schrijvers verdienen amper iets aan luisterboeken
Amsterdam, maandag, 16 februari 2026.
Een populaire dichteres verdient slechts 8,5 cent per keer dat haar boek wordt beluisterd. Dit bedrag komt van een streamingdienst na ruim 500.000 minuten luistertijd. De Auteursbond noemt de vergoedingen schandalig laag. Volgens hen is dit onvoldoende om van te leven. Streamingdiensten betalen per minuut, terwijl auteurs bij fysieke boeken een vast percentage krijgen. Die constructie beschermt de schrijver, zelfs als het boek ongelezen blijft staan. Nu groeit de angst dat schrijvers verdwijnen uit de sector. Lieke Marsman waarschuwt dat lage inkomsten leiden tot minder echte boeken. Zij vreest voor een toekomst gevuld met door ai gegenereerde pulp. De druk op platforms zoals Fluister en Storytel neemt toe.
symbolic payment for extensive listening
Poet Lieke Marsman earned just 200 euros after more than 500,000 minutes of listening time for her audiobook Op een andere planeet kunnen ze me redden on Fluister [1]. This equates to roughly 8.5 cents per full listen, assuming average listening duration [2]. The Auteursbond calls this compensation unjustifiably low [1]. Authors receive fixed royalty rates from physical book sales, typically around 10%, amounting to approximately two euros per copy sold [2]. In contrast, streaming payouts depend on total platform usage and listening time, resulting in minimal returns for creators [1][2].
streaming models undermine author income
Streaming platforms such as Fluister, Storytel, and Podimo pay authors based on minutes streamed rather than per play or subscription share [1][2]. According to Rianne Blaakmeer, commercial director at publisher Uitgeverij Pluim, this system generates extremely low revenue despite significant production costs [1]. Creating audiobooks involves hiring voice actors, renting studios, and editing recordings—expenses that remain substantial regardless of payout structures [2]. The Auteursbond argues this model exploits intellectual property rights without fair remuneration [1]. They demand greater transparency and improved financial terms for writers [1][2].
industry split over market dynamics
The Groep Algemene Uitgevers (GAU) disputes the notion that streaming harms authors’ livelihoods [2]. Director Martijn David states some writers thrive exclusively through audio platforms even if their printed works sell poorly [2]. Conversely, traditionally successful authors may struggle to gain traction on streaming apps [2]. Physical book purchases guarantee authors immediate royalties upon sale, whether read or not [2]. With streaming, income depends entirely on listener behavior and algorithmic visibility [1][2]. This fundamental difference raises concerns about long-term sustainability for creative professionals [1].
warning against decline and automation
Lieke Marsman warns that persistently low payments could drive human authors out of the industry [1]. She foresees a future dominated by AI-generated content designed solely for automated narration and maximum profit extraction [1]. Without viable incomes, fewer writers may pursue literary careers professionally [1]. This risks reducing cultural diversity and artistic quality across published works [1]. Marsman advocates for publishers to create independent platforms offering standard royalty agreements [2]. Such initiatives could protect both creativity and copyright integrity in the digital era [1][2].