The Mystery Writers of America weigh in on Harlequin
I suppose no one can say writers' organizations have no power! The MWA has offered this statement on Harlequin's self-publishing venture:
"...it is common for disreputable publishers to try to profit from aspiring writers by steering them to their own for-pay editorial, marketing, and publishing services. The implication is that by paying for those services, the writer is more likely to sell his manuscript to the publisher. Harlequin recommends the 'eHarlequin Manuscript Critique Service' in the text of its manuscript submission guidelines for all of its imprints and include a link to Harlequin Horizons, its new self-publishing arm, without any indication that these are advertisements."
"That, coupled with the fact that these businesses share the Harlequin name, may mislead writers into believing they can enhance their chances of being published by Harlequin by paying for these services. Offering these services violates long-standing MWA rules for inclusion on our Approved Publishers List."
And Harlequin, according to the "Bookmaking Blog", blinked in the face of the disapprobation of the Romance Writers of America:
"Harlequin boss Donna Hayes said, "It is disappointing that the RWA has not recognized that publishing models have and will continue to change. As a leading publisher of women's fiction in a rapidly changing environment, Harlequin's intention is to provide authors access to all publishing opportunities, traditional or otherwise.
Most importantly, however, we have heard the concerns that you, our authors, have expressed regarding the potential confusion between this venture and our traditional business. As such, we are changing the name of the self-publishing company from Harlequin Horizons to a designation that will not refer to Harlequin in any way. We will initiate this process immediately. We hope this allays the fears many of you have communicated to us."
Changing the name. Hmmm. Will they stop referring rejected authors to the vanity press arm of their company?
Keywords:
About Louise
Louise Marley is a former concert and opera singer who now writes fulltime. She is a two-time Endeavour Award winner, has had several ALA Best Books of the Year honors, and two Nebula nominations. Her bibliography includes science fiction, fantasy, and young...
Connections
I read this story and was
I read this story and was thinking about it. Then forgot about it until I read your post, which is asks the right question. What I see over the broad boardwalk of publishers is their attempt to utilize the tools of the internet without really taking into consideration the fact that they are trying to beef up their revenue streams like a pack of affiliate marketing junkies. There is a golden rule that governs the net: NEA coined by Doc Searls who was there at the founding of the Net. He says,"...three basic rules of behavior that are tied directly to the factual nature of the Internet:No one owns it. Everyone can use it. Anyone can improve it." [see World of Ends: What the Internet Is and How to Stop Mistaking It for Something Else." http://bit.ly/2wKnOm ]
The point is publishers don't understand this and although they are free to do what they want, they do so in a hit and miss way without a plan.
Do you mean
because they advertise their vanity press on their website? Or do you mean because two minutes after they announced their vanity press, everyone with internet access knows about it!
I mean everyone thinks that
I mean everyone thinks that Microsoft, Google, RedRoom etc. own the land they built their companies on. Not true. Therefore what to build is what the publishers should be figuring out, instead of trying to socialize. If a publisher built a valuable property that paid for itself and not at the expense of not being able to offer contracts to aspiring writers with damn good books, then they would have something. But they don't. They use social media to make money as in the case you pointed out. This is absurd. Think about it. There are dollars being spent and dollars coming in. When the dollars to acquire or to sell an author reaches a point where the cost to acquire a new author exceeds the return then their revenue model fails and aspiring writers have no chance at all, not because its personal, but because of economics. And I could go on. What about the good news I posted about on my blog The future of print: Follow the money http://www.redroom.com/blog/michaelwpokocky/the-future-print-follow-money
Michael, that's a good post.
What's important for writers to understand is that Harlequin is soaking innocent hopefuls--who aren't creating publishable work--in order to support those writers they actually pay advances and royalties. This isn't about social networking, but about scamming, and Harlequin is scamming aspiring authors.
Thanks for the great
Thanks for the great commentary. It was fun. Michael
Harlequin's hand was caught
Harlequin's hand was caught in the cookie jar.
No kiddin'.
Too bad there are so many aspiring writers putting cookies in there for them.