of content I would like. But that's not the same as wanting to pay myself.
Yeah, at some point I reached a crossover point of actively wanting to pay for a book if I enjoyed it or thought I was going to enjoy it. Sometimes it was hard to do
Otoh, with companies it can be hard to do. I can sign up to a streaming service but sometimes even then it's hard to watch. Or I need to watch it on a particular schedule to "count" for statistics. Or I want to watch a show over a couple of non-consecutive months and signing up to a streaming service just for that is as expensive as buying it would be, plus I can forget to cancel. So I try, but I've been managing it less often when it feels like it's really hard to give them money
I looked up the Patreons for the web serials I like. One is making only $2k a month, but they post ~1 chapter a month so this is a side hobby rather than a job. The others are making $10-30k a month. Even paying for an editor, that seems like a lot to me.
My guess is that the vast majority of authors are probably making very little, but the ones I like and would want to support are also liked and supported by others already.
I agree with the philosophical argument that supporting the authors seems good, but it feels less like I'm adding incentive on the margin.
Broadly endorsed. Although it seems worth noting relatively explicitly that following this pattern can often still involve pirating things.
More specifically: the principle here isn't "pay for fiction"; it's "pay for *good* fiction". Often, going into a work of fiction, one won't know yet whether it's good; that's a thing one learns as one reads / watches / etc. And thus, in many cases, it can be sensible to take an approach of "pirate a work; see what sort of impact it leaves; if the impact it leaves is positive, *then* go back and buy it". Because otherwise your money is going to end up being allocated, not based on which works contain good storytelling, but based on which works are advertised particularly well, and this is likely to produce less incentive towards creation of works containing good storytelling.
Good post! (Of course, I am biased in favor of writers being paid.)
I would also like to note that, particularly if you are a subscriber to a short fiction magazine, it is incredibly beneficial to write to the editor and tell them when they publish a story that you liked! Editors are of course mostly publishing based on their own taste, but they do take reader and particularly subscriber feedback into account in terms of future purchasing and publication decisions.
Very few people send letters to editors, and most of those letters are angry. There is an opportunity here.
(It's also good to write to the author and tell them although it's not always as directly impactful on publishing for structural reasons. But it's nice to read, which makes a difference in terms of "author I like continuing to write.")
As an author who made* $331 off my debut novel, and about that much weekly for writing boring articles about financial advice, I strongly support what you're saying. I have to make money in some of my time, and if it all goes to boring financial advice, you don't get as many space pirate books.
*that is, I wrote the book in 2020, sold it in 2022 and I will HOPEFULLY get paid for it in March. My second book, being self pub, pays out more often and a larger percentage, but I've only sold 19 copies, so that's even less 😛
Borrowing an ebook from the library is a great thing to do. Different services have different pay structures, but the library has either one copy they can only lend out to one person at a time, or a copy they can lend out infinite times but pay the copyright holder *per borrow.* Either way it's a sweet deal for me. I don't need YOUR money, I just need somebody's 😅
This is oddly difficult in practice.
A big problem is that it's hard to buy digital media: you can buy the right to read a book or watch a movie, revocable at any time by the seller. If you want a copy you actually own, you need to pirate it. Some publishers, like Tor, sell DRM-free books, but your favourite author is probably not on there.
Indeed, your favourite author is probably on Amazon, and is forbidden (explicitly or in practice) from selling their ebooks anywhere else. I very much want to support my favourite writers and their publishers, but encouraging Amazon's rent-seeking seems bad. So I end up buying a bunch of physical copies that I don't want, as a convoluted way to recompense the author and publisher and support local bookshops. Adam Smith is crying.
Likewise, itch.io sells video games, but most game authors only publish them on platforms like Steam. At least this is their own choice, not a monopoly forcing their hand. (I feel very righteous when I buy multiple copies of the same game on itch so I can gift some to people, even though nothing stops me from copying the files.)
For television, the situation is even worse: I have no idea how to support a TV show without supporting outrageous DRM practices.
Small artists with a donation page are probably the easiest case, especially since even small amounts of money have a much bigger impact. (Though you still have to contend with payment processors being awful.) I should check out more of those.
> I think that if you have spare income such that this is realistic, and you like fiction, you should give money to people who create the fiction, because then you’ll get more fiction you like.
This, like arguments for voting, only really works from some kind of Hofstader-ian "Superrational" logic. It is inconceivably unlikely that my giving money will materially influence content creation (or, in the case of a small indie creator, just unlikely). So from a strictly rational, selfish perspective, it's always better for me not to pay. I certainly want people like me to pay for the sort of content I would like. But that's not the same as wanting to pay myself.
I think it's really important that you phrased it as pay for fiction not don't pirate.
Pirating a show you wouldn't have purchased anyway hurts no one. Paying for content even if you'd never have pirated improves incentives.
Yeah, at some point I reached a crossover point of actively wanting to pay for a book if I enjoyed it or thought I was going to enjoy it. Sometimes it was hard to do
Otoh, with companies it can be hard to do. I can sign up to a streaming service but sometimes even then it's hard to watch. Or I need to watch it on a particular schedule to "count" for statistics. Or I want to watch a show over a couple of non-consecutive months and signing up to a streaming service just for that is as expensive as buying it would be, plus I can forget to cancel. So I try, but I've been managing it less often when it feels like it's really hard to give them money
Free subscribers: [PeeleSweating.gif]
I looked up the Patreons for the web serials I like. One is making only $2k a month, but they post ~1 chapter a month so this is a side hobby rather than a job. The others are making $10-30k a month. Even paying for an editor, that seems like a lot to me.
My guess is that the vast majority of authors are probably making very little, but the ones I like and would want to support are also liked and supported by others already.
I agree with the philosophical argument that supporting the authors seems good, but it feels less like I'm adding incentive on the margin.