I had to laugh a little yesterday. I finally launched the first issue of The Book Supplement, and people were really happy about it. People in the book industry reached out to let me know how great it was that I was doing this. Others let me know that they had ordered the books mentioned. This is all great! This is the goal. Did the debut of The Book Supplement bring in enough new subscriptions to fund this project for the rest of the year? No. But did it bring in enough new subscriptions to fund just this issue? Also no. This is where I had to laugh.

Across the U.S., publishers have been deciding that arts coverage is not profitable. Specifically, these kinds of reviews—the ones that let you know what’s out there and what’s worth your time—where there’s usually nothing too controversial that can make them go viral. The reviews are short, and they center the book being covered and its worth over the writerly prowess of the critic. If the Associated Press and The Washington Post and almost every newspaper in the country decided that these kinds of reviews, and most book coverage in general, was not profitable, then why did I think that my reviews would be any different? That is why I had to laugh.

On the other hand, we’re only just beginning. It will take a while. If arts coverage is allowed to die, then the arts die too. No one can buy books they’ve never heard of. The algorithms we’ve come to reply on as mechanisms for discovery do not do a good job. When not feeding us the corporate agendas of their creators and pushing digital addiction for its own sake, the algorithm can only show you whatever is already popular, what you already think you know and think you want, and usually the most narrow and impoverished version of that as well.

The Book Supplement will continue. I’m aiming for the next issue to land in about two weeks. I hope you’ll subscribe and read along with us.