Why publishing book reviews makes sense

So few book reviews, so many books.
No, it hasn't started appearing on T-shirts yet, but wait.

For the last half year, thanks in part to vigorous noisemaking by the National Book Critics Circle and its energetic president, Swarthmore grad John Freeman, the publishing world has done almost as much talking about the "book review crisis" as it has about the rectangular objects it sells.

So far in September, no fewer than five panels in New York, at venues from Columbia Journalism School to Scandinavia House, have been devoted to some version of the "The Vanishing Book Review."
Why? Because across the country, freshly written, independent book reviews, a staple of newspapers since the late 18th century, are disappearing. In many papers, they're the latest target of managers seeking to cut costs and maintain profit margins in an era of shrinking ad dollars. More and more book reviews that you read in Paper E have already appeared in Papers A, B, C and D.

Citing recent signs of crisis now counts as a ritual. The Los Angeles Times killed its stand-alone book section and combined its still-substantial number of book pages with its opinion section. The San Diego Union-Tribune also buried its stand-alone book section. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution eliminated the position of book editor. The Associated Press discontinued its book-review package.

Even the New York Times Book Review, the largest and most powerful in the country, offers considerably fewer pages than it once did.

This story from The Philadelphia Enquirer. To continue use this link.