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 shouldnâ€™t post my thoughts on that today, but what the hell, right?
While Iâ€™m fortunate to be with two e-publishers who havenâ€™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, thereâ€™s no way in hell Iâ€™d recommend the venue to my professional membership.
Their â€œstamp of approvalâ€, so to speak, does carry some weight. After they â€œrecognizedâ€ 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 donâ€™t think thatâ€™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 wonâ€™t be long before the bandwagon companies are gone and the legitimate ones are left standingâ€”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 wonâ€™t make me any friends, I support RWAâ€™s currrent standards and think their value as an organization transcends the pink ribbons.
Very well said, Shan! :clap: