Ad-supported textbooks: The pros and cons
The news stories: Links here.
Skepticism—from if:book blog: “Though making textbooks free to students is an admirable aim, simply shifting the cost to advertisers is not a good long-term solution, further eroding as it does the already much-diminished borderline between business and education (I suppose, though, that ads in business ed. textbooks in some ways enact the underlying precepts being taught). There are far better ideas out there for, as Freeload promises, ‘liberating the textbook’ (a slogan that conjures the Cheney-esque: the textbooks will greet us as liberators).”
Enthusiasm–from a new Student Public Interest Research Group report, as paraphrased by Inside Higher Ed: “The report suggested that good news for the penny-pinched student could be found in the growing number of alternative publishers that are offering lower-cost and sometimes free texts. Through a survey of faculty members who had used such publishers, the report indicates that they are overwhelmingly ‘happy with the books’ educational content.’”
The TeleRead take: The PIRG report does criticize the limited selection of such publishers—a problem on which they’re very much working. Besides, this is really a professor-by-professor battle. All in all, I think ad-supported textbooks are a “depends” thing.
Fast-food ads inside K-12 books are evil, yes, as I see it. But will Freeload Press—with which OpenReader and its implementer OSoft have relationships—sin by inserting FedEx ads inside college texts? Definitely not.
The Educational Divide
We’re talking a Digital Divide, or more precisely an Educational Divide, in a major way. Elite college kids with rich parents can afford to thumb their noses at e- and p-books fully or partly supported by ads. Students from blue-collar families, however, may feel otherwise, as the AP story makes clear.
I’d prefer that no student need to use ad-supported textbooks, but I’m a realist. Blame education-stingy politicians—frittering away billions on a loathsome war in Iraq—rather than companies such as Freeload that are addressing very real needs.
Nirvana for me
The best approach: Balance: I can appreciate the criticism—from if:book and friends—of textbook gouges and the rest. I’m open to alternatives. Some content will lend itself best to Wikipedia-style models or volunteer-run peer-review committees. Or even the concept of carefully vetting, recycling and and organizing student-originated content. Gasp, I even like the idea of a well-stocked national digital library system with federal tax money involved to help overcome the savage inequalities in libraries and schools alike.
But what should society do about a book requiring massive research and benefiting from a coherent point of view if the opinions are not in vogue in academia or among politicians who control library budgets? Suppose that such a work could actually be valuable and end up as assigned reading in the future? Or how about works that could be priceless to readers but not so intriguing to Wikipedia volunteers or as the end results of recycling? Private publishers have a role to play in offering different approaches, such as experimentation with new technologies that may be beyond the reach or expertise of those in education.
Biz-model diversity and the campus Web host from hell
If nothing else, I’m not the biggest fan of the efficiency of many nonprofit or academic endeavors created in the name of education. The worst Web hosting experience I’ve ever had came at the hands of a university archive with Netcrats in dire need of market discipline to make them more responsive to users.
Simply put, we need a variety of models–free-subsidized, free-ad-supported and not-so-free. Get rid of not-so-free and free-ad-supported (as useful points of comparison) and executions of the free-subsidized model may suffer.
August 17th, 2006 at 11:22 am
I was reading your blog post about the ad supported textbooks and wanted to let you know about another solution.
I’m working with http://www.iChapters.com, a site that allows students to download just the textbook chapters they need starting at $1.99 or buy a full college eBook for 50% of the price of the new hard copy version. So far our feeeback has been positive. Students like buying chapters like they buy music….digital download and one off transactions.
August 17th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
Thanks for the fresh info, Bill. I say–the more choices, the better! - David
August 17th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
The main problem I have with ad-supported anything is that it changes the relationship between producer and consumer.
In a traditional model, the producer creates something which is then sold, on its merits, to the consumer. If the consumer doesn’t like it, or wants changes, she doesn’t buy the product and the producer is forced to change his ways. It’s a valuable dialog.
In an ad-supported model, though, the producer creates something, and then sells the eyeballs of the consumer of this thing to a third party, the advertiser. The exact merits of the produced good aren’t important, just that many people use it. It’s no longer important for the producer to attract customers, now they need to attract advertisers. Most of the time these are complimentary goals, but it’s still worth noting that the dialog has changed, and the producer’s goals have changed, and that the good and the consumer are no longer the focus. If a conflict comes between the users’ benefit and the advertisers’, an ad-supported producer will choose the advertiser.
In this situation, advertising also has another knock against it: studies have shown that children are much more susceptible to advertising than adults. The younger they are, the more they lack the ability to filter information and critically examine the claims of advertisers. College students are in less danger, true, but it still seems to me that mixing facts that we hope they absorb with advertising is a dangerous mix. Either they will see Socrates as a corporate shill or believe that PIzza Hut ads and calculus are equivalently true and useful. Giving ads the imprimatur of truth that’s inherent in a college textbook seems dangerous, especially in our current society (on a somewhat related note, the FCC is examining stations for running “fake news” releases from corporations. http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/intro)
August 17th, 2006 at 4:20 pm
Hi, Bingle. As noted, this is an “it depends” thing. I rather doubt that Freeload will run ads disguised as parts of the books. And if the books are tainted by that or by editorial interference by advertisers, then I’d hope word would circulate about this. I do think ads in books do carry risks, and you’re correct to note this. What counts, however, will be the execution. I myself think the risk is worth it, given the stinginess of the politicians. Just today I was reading an attack on Freeload in an Arizona newspaper that made all kinds of noises about watching out for the students. But guess what? The paper was without actual solutions that could happen immediately, and like it or not, the kids have needs now. Thanks. David
August 17th, 2006 at 5:20 pm
But will it stop at advertising? Is product placement next?
From Einstein’s Theory of Relativity
From Plato’s Republic
From The History of the French Revolution
August 17th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Actually, Jon, given the fact that the White House seems for sale to industry, your whitehouse.gov example is entirely on the mark. David
August 17th, 2006 at 5:58 pm
David Rothman said “Just today I was reading an attack on Freeload in an Arizona newspaper that made all kinds of noises about watching out for the students.”
Here is an excerpt from a critical article in “The Arizona Daily Star”:
These are valid concerns, but the opinion writer is unaware of a greater danger. He or she is endangered by the “potential pitfall” of hilarious hypocrisy. The Arizona Daily Star is supported by advertisements. For example, a large advertisement for “Qwest High-Speed Internet” was adjacent to the lacerating text. Is the opinion writer a corporate stooge for Qwest who wants everyone to read textbooks online using Qwest? I do not think so, but texts can be curiously and unintentionally self-referential. At what point does the Arizona Daily Star “accede to its need to make a profit?”
August 17th, 2006 at 6:06 pm
Oh, the perfect logic of a newspaper worried about competition for ads! Thanks, Garson. - David
August 18th, 2006 at 12:59 am
Bill Balderaz,
So glad you mentioned http://www.ichapters.com/. I just passed it along to my daughter (working on her anthropology degree) at NKU.
All,
All this talk of book advertising reminds me of some of my books from Brady/Simon & Schuster (all out of print), most of which were about online services, modems, or portable computing. There were always ads from CompuServe, The Source, and DELPHI (and later, GEnie and BIX), as well as companies that made modems and portable devices. No one complained, and I had no problem with it.
As was done in other books, the ads were collected in their own section at the back of the book–the best idea, I think. If, like the ads in my books, the ads in textbooks had some value-added element, I see nothing wrong with them.
–Mike
July 18th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
[...] those interested, this is a solid pro/con argument about ad-supported textbooks showing the digital divide affordability issue (this one discusses free [...]