By Cecilia Galarza

Entrepreneur Michel Elings and photographer/writer Jochem Wijnands launched the award-winning iPad magazine TRVL in 2010, as part of their start-up venture based in the Netherlands. While producing this travel magazine app, they found that something was “broken” in the digital magazine production and distribution tools. Tired of the non-intuitive softwareWoodwing, its dependency on Adobe InDesign and the expensive distribution costs, they decided to develop PRSS, a more efficient platform for digital magazine design.

PRSS is user-friendly, template-driven and doesn't require programming skills. The creators optimized the file formats reusing the same image for different orientations, using algorithms to shrink size and supporting retina display. As a result, magazine pages don't take long to display, which makes the experience closer to flicking through a magazine. No need to wait for the entire issue to download to start reading. Elings and Wijnands wanted the content to stand out and the app to facilitate it. Full integration with iOS capabilities also enables a better user experience. For example, a very nice option that I tried myself in the 
TRVL app is tapping on images so that a map pops up showing where the picture was taken.

The publishing tool includes real time collaboration features for writers and designers, and being web-based, changes are automatically saved.

It's no coincidence that this publishing platform is so good. It was created by a publisher, having in mind exactly what a customer would want. The developers used to be customers in the first place, and they created this tool to redesign their own magazine.

The latest news reported on September 24th is that Apple has acquired PRSS and hired the company founders and their team.

In an interview back in 2012, Elings said that with their production suite they wanted to help new publishers start their magazines, something that would democratize the market of iPad magazines in the same way that desktop publishing software such as Quark or InDesign did for self-publications in print and online. With that aim, the plan was to make PRSS free to use but charge a small fee for distribution costs. They had experienced unfair pricing with other tools and thus they didn't want the same for other publishers.

Up until now, Apple has been offering users an app called iBooks Author, which allows to create books for iPad and Mac, but doesn't have a specific tool for magazine publications. Right after the news of Apple acquiring PRSS became public, the site prss.com stopped functioning, and it seems fair to guess that Apple will build the PRSS features within iBooks. However, we will have to wait and see what pricing model is established for distribution. Hopefully it will be widely accessible for small independent publishers and revolutionize the market creating new opportunities.

These are the type of stories from the publishing industry that inspire me. Not the part where Apple bought the company, but the one about two people that had an idea for an original publication that readers would enjoy, and their determination to create a powerful tool to deliver it successfully. Anything is possible if ideas arise from the passion for creating wonderful materials and are applied to making things better.

Articles:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/23/prss-digital-magazine-platform-acquired-by-apple/
https://gigaom.com/2014/09/24/apple-acquires-prss-a-company-that-builds-tools-for-ipad-magazine-creation/
http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=12000BSVY0CO
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/10/20/new-ipad-publishing-system-prss-sets-out-to-make-print-feel-stupid
https://gigaom.com/2013/07/08/prss-is-trying-to-design-the-ipad-publishing-app-that-apple-never-built/
https://gigaom.com/2012/11/02/prss-aims-to-be-a-low-cost-ipad-magazine-factory-in-the-cloud/

No day is the same in the publishing industry, and everyday new features and technologies are released to help enhance reader experience.


“How many times have you flipped through a magazine in line at the checkout counter before deciding to buy?” is the question Adobe posed to readers last week when they released their new digital publishing tool.


On September 8, Adobe Digital Publishing Suite developers released a new version of “Article Preview” with an new feature, “Alternative Free Article Preview Experience”, which allows publishers to provide previews of free articles in a magazine issue on iOS. The new beautifully designed user interface and preview tool is configured by publishers to“...pique readers’ interest with select free articles while also encouraging them to purchase with teasers of other articles within the preview experience. Readers will [also] be able to enjoy the full experience of free articles while being prompted to buy or subscribe when they navigate to other articles within the publication” [1]

It is different and exciting because the preview feature lets readers navigate all free articles in an issue before committing to buy. Adobe states, “Readers will also be able to identify free articles in the table of contents and browse view”.  

Publishers and Developers: Learn how to configure "Free Article Preview" here

[1] Source: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/digitalpublishingsuite/articles/configuring-alternate-free-article-preview-experience.html

by Cecilia Galarza

Vox.com is a news publication that launched in April 2014. Aimed at a young audience (millenials aged 25-34), what is innovative about this website is how information is presented.

Content is arranged in a fluid layout with preeminence of engaging images and videos. Articles are organised in different levels of detail, adapting to the attention span of modern readers, who can also opt to delve into contextual information about the news. Background information is displayed using different formats. There is a section with card stacks: a collection of explanations, facts and definitions located under a common title such as “Everything you need to know about...”. Visual resources including different types of maps (economic, factoid, historical) and videos are available for further exploration of a theme.

It looks like the publishers of Vox followed the rules of the modern publisher to attract the attention of readers on the web. It is also an example of the publishing model advocated in the book “Book: a Futurist's Manifesto”: starting with context and making it discoverable, facilitating the management of abundant content.

The mission of Vox is to “explain the news” and their objective is to make hard topics appealing through a combination of presentation elements. The application of this approach to scholarly publishing can open interesting possibilities for engaging young students, as traditional education materials become more up to date with the new generations of readers.

Full article: http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/09/02/have-you-looked-at-this-vox-com/
Links: http://www.vox.com/

eReaders, Comprehension, and Consumer Preferences

By Rhonda L. Larson, 09/04/2014

I’ve recently noticed (because I’ve been looking) a number of articles on reading comprehension and digital text on tablets and ereaders.  This topic also surfaced during the first class session of the Fundamentals of E-Publishing Course, part of GWU’s MPS in Publishing Program.  Naturally, there is a range of opinions about digital publishing formats; reading is a personal activity, and no two human brains work the same. 

A study published in January 2013 by Anne Mangen of University of Stavanger in Norway found that 10th graders who read material on a screen demonstrated less comprehension of the information than the same-grade students who read the material on paper.

A Harvard University study published in September 2013 found that reading on a screen helped high school students with dyslexia to read material faster and with greater comprehension.  There have been any number of different studies on the comprehension levels of readers using both paper and digital formats, each study seeming to indicate something different—depending on the age of the test subjects, their familiarity with the digital devices, the reading material used, etc. 

Considering the implications of all of these studies, those in the publishing industry would do well ask, “Which formats are more enjoyable for the reader?” as well as, “Which formats lend themselves to better comprehension of x type of material?”.   It may also be worth exploring whether individual readers prefer different types of material in different formats—such as reference material in a digital format, and literature on paper.  Ferris Jabr wisely pointed out in Scientific American in April 2013, “But why, one could ask, are we working so hard to make reading with new technologies like tablets and e-readers so similar to the experience of reading on the very ancient technology that is paper? Why not keep paper and evolve screen-based reading into something else entirely? Screens obviously offer readers experiences that paper cannot.”

In June of this year, Julian Baggini wrote in the Financial Times, “…research has already told us a lot about how we read now.  First and foremost, it emphasizes that even using paper, there are many different approaches…our habits have provably been created largely as combination of childhood experience and how the medium we read in is nudging us…  Second, we might benefit from being aware just how much habit, fashion and culture shape our preferences.”   In August, Forbes Magazine contributor Jeremy Greenfield asked “Will Ebooks Make Us Dumber?”  (Although, the online version of this article was re-titled, in a charmingly ambiguous fashion, “Ebooks Will Make Us Dumber, Or They Won’t”.)  Greenfield concludes, after mentioning a number of these types of studies, “What the right mix of reading is, for both adults and children, is unclear.  What is certain is that what we think it is will change and that each individual study should be taken as a data point only, suggesting the path for future research”.

Ultimately, the consumers will make their preference of formats known by which products/formats they purchase.  

There may be some information buried in these studies that sheds light on (or opportunities for further research that explores) the propensity of digital consumers, as opposed to paper book consumers, for “binge reading”.  (Please see Emily Klingman’s thought-provoking piece on the implications of binge reading in the Editorial section of this newsletter.)  Further, if binge reading has or will become a phenomenon, will that translate into a growing demand for E reader subscription services from providers like Oyster, Scribd, and Amazon’s Kindle Unlimited?