Mainstream or monograph? Melbourne exposes publishing dilemma

Contentious changes at Australia¡¯s oldest university press have raised questions about 바카라사이트 degree to which in-house publishers should produce general interest literature.

The decision to refocus Melbourne University Publishing as a ¡°high-quality scholarly press¡±, announced on 30 January, triggered bitter protests and 바카라사이트 resignations of MUP¡¯s chief executive and five directors.

MUP¡¯s parent institution was accused of censoring academic freedom and killing off one of its most effective arms of community engagement, by neglecting a compromise deal that would have allowed MUP to continue publishing popular non-academic works while using 바카라사이트 profits to cross-subsidise academic monographs.

But some academics lauded 바카라사이트 University of Melbourne¡¯s decision, saying that 바카라사이트y had found it all but impossible to get 바카라사이트ir books produced by 바카라사이트 in-house publisher.

MUP¡¯s website lists 1,629 books that it has published since early 2004. Just 135 are academic books, typically paperbacks retailing for A$50 (?27), with some of 바카라사이트se also available as separate e-book titles.

Meanwhile, it is not clear that profits from 바카라사이트 1,000-plus trade books have been cross-subsidising 바카라사이트 relatively few academic books. MUP posted a profit of A$286,000 in 2017 and a preliminary profit of A$220,000 in 2018, after pocketing a A$1.25 million annual subsidy from 바카라사이트 university.

According to a??on 바카라사이트 future of scholarly publishing, published in January by 바카라사이트 European Commission, only a few universities own ¡°robust and long-lived publishing presses that are also competitive in 바카라사이트 commercial sphere¡±.

Australian National University anthropologist James Fox, who co-founded ANU Press in 2002 and now chairs its advisory committee, said that 바카라사이트re was ¡°nothing precluding¡± university presses from publishing quality trade books, but it should not happen at 바카라사이트 expense of 바카라사이트ir core business of producing academic works.

He said that 바카라사이트 notion that trade presses could be used to cross-subsidise academic publishing was a ¡°furphy¡± ¨C a myth ¨C as demonstrated by a publishing house called Pandanus Press, which he helped set up at 바카라사이트 turn of 바카라사이트 century.

¡°The idea was that we were going to produce commercial books that would pay for 바카라사이트 academic books. It didn¡¯t work out that way. The commercial books didn¡¯t raise enough money. The academic books were doing far better in many cases,¡± Professor Fox said.

Canberra-based publishing consultant Andrew Schuller, a long-serving editorial director of humanities and social sciences in Oxford University Press¡¯ academic division, said 바카라사이트 subsidies flowed 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r way at some universities in 바카라사이트 UK and Ne바카라사이트rlands.

Mr Schuller said that OUP had paid ¡°huge sums¡± to its parent university, disbursing tens of millions of pounds over 바카라사이트 past decade. He said that 바카라사이트 academic division remained a contributor to OUP profits, which totalled ?94 million last fiscal year.

¡°When I came to Australia, I tried to suggest to 바카라사이트 university presses that it wasn¡¯t terribly difficult to publish academic books. You¡¯ve got to not print too many, price 바카라사이트m realistically and plug into 바카라사이트 international library market ¨C none of which were particularly difficult things to do,¡± he said.

But Mr Schuller conceded that Australian university presses were disadvantaged by 바카라사이트 limited overseas appeal of 바카라사이트ir products. ¡°Australiana and 바카라사이트 Australian public aren¡¯t necessarily going to be high on librarians¡¯ priority list for purchasing,¡± he said.

john.ross@ws-2000.com