“We have been alerting the public authorities to the deterioration in the economic situation of authors for years”

VS20 days without anything for “culture”.

The word is desperately little present in the thirty-five pages specifying the roadmap of Elisabeth Borne’s government for the next three months. Not once (except very marginally) does it pop into the minds of those who detail the means they intend to mobilize so that the ambitious and pretty formula of “France stronger” become reality tomorrow.

However, the word “culture” deserved to appear from the start, around what the document identifies as “priority 1” of this program, that is to say “achieve full employment and reindustrialise France”. Because the book sector falls squarely within the scope of what official terminology calls “cultural and creative industries”, and which today weigh more than the automobile industry. Among these, its economic weight represents a considerable turnover, estimated at 4 billion euros.

The first project opened by the roadmap is called “Transpose the national interprofessional agreement on value sharing to encourage the development of the various tools available to companies (profit-sharing, profit-sharing, value-sharing bonus, employee savings, employee shareholding)”. A wording that touches our hearts. It echoes one of our fundamental demands: the “value sharing” within the book chain.

An end of inadmissibility

We have been alerting the public authorities for years to the deterioration of the economic situation of perpetrators and their precariousness: surveys and public reports, observatories and barometers drawn up by our professional organizations document it regularly. Tirelessly. Inexorably. And for years we have been asking for a better sharing of this value: how is it that the book sector is doing well, even very well, while writers, translators, illustrators, comic book authors, etc. . are getting worse and worse?

Read also: Article reserved for our subscribers “The root of the problem of cultural policy is that artist-authors are excluded from common law”

The subject has been mobilizing us for years. But our publishing partners refuse to discuss it with us: a few months ago, they opposed us to an end of non-receipt, on the pretext that our proposals would jeopardize the entire book economy.

Under these conditions, faced with such a grim prediction, based solely on the assertions of the major publishing-dissemination-distribution groups whose concentration and financialization are constantly increasing, why should we open the debate, seriously examine the content of what we are proposing to improve the remuneration of book authors?

You have 33.47% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *