In a recent article posted on Media Bistro’s Galleycat, Sarah writes that Simon & Schuster’s unorthodox partnership with Media Predict, a venture that has the company wielding out book deals based on the popularity of proposals in an interactive trader’s market, confirms that “the publishing house execs must really have a high-quality crack pipe being passed around the office.”

Some criticize the publishing company for assembling yet another highly-publicized contest to gain insight into the minds of their readers. However, S&S hopes that by pairing up with Media Predict, which relies on prediction markets to guide companies in the media industries, they can better gauge the probability of a project’s failure or success. (Another popular Media Predict contest includes bands on MySpace vying for a record deal.)

For the purposes of S&S, the site gathered together a range of book proposals from various sources and posted them online. For example, agent Christy Fletcher submitted the novel Crown Chasers for consideration, which was penned by former Miss America Kate Shindle and offers an insider’s look at the hectic lives of pageant contestants. Other novels on the list include a children’s book co-authored by figure skater Dorothy Hamill, a book entitled You Are Your Own Gym detailing innovative bodyweight-only exercises, and Coming Up Short, which chronicles a slew of sports greats who failed to win championships in their careers.

With the list formulated, the fate of these potential books now transfers over into the hands of the traders on Media Predict, who use $5,000 in “fantasy cash” to buy shares and support the proposals they believe will either secure a book deal from the publishing mogul or become a finalist in Project Publish, a contest launched by S&S affiliate Touchstone Books. If either happens by late August (at which time the virtual “stock market” is closed), the value of the shares go to $100 apiece; if not, the share price falls to zero.

Media Predict’s online “game” clearly lacks any semblance of a logical approach to book publishing. Furthermore, the fact that S&S has sunk funds into this uncertain resource signals a lack of confidence in their own internal decision-making. Nevertheless, this may be just what S&S needs to rejuvenate their book sales and create products better geared toward their audiences. Compared to the intensive focus groups and private screenings set up by television and film producers, the book industry is little more than a well-orchestrated guessing game.

These “traders” represent an unbiased opinion of what will sell. And more importantly, what will not. Maybe S&S isn’t so misguided to look to an interactive game for guidance, seeing as it involves money, and most people cringe at that thought of losing any of that, even if it is fake. Whether it was a crack pipe or a plain lack of options that inspired the coalition between S&S and Media Predict, here’s to hoping that is breathes new life into an otherwise lackluster publishing process.