A Call To Action
I want to thank ESPAN for inviting me to post here and believing that I was the right person to respond to some of the points in Ms. Pershing’s Friday post. However, after some thought and further conversation with Kristen Painter, I’ve realized that I’m not the right person to do so because there is no one person who can speak for an entire industry or organization. In looking around the internet, at various blogs, forums, Twitter, and groups, hundreds of you have already spoken out and many have done so eloquently and passionately, with facts about your business and careers for anyone who cares to listen.
Not only do I believe I’m not the right person because I’m only one person, but also because RWA is not an organization for publishers but is an organization for authors. Despite the fact that I’ve done much to educate authors over the years, not solely about my publisher but about epublishing in general in a fair, pragmatic, cautionary, balanced and non-cheerleading type of way, the fact remains that I work from a publisher point of view and am not unbiased. Inside the community of writers and authors, however, epublished authors and publishers hope that RWA will step in and provide further education. I respect the work RWA has done at both a national and local level in the past and hope they will recognize the evolving publishing climate and move to work with a growing segment of authors within a new publishing model.
Because, however much I believe in RWA as an organization for authors, and appreciate the spirit of author advocacy in which they operate and have set its current standards we—by which I mean epublishers like the one I currently work for—are operating as legitimate businesses with a committed business model and we have no intention of changing that business model to suit the demands of some who wish to will it away..
In truth, we have said from the beginning that the epublishing business model is not one suited to every author nor every publisher. But it’s not a model that’s going to disappear. While I thoroughly enjoy attending romance and writing related conferences, my other passion is the broader scope conferences that examine the crossroads of publishing and current technology, like the O’Reilly Tools of Change in Publishing, BEA, Digital Book 2009 sponsored by IDPF and others. It’s at these conferences that we learn that publishers throughout the industry are exploring alternate models of operating in order to continue to grow, stay in business and/or continue publishing and producing within the various genres. And let’s be frank: these conferences are not inexpensive, and the individuals who present and share their knowledge are not unknowns. Technology and publishing—dare I say, digital publishing—is not a niche market or even a new market. These conferences would not exist nor sell out if the subjects addressed weren’t crucial to the publishing community.
Because I see that cooperative commitment to education and exploration of the terrain of digital technology and publishing at conferences (as well as on online discussions at blogs and Twitter from non-romance publishers) I am sorry that the RWA national board, with Ms. Pershing as spokesperson, has chosen to take the most recent stance on epublishing. Not because that validation is necessary for publishers to continue operating, but because this is a model of publishing that RWA can learn about and educate their membership about proactively, in preparation for a constantly evolving publishing landscape, which is going to include this business model on some scale.
I have always been honest in my presentations, both online and in person, about the state of epublishing. The business model is one that makes it easy for any person with a computer (or access to one at their local library), a website and some content to open an epublisher. Indeed, as in any business, there are those who will take advantage of authors, have questionable clauses in their contracts, and generally not “do right” by the author and their works.
There are those within the RWA who would include the no (or token) advance portion of the business model as an indication of nefarious intent, but it is not. It is different, yes, and it is an integral part of the business model that allows a variety of books, authors, genres, word counts and story ideas to be published.
The enthusiastic interest and reception editors and publishers from various epublishers have received at the local chapter and specialty chapter levels has demonstrated there is an interest and belief in epublishing from many authors. One indication of this has been the sheer volume of attendance at the workshops on epublishing I, and others, have presented over the years, whether at RWA Nationals in 2008, or as recently as this month at the Lori Foster Get Together, where, at a conference of approximately 300 people, at least 50 people tried to attend the workshop I presented on epublishing (I say tried because the hotel didn’t have a conference room big enough to accommodate the workshop and it was standing room only so we had many people unable to get in). In other words, at a conference held by an established author for NY, nearly 20% wanted more information on the epublishing model—and of those who could attend, all sat through a two-hour workshop on the subject on a Saturday morning at a conference designed for a casual get together, not a workshop-oriented day. The interest is real.
Whether or not RWA makes epublishers “eligible” at the national level, the epublishing business will continue as usual, and authors will continue to seek out and show interest in epublishing. In fact, RWA’s position to choose not to educate its members at the national level harms its membership and fosters an environment ripe for any person interested in taking advantage of authors or in operating as an “author mill”. Because, if all of epublishing was truly out to operate dishonestly, the less education out there, the easier the mark. Indeed, in that case, it would behoove epublishers to either remain silent—or encourage RWA at the national level to continue on their current course—rather than offering education and continuing to campaign for awareness within RWA, as a number of editors/epublishers have done.
Moreover, these same epublishers wouldn’t offer workshops online and at conferences, or write articles and blog posts about publishing, the craft of writing, promotion and other educational topics because they would not want authors to have access to any information that might increase their awareness of contracts or anything to do with the business of publishing..
Despite claims or accusations to the contrary, any interest I have shown in RWA understanding epublishing’s business model or any efforts I’ve made to educate authors on the same come not through an attempt to become an RWA eligible publisher but because I am intimately aware of the pitfalls of epublishing. I understand that it’s not for everyone and I acknowledge that there are less-than-reputable publishers operating and that there are things that could be done better. I believe most anyone who works within epublishing will acknowledge the imperfections and pitfalls. However, these imperfections occur in all levels of publishing, not just epublishing, and those same imperfections are the reason why RWA has been a vital and important part of so many authors’ careers—for their ability to advocate for and educate authors.
It’s for this reason that I hope, no I challenge RWA to not turn its back at a national level on authors who want to start a career, pursue a career or continue a career within the publishing world that includes epublishing. These authors are looking for leaders in an organization that will advocate for them in a variety of publishing settings, a variety of word counts and a variety of genres. I believe RWA can be this organization, because its members are already doing this at some local and specialty levels. This isn’t about recognizing publishers, because the publishers aren’t the heart and soul of this incredible organization. We will continue to advocate for ourselves within our business model whether or not we are RWA eligible. It’s about recognizing authors, who want to pursue their passion and love of writing and shape it into a career, as being as needful and deserving of advocacy whether they choose a traditional path or one less traveled.
- Angela James, Executive Editor, Samhain Publishing
Date: June 22nd, 2009 @ 03:56
Categories: News
Natasha Moore
Great post, Angie! I hope RWA takes up your challenge.