I originally posted this in the comments of Karen Scott’s temporary blog, but it’s a little off topic there, so I figured I’d repost it here so if people need to explain to me the error of my ways, it can be done without hijacking the topic.

I was thinking about RWA standards earlier and how I shouldn’t post my thoughts on that today, but what the hell, right?

While I’m fortunate to be with two e-publishers who haven’t done me wrong and seem to be fine, upstanding companies, if I was the RWA and looked at e-publishing as a whole over the last year, there’s no way in hell I’d recommend the venue to my professional membership.

Their “stamp of approval”, so to speak, does carry some weight. After they “recognized” EC and Trisk (or whoever it was) a lot more writers started looking that direction and a LOT more epublishers opened their doors. I really don’t think that’s a coincidence, and I think RWA was wise to revisit the issue when the bandwagon publishers started to crash and burn.

Yes, some legitimate publishers and authors get the brush-off, but it won’t be long before the bandwagon companies are gone and the legitimate ones are left standing—publishers who offer fair contracts and the ability to earn decent money for their authors and authors who respect themselves and their work enough not to sell out for a contract and a book cover just so they can call themselves published.

So, while it won’t make me any friends, I support RWA’s currrent standards and think their value as an organization transcends the pink ribbons.