There are, however, a few things that don’t add up for me.
If you haven’t seen RWA President Diane Pershing’s response to author/agent Deidre Knight’s post over on the Espan-RWA blog, you’ll find it here.
First of all, I’m so glad Ms. Pershing responded. It shows that she is interested in a dialog with RWA members and writers in general.
However, there are a few things I’m confused about. Notably, her statement in regard to the workshop offered to the Pro Retreat on digital publishing and the poor turnout. If I understand correctly, only Pro members would be allowed to attend that workshop. Now if that’s the case, what a faulty logic. First of all, let’s just say for easy math that one third of RWA membership belongs to PRO. Out of that 2000 or so members that usually attend the National convention, let’s also say 1/3 are PRO. That means 2/3s of your membership cannot attend by default! Now throw into the mix that I’ve never even heard of the speaker. Why would I want to attend?
I’d also like to point out that not everyone who is “eligible” for PRO or PAN has signed up for PRO or PAN. I am just one such example. Since that’s the case, how can RWA think they know what would best help me…since they haven’t asked and I’ve never felt it would matter to tell them. Just like with the RITA and Golden Heart, there are so many members who don’t belong to one group or the other. And that, is perhaps, just one of the reasons that RWA feels like a clique at times. A club. And yet another reason I created catauniversity with tons of information for romance writers, or a group like CataNetwork Writers where writers can gather and discuss without all the politics that RWA brings. Oh, and did I mention its FREE?!
It’s been pointed out that Melissa Schroeder presented a class/workshop at RWA national last year. Presenting with her? Angela James…the same Angela James who submitted another workshop for the 2009 National conference and was turned down. I’d love to know why it was okay to have a workshop last year, but not this year. What’s the difference?
If I’m going to attend a workshop, I’d like people who are actually in the know, within the digital publishing industry with a romance edge. Like, Angela James. Not some guy I’ve never heard of before.
Now, I do have to agree with Ms. Pershing that there should be some way to figure out which publishers should be endorsed by RWA. It’s either all or none, or a select few somehow decided on by an elite few. Trust me, I understand. We at Ecataromance gets authors and publishers we’ve never even heard of before requesting things from us, reviews, interviews…and no, we don’t get membership dues from these authors. So I understand the need to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Way back when Ecataromance.com first came to be, I thought it was a great idea to promote ebooks separately. It’s it’s own market. They do their own thing. Let them promote on their own and sell to those who read ebooks. And the response from ebook authors was tremendous!
But lately I’ve been rethinking that stance. By segregating ebooks to their own site, are we not keeping that giant valley between ebooks and print books? Since so many print books are sold in ebook formats and so many ebooks being released in print, would it not just be better to have one dynamite site that offers a place to list the various formats a book is available in? Audio, hardback, mass market, trade paper, kindle, .pdf, etc?
I don’t know, but it’s something worth thinking about. And gathering opinions on. Feel free to leave a comment below. And if you haven’t voted yet on a merger between ecata and singletitles, please do.
Also, if you’re a writer, please fill out this survey presented by author Shiloh Walker. The results should be eye opening.