出版与作家生涯2021stratechery.com
出版业回到未来
Publishing Is Back to the Future
导读
本文从商业模式角度梳理出版业的历史循环：广告支撑的大众媒体衰落，以订阅为核心、面向特定读者、带有鲜明立场的媒体兴起（如纽约时报、Substack）。对写作者而言，它提醒你思考一个问题：你的写作靠什么养活，这直接决定了你写什么、为谁写、怎么写。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
先想清楚你的收入来源：靠广告就要追求最大流量、选题尽量宽泛，靠订阅就要服务好一小群愿意付费的读者、允许自己有立场。
- 02
不要指望任何单一信息源能提供完整的真相；写作者既要有自己的判断，也要主动阅读不同政治光谱的材料。
- 03
明确区分报道与观点：要么坚持不偏不倚、多方求证的报道，要么公开亮明立场做有观点的写作；两者混着做最容易失去读者信任。
- 04
把“公共品”意识纳入选题：有些题材商业回报低，但社会价值高，值得用其他收入来补贴这类写作。
HN 评论精选
没有单一信息源掌握全部真相，写作者应主动跨视角阅读。
这篇文章最精彩的部分是：互联网让社会在获知真相方面处于比以往更强的位置……《纽约时报》并不掌握真相，我也一样，亚马逊也一样。这是理解当今新闻的关键：你不能依赖任何单一信息源获得完整图景，必须阅读多种视角，最好跨越不同的政治立场。我父亲那一代在互联网之前长大的人凭直觉就懂这一点，总是读好几份报纸；我们也该这样做，别再指望自己偏爱的信息源能对一则新闻给出最终定论。
amoorthy查看英文原文
This is the best part of Ben's article: > I think we as a society are in a far stronger place when it comes to knowing the truth than we have ever been previously, and that is thanks to the Internet…the New York Times doesn’t have the truth, but then again, neither do I, and neither does Amazon. This is the key insight in news today. You cannot rely on any one source for the full story. You must read multiple perspectives, ideally from different points in the political spectrum. My father, and likely others who grew up pre-internet, knew this intuitively and always read multiple papers. We should do the same and stop expecting our favourite source to be the final word on a story.
编辑与商业的隔离是新闻伦理的底线，而非天真。
对商业运作的无知，并非出于幼稚或随意；对记者来说，“编辑独立”，也就是新闻不应受商业利益影响，就像“不伤害”原则对医生一样重要。新闻编辑部与广告业务人员之间的隔离，是出于伦理而有意维持的，性质类似于银行自营交易与咨询业务之间的隔离，也就是所谓的“中国墙”。
closeparen查看英文原文
Ignorance of the business side is not childish or haphazard. Editorial independence - that the news should not be influenced by business concerns - is as important to journalists as "do no harm" is to doctors. Separation between newsroom and ad business staff is maintained intentionally as a matter of ethics. It is the same sort of animal as the separation between proprietary trading and advisory services at a bank. The "Chinese wall." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall
媒体正分化为“广告换广度”和“订阅换深度”两条路。
让我印象深刻的是，Ben 对《纽约时报》正在变成什么样（一个有观点、以订阅者为中心）的描述，和我对 Substack、Patreon 的看法高度吻合。如果长期来看媒体最终只剩两类，我不会感到意外：一类以广告为中心，追求极广的覆盖，内容往往质量不高；另一类以订阅为中心，范围更窄。
lbarrow查看英文原文
I'm struck by how much Ben's description of what the NYT is becoming - an opinionated, subscriber-focused institution - matches up with how I think about Substack and Patreon. I wouldn't be surprised if in the long run we basically end up with two types of news and media institutions: the advertising-focused ones who go for incredibly broad and often low-quality work, and the subscribed-focused ones who are more narrow.
只谈商业模式会忽略新闻的公共品属性。
这些内容有可取之处，但只谈商业模式是没抓住重点。新闻也提供公共品，而在纽约时报、Politico 这类例子里，公共品正在消失，取而代之的是给精英看的精英新闻。澳大利亚那项法案几乎肯定是默多克系媒体推动的，很可能很糟……但如果社会通过政府表达出它重视新闻这一公共品，社会就有权想办法为这种公共品提供资金。
te_chris查看英文原文
There’s some good here but to talk only of business models misses the point. News provides public goods too and in examples like nyt, politico etc. they’re evaporating in favour of elite news for the elites. Now, the Australian bill is almost certainly at the behest of the Murdoch press, and so is likely shit...but if society, expressed through govt., decides that it values the public good of news, then society is entitled to find ways to fund that public good.
同类还值得读
写书：值得吗？
Writing a book: is it worth it?
Martin Kleppmann（《设计数据密集型应用》作者）复盘写书到底值不值：金钱回报低、耗时极长，但带来了可见度、信任和职业机会。
出版与作家生涯2020 · 642 分 · 287 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写书并不是个好主意
Writing books is not really a good idea
这篇文章讨论靠写书谋生的现实难度，评论区从版税数学、收入预期和写作目标三个角度补充了作者视角。
出版与作家生涯2021 · 577 分 · 609 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何自助出版一本书：实用资源清单
How to self-publish a book: A handy list of resources
这是一份关于「如何自助出版一本书」的资源清单帖，涵盖从编辑、排版到 ISBN、销售渠道的实操工具与花费。
出版与作家生涯2018 · 558 分 · 88 评4 条写作要点编辑精选我自助出版一本Ruby on Rails书，赚了7万美元
How I Made $70k Self-Publishing a Book about Ruby on Rails
这是一篇 Ruby 开发者自述：他把一套 Rails 性能课程（书＋视频＋答疑）自出版，一年毛收入约 7 万美元，并总结了选题、定价、营销等经验。
出版与作家生涯2017 · 539 分 · 175 评4 条写作要点编辑精选石黑一雄警告年轻作家因“恐惧”而自我审查
Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'
石黑一雄提醒年轻作者因“恐惧”而自我审查，即这条帖子讨论的核心。
出版与作家生涯2021 · 396 分 · 641 评5 条写作要点编辑精选