AustLit

'Currently there is no clear and comprehensive way to measure the “diversity” of literature in the Australian public sphere. After outlining and analyzing the current measures in use—such as proxies, industry-wide studies, and activist-led counts—this article proposes the expansion of metadata in order to provide richer data for the publishing industry and researchers into the sector. By improving the use of subject codes, increasing the scope and number of terms used in keywords, and strengthening the use of descriptions and biographies, metadata can serve as an elegant solution to the publishing industry's abiding lack of data. If this is done in an ethically sound way, using examples of data protocols and practices already in existence in Australia (e.g., to uphold Indigenous data sovereignty), publisher-supplied metadata can improve the ability of publishing houses and researchers to move the needle on the range, variety, and volume of voices in Australia’s bibliosphere.' (Publication abstract)

'This research uses exploratory, mixed-method case studies to explore the relationship between Australian micro- and small presses (MSPs), their publishing and promotion of writers of difference (WODs), and the relationship to Couldry’s (2010) concept of voice. Through structured interviews with two publishing houses and their WODs, I (a) identified MSPs’ strategies for publishing and promoting silenced and neglected writers, thus facilitating the expression of voice; and (b) learned how MSPs’ authors respond to their publishers’ efforts to promote voice, and what publishing strategies they suggest for the industry. This research offers a novel contribution to publishing studies and communication for social change.'

Source: Abstract.