Roughly speaking, what percentage of your budget currently comes from sales and what percentage from and advertising? How do you deal with economic difficulties? Are you widening your field of activities beyond strictly publishing? Are you exploring new business models, lobbying cultural decision-makers, or appealing to the public?

SabitFikir is innovative both in terms of content and as a business model. The information age brought with it a boom in productivity, which is reducing the marginal cost of duplicating information, and information itself almost to zero. In the words of Wired‘s editor-in-chief Chris Anderson, this is “freeconomics”. In short, “free” is no longer just a marketing gimmick, and SabitFikir is one such example in Turkey. It is not sold, it does not generate any sales. It is distributed free of charge, and the only source of income is advertising.

Nevertheless, SabitFikir is also the flagship project of Idefix (on line book, music and other by-products vendor). This is why they will support us whenever we encounter any economic difficulties. This separates us from other literary journals.

While journals in Europe continue their existence largely with the help of public support, this is not the case in Turkey. What should be done in Turkey to secure public support for art and literature journals?

Financing European cultural journals

Like other types of cultural organization reliant on public funds, cultural journals throughout Europe have felt the impact of recession. In addition to funding cuts, journals are also having to negotiate the upheavals taking place in the print sector.

Through a European survey of financing for cultural journals, Eurozine takes stock of the situation of the network, in order to communicate its experiences internally and to others who hold a stake in European cultural policy today. [more]

Read the statements here:

Varlik, Turkey

Ord&Bild and Glänta, Sweden

Vikerkaar, Estonia

Wespennest, Austria

Sodobnost, Slovenia

Host, Czech Republic

Res Publica Nowa, Poland

Mute, UK

Intellectum, Greece

Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, Germany

There are just too many things wrong in literature and the arts in Turkey. Publishers, especially boutique publishers are struggling. The industry cannot meet the expectations of its qualified workforce. Literary translators are suffering. Almost no writer lives on writing alone. (We need to think about how many writers Turkish literature has killed alongside those it produced.) Turkish literature has great difficulty in reaching foreign readers. There are legal obstacles, and then there is censorship and self-censorship.

The role of the private sector in plastic arts; music, film, performing arts… There are problems everywhere. Public funding for the arts is ridiculously small when compared to European nations.

Before these issues are resolved, it would be of little importance even if all the expenditures of journals were met by public funds. You may ask what there is to do about it. Customs, education and living conditions determine how a society and its leaders will view art. This means there is both nothing to do, and plenty to do at that.

What is your distribution and sales strategy? How do you take your journal to its readers?

We send the printed journal to Idefix customers who order books online, and make it available at bookstores serviced by our sister distribution company, Prefix. The digital journal is available on Idefix Bookstore and Turkcell Newsstand applications. The entire content is published online.

Journals tend to extend their publication intervals due to economic difficulties. How does this impact a journal’s communication with its readers?

We regret that publishing periods are extending. Part of a journal’s soul comes from its continuity, its ability to recur every time in a new form. I wish all journals were weekly instead of bimonthly or quarterly. Otherwise they will lose influence and be replaced by digital forms. And those are not up to the task of filling the void created by literary journals yet. This would make it a dangerous substitution.

Do you have a website? How much of your content do you make accessible on it and what other uses does it serve? How do you make use of social media and what do you perceive to be its benefits?

Yes, we do have a website. In fact, we were published on the web before turning into a printed journal. We not only publish all content online, we have some web-exclusive content as well. This makes http://www.sabitfikir.com/ a larger node of content that includes the SabitFikir journal.

We use social media to remind people of ourselves. We don’t do book giveaways like some other online literary publishers. I am always wary of social media: you’re good, but then you could go bad. You have to take very cautious steps. Do you want to be the most followed or the most remembered; do you want only interested people to read you, or is it enough that anyone accesses your content? These are important decisions and small gains tend to lead people away from the large picture. Besides, I don’t want to believe that those woeful days when we judge a literary journal’s worth by its popularity have come. In short, I think one should be very cautious about the whimsical nature of social media. It has great merits too: it’s a democratic medium, first of all. It instigates creativity. It creates new modes of expression. I discovered Aysu Önen, one of our most valuable writers, about two years ago by her tweets. What more can I say? We will soon introduce a social media-only project.

Are you experiencing opportunities for synergy or co-operation between big and small media, or print and digital media, that previously did not exist?

There is more communication between large and small media as we become increasingly digital. For instance, we supplied literature news to NTV not too long ago, they would probably not let me past the gate of a national TV station. The fact that the internet makes everybody equally visible creates new connections. Newspapers, TV stations, larger magazines all are working to build online teams and have begun to prioritize the online version to the printed journal. Newsweek and New York Times examples are not trifles. Think of this: You’re in the news business and you have a team of two. One is modest but dependable, slow yet meticulous. The other is fast on his feet with a larger room for error; he is whimsical but exciting at once. Who do you choose? Both, of course! They have lots to learn from each other. Picking one over the other doesn’t really work. This is my idea of the relation between digital and printed media. If you can blend the best of both worlds, you will have the entire world at your feet.

How do changing readership habits brought on by digitization and Internet media effect circulation and sales? Is digitization bringing a change in the type of text that is submitted to your journal? Do you plan to adapt the journal’s content to changing readership preferences?

SabitFikir didn’t exist before digitization, so I can’t really say anything on the matter…

Are there political or literary polarizations between journals? If any, what should be the nature of contest between journals?

And how! This (polarization) was the most unpleasant surprise when I quit the newspaper I was working for to join this magazine. This is not the case in newspapers, especially in the culture and arts sections. The bosses might be enemies but the employees like and support each other (or I was just lucky all the time). The climate is much more emotionally charged in literary journals, probably because of the fact that everybody puts their heart in it. People go to all sorts of extremes and are unable to embrace the new.

People almost forget that they are making journals for readers, and think that they are doing business for each other. There is no shortage of “first-evers” and “exclusives”. People are trying to do better than others, as if they were mall managers or sales representatives. For me, the beauty of art is that you can look for the best all your life and you will not find it. Each and every magazine is authentic and the best given the circumstances. We should realize this. I think even competition is wrong, because in every kind of competition there is a loser and a winner. Journals should inspire and learn from each other. They could be natural extensions and continuations of each other. You will see some successes when you will say “we should have done that (too)”. But this will push you into a malicious cycle if you can’t do it the next time. Instead, if you think something is not done well, you should try to do it well as you see it. If something is indeed done well, you congratulate the people behind it for a job well done, and try to do better. I can’t think of another way to go. Take Nabokov and Sartre: wouldn’t it have been better if they had invested all that time they wasted hating each other, in writing? Can you say one is better than the other?

As for political polarizations, it is bitter, like it is for the entire country. I can only look on in pain as millions of people who live under the same sky are so much irritated by the other’s presence. People I hold very dearly say things like “I don’t care whether he’s good or bad; he’s from the other side and I don’t want him,” and my eyes pop out. I love (the communist) Nâzim Hikmet just as much as I love (the Islamist-right wing) Necip Fazil.

Do you think journals continue to be a school for aspiring writers and poets? In the past, writers and poets would usually publish their books after gaining acceptance by having their works published in journals; journals were stepping stones for young writers and poets, and would introduce important foreign writers to their readers before their books were translated. Has this situation changed? What is your opinion of writers who publish books after gaining popularity online?

Many poets and storywriters are first seen in journals; I think journals are still a stepping stone. The internet did create another opportunity, but literary journals are still strong. Maybe not as strong as 30 years ago, but then again, is anything the same?

What responsibility does the bias and cultural inadequacy of mainstream media (daily newspapers and others) bring on journals? Are journals able to stand up to the task? What responsibilities do readers expect journals to undertake?

People who create journals should realize that what they do is to present a product. Let me explain: many journals feel as if they are a blessing to the reader by their very presence. They should ask themselves whether the appearance and presentation of their work is appealing. They should realize that literature is not a lecture you give at a podium with a booming voice. Literature can be everywhere, in anyone and in anything. We must build stronger ties to the world. We must have some idea about music, film, modern art, technology, politics. This is a periodical after all. In the absence of this, people interested in these issues are intimidated by the boring, scary blocks of text in journals and turn to the mainstream media for culture and the arts, which, of course, they cannot find.

Readers are a world by themselves. I don’t know whether it is expectations or just the ability to express them that boomed after the internet, but their expectations are high for sure. We changed many things in the magazine based on the feedback we received. Sometimes a reader’s comment would not just back my opinion, but light a bulb in my head. These kinds of comments would then lead to new sections, illustrations, even writers.

But critique sometimes gets ruthless. This has to do with either allegiance or prejudice. Let me explain prejudice. As we are the publication of a sales channel, namely Idefix, people comb through the content for a trace of commercial concern. But there is none. Really. Or they think that you will simply praise every book to boost sales. Those who read us saw that we would review books with no regard for commercial interests, with a boldness that few journals have been able to demonstrate thus far. They think that you will be frivolous when you are popular, colourful and illustrated. That is not the case; from every objective angle, we are not a “light” journal. People see what they want to see. This helps release some of the pressure. Sometimes I know that whatever I do, I will never be able to please some people.

I think this drama is inevitable in creative industries. Since the readers are one of the key parties in literature, and since it is very probable that they too write or want to write themselves, they are always a little on the critical side, especially in culture and arts. Allegiance also plays a part in this.

Having said that, we are still here today thanks to the readers. Had not so many people enjoyed reading us, I would have been fired long ago, and Idefix could have shut down the journal. We receive praise and appreciation from readers almost every day. Yes we are a popular journal, but I know very well that this is not how things go in every popular journal.