It was announced a week ago, that after fifty-four years of operation, the University of Missouri Press will close following a decision by UM President, Tim Wolfe. After suffering heavy staff cuts in 2009, the UM System will withdraw its $400,000 subsidy, thus ceasing operations for the Press. UM officials cited an annual budget deficit, and said, in a statement from Provost Brian Foster, “technological change have turned media up on their head, and that’s turning scholarly communication on its head.  We just don’t know where (the change) is going.”

The announcement has caused uproar among supporters of the press, which was publishing about thirty books a year, and boasted a catalog of roughly 2,000 titles. Advocates of university presses, concerned over the potential trend of more universities and state legislators forcing presses to cease operations, are now taking a stand. Bruce Joshua Miller, a publisher’s representative who, for years, has worked closely with university presses in order to market their books, has teamed up with Ned Stuckey-French, English Literature professor at Florida State University, to promote resistance and reaction to the closure of UM Press. Miller started a Facebook page that now boasts over 1,000 votes of support, and he and Stuckey-French have called for support from journalists, presses, the Association of American University Presses, and even inspired donors to cease funding of the University. Professors and writers have posted resentment of the press’s closing.

See the support on Facebook at Save The University of Missouri Press.

The Facebook page also details a Twitter campaign, aimed at the ears of the University of Missouri. One message to UM President Tim Wolfe reads: @UMPrez #savemissouripress Will you, President Wolfe, become a reverse alchemist, turning Gold (U M Press) into Dross?

Miller and Stuckey-French’s rally for support, while in some ways serves to critique the actions of the UM administration, is about defining the role and importance of university-based presses. Their protestations carry a message about the significance of literary and academic publishers, and what it means to sacrifice them in favor of resource reallocation.

The fear over this controversy is that the closing of UM Press will spark a devastating trend.

“It sets a horrible, scary precedent. Some people have the idea that we don’t need people who fuss around with printers, who sit around editing things,” said Miller.

In the recent past, such as in 1998, 2009, and 2010, Louisiana State University, the University of Arkansas, and Southern Methodist University nearly shut down their presses. But they all survived. Nationwide, presses have their budgets cut and their staff abbreviated, but they rarely get shut down.

Miller suggests that what UM has done will indicate to other administrators that university presses are unimportant, or extraneous. “It puts that idea out there,” said Miller. “It sends the message that what these presses do is not worthwhile.”

“The university has the money, but for whatever reason they don’t want to give it to the press. I’m trying to mobilize action. I don’t think Tim Wolfe understands the reach of the university press—he doesn’t understand why a book that might sell 2,000 copies is important.”

Miller and Stuckey-French aren’t necessarily trying to force a change. Miller claims this is a fight that can’t easily be won. They just want President Wolfe to rethink his decision. So far, the University has been largely silent. Considering the University’s expected response to the outcry from hundreds of supporters, Miller remarked, “to rethink this decision would be to reverse it.”

Miller said when his initial inspiration to fight for the press wore off, he became pessimistic over the cause: eventually, presses will subside, defenders of the printed word will yield, and universities will cease to promote literature, history, culture, and criticism in the ways they have in the past century. But, after seeing the support for UM Press continue to grow, his optimism is back.

“I’m doing this because Tim Wolfe’s decision is really an attack on everything that I value and love in my life—which has always revolved around books,” he said. “This thing’s definitely building. It hasn’t peaked yet. I’m getting excited.”

“If it’s a decision by one man (President Wolfe), I don’t see why we can’t reverse that.”

More reporting on this story: Publishers Weekly: Outrage Grows to University Missouri Shutting Down Press

Chronicle of Higher Education: Planned Shutdown...Underscores Shift in Traditional Publishing