Wendy, a.k.a. THE Super Librarian, as an interesting post up regarding RWA, Press Passes and Fans: Group Mentality. As normal she has many a good point, go check it out if you haven’t seen it.
I like RWA. I don’t see them as the window to becoming Nora Roberts and I don’t think you have to be apart of it to write the next best selling novel. It has its pros and cons, and each writer needs to look at it and decide if it is worth their money to join, go to the chapter meetings, and attend nationals. It is a big cost (I think), not to some of course – and yay them – but to many people, it is.
To me the cost of joining RWA, what is does for the writer or brings to the genre, isn’t the point or my issue with the new policy. Nowhere does RWA state “No bloggers allowed” or even “no fans“, they are saying “pony up.” I fall into the camp of “fans” who don’t need to go, unless they fall into the “I want to be a writer when I grow up” camp. Many a fan does grow up, so sure it makes sense they should pay to play, but going just to go, hang at the bar and go to the author signings (where you pay for the books and all the money goes to charity), seems like a cool thing to do if you are a fan and live in the area.
Other than that, events are mostly invite only and the rest you pay to play, “crashing” events even if you say “Nora Roberts said it was ok,” is not something I would do or suggest. It was a concern of mine last year when we went that the view some readers took away was, “OMG that is so cool, I wanna go play too!” And when I voiced that, along with the thought presenting it in a “fans should go way” would put RWA in a position to not ‘give’ alloted press passes to bloggers, I believe I was told “Why shouldn’t fans go?”
The reason, IMHO, is because it isn’t for ‘fans’ and nationals isn’t a ‘convention’ but a ‘conference’. So saying that, why do I care “internet media is being excluded”, especially when I hadn’t planned to attend? It seems from the comments in this post the thought is ‘hey chick I pay, you should pay‘.
To which I say, no, not in all cases.
There are many different reasons for going to nationals. If you are a writer, going for your job, it makes sense to have fees. If you are a publisher, going for your company, it makes sense to have fees – like the authors you are getting something for your craft, your company, your job out of attending. As well as it makes sense that if you give back in the form of your time, you get a discount or comp (depending on WHAT you are doing). If you are a fan, going to stargaze, you should pay.
I am sure some of you are thinking this just comes down to me thinking everything is about me. Oddly it isn’t. Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying I don’t think everything is about me, but that would be a different issue. WHAT? Like you don’t have issues. Shut up.
My point goes with Stephanie Feagan, a member of the RWA Board who responded with her personal opinion at DearAuthor.com regarding the quoted email sent to internet media who received press passes last year:
…What is it, specifically, that RWA gets in return for handing out press pass comps? Hopefully some national media coverage that will get the word out about romance and the authors – hopefully in a positive light.
If there are 13 comp press passes and the point is ‘national media coverage ‘, how is the answer to exclude ALL internet media? Tina, an editor at Blogburst, recently posted, “Bloggers and Journalists form an uneasy alliance“:
A new survey of US journalists found that nearly 70% check a blog list on a regular basis and the majority of journalists surveyed said blogs were having a significant impact on news reporting in all areas tested except news quality.
The quality part is another post for another day, but did anyone see the report on Cassie Edwards? It is possible you caught it at CNN, New York Times, Newsweek, or that little used source The Associated Press. In case you missed it, the story (or witch hunt as authors who I can only guess don’t like ‘national media coverage’) was discovered by a BLOG. You probably haven’t heard of it, being just a blog and all, but The Smart Bitches Who Love Trashy Books would be the chicks who got the word out that lead to “national media coverage”. Oh and they were at Nationals last year. Were they one of the 13? I have no clue and haven’t asked. But if that is the purpose of having those passes, excluding ALL internet media might be a BAD IDEA.
Go Google “RWA National Conference”, go ahead, I will wait. Here have a link. Isn’t it nice to see all that “national media coverage”? Makes total sense to not have internet media there to muck up the place. Oh I know, we should have spelled out RWA… let’s try that… Are you tired from all the national news coverage reading yet?
Hmmmm let’s try another way… searching Publisher’s Weekly, the top return is regarding a conference from 2003: Sweet Savage Bookselling: Opening Day at the Romance Writers Conference. Most recent coverage would be Barbara Vey, who will be in San Fran. Nice blog, all positive, author heavy (as positive, nice blogs are) and a very, very nice person running it but how can it be argued The Smart Bitches Who Love Trashy Books is a bad way for nonromance readers to get a view into romanceland because they won’t get ‘we are more than snark and naughty words’ but it is fine to present the view of women MUST give ‘only praise to be supportive,’ are only here for teh sex, “oh look at that cover hunk” and “do my thighs look fat” is a good way to present romance to the
nonreader?
That is just a small part of my point though but I hate long ass posts so shall continue this in part II. No really there is a part II, I know. Try to contain your excitement.
I really don’t think the idea is PW (as an example) = good press, bloggers = snark in this decision. It’s about cost. While some of the media given press passes would attend the entire conference, for the most part they come in for a day, do interviews. They’re local, or local stringers for national venues.
It’s also, I imagine, about figuring it out. Who would qualify for the blogger/press pass thing? Every blogger out there from the SBs and the adorable Sybil to the blogger who dedicates her space exclusively to Cats And Kitties In Romance!
I’m glad I’m not one of the people who has to figure all this out.
I think you should just come to Rt Con with me. It’s more funner and we get to wear costumes and those mean girls *coughNFRcough* won’t make fun of us for wearing them.
Okay, she might anyhow.
I wonder what part of “nationally syndicated on Reuters, USA Today, and multiple city newspapers” is not “national media”? ‘Cause all of that is true about TGTBTU and several other blogs.
I wonder what part of “thousands of readers worldwide” is not “national media”? ‘Cause that is true about TGTBTU and several other blogs.
Irritates me.
Rodney Dangerfield had it right – no respect.
I would hope so Nora, I went with PW just because it was the first RWA listed in it examples.
And one would think since the google search didn’t show one newspaper, TV station or print magazine (I only got to page 5 or 6 before I got bored) that one day or whatever they are doing isn’t getting that much ‘national attention’. I could be wrong but I think most papers now days are arch’ed on the web. Even if you have to pay to read it.
What is there are a ton of blogs mostly by authors. So that view is going to be… well from an author pov and very cya – which is understandable.
I am selfish, I completely cop to that so I want more than just what an author can give. And I would like a view from a few people who don’t go into it without hating the genre, dare say a few that even like it? [yes to be fair that is about RT which is uh, I have never been but really…]
And I don’t object, LOL as if I get a vote or it matters, to saying there are guidelines. What I find wrong is counting out all internet media. That reeks of agenda to me… but it isn’t like RWA hasn’t done the ‘no, none ya’ thing before to then rethink and be smart. But why in the heck can’t it learn from those mistakes insted of making the same ones over?
I completely disagree with the idea it is hard to set guidelines. For one nothing dies on the net so there are links to whatever. There are blogs with syndication, I know we are, Dear Author, Book Binge and Romancing the Blog – I am sure there are a few more. But just like you can submit traffic numbers for a blog you can submit them for how many times something has been picked up, how many times it has been viewed and if the traffic came back to the blog.
Of course there are always ways to screw with numbers. Anyone with a message board will have a higher amount of page views (if anyone visits it of course), you can submit ‘hits’ vs ‘page views’ which ‘hits’ mean jack and can be way higher and so forth and so on…
But there are ways to narrow it down. And honestly, I just can’t see THAT many people submitting for a press pass. Hell how many even know they could get one before Jane posted about RWA no longer allowing internet media?
Again I could be wrong… maybe RWA is sitting there buried in emails requesting free passes from Teh kitten bloggers who luv romance. And it was just too much work to type up a form letter to say sorry we would love to give you a press pass but we are limited in the number allowed and you don’t met the requirements.
::shrug:: just pisses me off though to have the whole internet media brushed aside and on the heels of all that review crap (which I admit is NOTHING new) but fuck me, it leaves me with the idea RWA and some authors are more than happy, hey thrilled to let us do things to help them, more than happy to use us then turn around and cry foul when it isn’t convenient for them.
Sybil: Of course I made good points. I mean, would you expect anything different? LOL
BTW: I love that picture of Daffy Duck and I’m reading the new Karen Templeton. Now to find time to read. “They” actually expect me to do my job when I’m at work! How unreasonable can you get?
Ethically speaking, should you even take a free membership if it’s offered? I know a lot of big media sources probably wouldn’t care, since journalistic ethics are in the dumper, but I was always taught that obectivity becomes suspect, if the reporter is eating free meals while gathering the news. And this should go for media of any size, print and electronic.
So, were these press passses full memberships, complete with all the meals and snacks? Or were they workshop and event only passes? And really, is there anything keeping bloggers from showing up and hanging around in public areas like the hotel bar and the public literacy signing, where a lot of the action is happening anyway? I think most writers would be happy to do interviews there, and no one needs a memebership or a pass.
Maybe they could comp you into the annual general meeting, too. You can have my seat, and more power to you. I plan to be drinking then.
Sorry, but speaking as a writer, I know plenty of people who have been saving for this conference for 2 years, who are worried that they can’t attend because they still don’t have enough money saved. If cutting back on several thousand dollars of freebies to the press makes it even a little cheaper on the writers attending that need this event as an educational conference and not a photo/promotional op, then I’m all for it.
They don’t offer free memberships, well as far as I know. I know there is a discounted membership for ‘associates’ or some such that allows you less than a full membership.
If journalistic ethics can be bought for free food, I think there is more to worry about there but in this case the meals have to be purchased. I would say the whole thing, I drove, cost me around 600 – 800? Of course I had 4 roommates. Then again I am not worried about my ethics, an author did buy me lunch and I had no problems telling her what issues had with her up coming book *g*. Just as I will honestly review your book, like it or not, even though I didn’t pay for it.
I understand writers save for this and some can’t afford to go. I get that completely. And if I wanted to be a writer I would think I should pay and join. But my point is IF there is going to be X amount of press passes… internet media SHOULD NOT be discounted out of hand.
If journalistic ethics can be bought for free food, I think there is more to worry about there but in this case the meals have to be purchased.
Not trying to impugn your ethics, Sybil. Really. I trust you to be honest, and since you accept electronic ARCs for review, you work damn cheap (like for free). And I would totally be willing to buy you a drink or lunch, or give you a free book, and not expect a puff review in return. Because on the other side of this, every gift is not a bribe.
But…
If you start checking around on newspaper ethics codes, we’d be heading into a gray area, with an all access pass to this conference. You can’t expect reviewers to review without tickets, and free books. But those things are cheap, compared to even an associate membership to this conference. (although I can’t find the DAMN price on the DAMN website, without spending my day in click hell, I’m pretty sure we’re over $200 and under $400, right?)
So, generally speaking, a serious journalist should probably turn it down, if their media outlet couldn’t afford to buy them a ticket. It would be worse, if we were offering hotels, too. But even with hotel grade horse’s duffers, and continental breakfast, it could look to some people like we were trying to buy good press.
And frankly, having run a small conference (which I will NEVER do again) I know how crazy it gets when you try to figure out who to comp, and what to comp them for. And I also know that some people will try to get as much as they can, even when you can’t afford to give. (I could tell stories. You will have to find me and get me drunk, first. Very drunk.)
So, while some people don’t see why the bar can’t be lower, to let more press in, I don’t see any reason that it can’t be higher to kick everyone out. It’s not that I want to exclude the press, to keep them from seeing some dirty little secret. If there are dirty secrets? I definitely want to be at that party. I always miss the really good stuff, even when i’m in the right room. And I don’t really care who comes, or who they represent.
I only care if we’re paying for them. And I’d just as soon see no full conference passes. Or people in on a day pass. And then let them leave. But sell a membership to anyone who wants one.
I don’t think it’s possible to make an easy decision on who is big enough, and who is too small. But that’s just because I’ve never seen any decision made by the RWA board, that hasn’t made someone mad, or not generated accusations of favoritism, cronyism, or Ludite thinking. No matter where they draw the line, the person on the wrong side of the line is going to be unhappy.
I would be fine if there were no comps. I can’t say if there were more last year than the year before all I saw was the 13 press passes last year.
But if they are gonna have x amount they should be based on what gets the genre the most exposure. To the right audience that would buy the books.
I would look like the asshole if I applied for a pass, sent in my numbers and whatever and was 20 out of 20 for 10 passes. What would I say… omg it isn’t fair? Well life isn’t fair.
But to say I don’t count because I am ‘just’ a blog so I don’t even rate to apply. And if I am stupid enough to send in an app for my kitten’s luv teh romance blog… tell me no.
I can’t even believe it would be a question that the internet isn’t ‘real media’ or that a professional org can’t tell morons ‘no’.
~that a professional org can’t tell morons ‘no’.~
On this point, I can say RWA has to be very careful. People sue, especially like to sue organizations. Who decides who’s the moron? The moron NEVER thinks they’re a moron.
So without a clear-cut policy with standards for what qualifies as a blog for this purpose, any blog declined could threaten to sue. You’re right back to the mean girl thing. RWA is a mean girl, and they only let Blogs A, B and C in because they’re mean girls, too! They HATE kittens!
However silly that sounds, it’s pretty close to reality.
The thing is, I don’t get the impression they’re wanting the “press” to reach readers, Sybil, so I’m not even sure some of the arguments being used here and on Dear Author work. What I am hearing is that the organization is wanting “good press” from this and the online reader sites are wanting another thing entirely, i.e. what actually goes on at the conferences from a reader’s perspective and not a writer’s.
I’m not sure the two things are at all the same in terms of reporting. It is entirely possible that a completely new category needs to be invented, not for online sites and blogs but for reader representatives. This may not be about the difference between media but between audiences. We simply aren’t the general public. Romance doesn’t have to be “sold” to us. But it also doesn’t have to hide from us either, does it?
Oh, and while I’m at it, I can’t get it Wendy’s blog. Is it down or is the link wrong?
Bev(BB): Hmmm, maybe it was just a hiccup? Blogger does seem to be running slowly at the moment, but who knows if that’s Blogger or my Internet connection. But Sybil does have the link right!
LOL well I would expect them to not use the word moron 🙂
Although really could you sue for that? I am sure I have been called worse.
Really this goes to my beef with websites charging for ad space and what they charge. I can’t understand, other than the author just doesn’t ‘understand’, why anyone would pay 150 for space on a blog that clearly shows their traffic at less than 60 views a day with an average of around 400 a month.
When low end for high traffic blogs is around 100,000 a month.
Soooo really… telling the kitten blog, who I would bet is nicer than ANY high traffic blog (even nicer than me and I am sweetness and light) no soup for you, how in the world could that be sueable? Hell is sueable a word?
Of course unless the point is not wanting the high traffic blogs like SB and DA who some deem meangrrls. Then taking the kitten blog and saying no no SB and DA would be wrong, bad and evol. And goes back to just wanting to make the meangrrl bloggers pay for being… you know… mean.
Which of course, me being sweetness and light wouldn’t count either way so why do I get punished? 🙂
…and on that note, the dead horse up and said HALLELUJAH! I’ve RISEN AGAIN! Dude and I haven’t even posted part II yet!
Don’t know but the error I keep getting is this one:
I get it on both the linked page and the base URL. It may just be a temporary thing that’ll clear up later but I thought I’d ask.
Or it is just you cuz I just got in… could be my sweetnessness and lightness though 🙂
Bev(BB) – that is very odd, because I’ve had comments recently on that post. Maybe clean out your cache? Try hitting refresh? Hmmm….
Bev(BB) she prolly has you blocked cuz you are a meangrrl and just doesn’t wanna tell you. Wendy’s like that you know….
Ha! Hardly. I wouldn’t even begin to know how to block somebody. It’s nothing personal Bev(BB) – honest!
Soooo really… telling the kitten blog, who I would bet is nicer than ANY high traffic blog (even nicer than me and I am sweetness and light) no soup for you, how in the world could that be sueable? Hell is sueable a word?
Because nice isn’t the same thing as rational. Normal people turn crazy without warning, if they feel they are being treated unfairly. And it doesn’t really matter if they can win a law suit. They can still sue. And it takes time and money to make them go away, even if they have no grounds to get in your grill about an issue.
Even if the law is not involved, it takes lots of time to deal with people who are unhappy with a decision. And the members of the RWA board, whether they are right or wrong, are all volunteers. My heart goes out to them.
Bev, I’m interested in your division between press and reader’s advocates. Because that puts a new spin on this. If blogs aren’t press, then they don’t deserve a press pass. They should think of themselves as fans or readers, and buy a ticket.
(Of course, if they are press, then I think that ethically they should still buy a ticket. I’m sticky that way).
It’s not that RWA is hiding. Really. Anyone who can afford to can go to this thing. And it’s expensive because it is not a fan conference, it’s a business conference.
I guess I’m just not clear on the need to subsidize anyone, just to make our business appear transparent.
You know, writers don’t get comped unless they give workshops, so why should press/bloggers get comped? This year they turned down my workshop idea. I’m still going and I’m paying full price, plus airfare and hotel. I don’t care. I’m still going.
I think readers, fans and bloggers are more than welcome to attend. It’s great to meet y’all and it makes me feel like a star! lol. But this is an industry conference and it is primary set up for people who write romance. It’s not a fan-based event. If you’re coming to meet authors and learn more about the genre great. Fabulous if you’re coming to write about us and make us look great :-). But if you want something geared toward readers, you might want RT’s conference. Which, btw, is more expensive than RWA. I’m just saying.
Well, it’s not so much that I’m wondering about the “press” distinction for reader-oriented sites as it is that I’m questioning the audience for what they’re “reporting” in the first place.
Or maybe it’s more a matter that readers have a unique place in the grand scheme of things with regards to all this anyway. And we’re not talking about inviting readers off the street in for the book signings and such but designated representatives that are going to report back to a much larger numbers of readers. So, yeah, they are reporters and in that sense “press” but not in the sense of publicizing the industry to the rest of the world.
Put it this way, I bet RWA doesn’t bat an eye at a magazine like RT doing feature articles on the conference targeted at ROMANCE READERS . . . same difference. Only in the case of the other sites and blogs, their reports happen instanteously more or less. There is no lag time. They are still articles that have a wide audience appeal within the online readership of romance readers.
So, does RT get press credentials or does it fall into the same limited scope as the rest? I’m asking that not to be snarky but simply for clarification. What designation does it have as an organization? Because I certainly wouldn’t think that it has a national affiliation. And here’s the thing, maybe SB or Dear Author haven’t reached an appropriate level yet, whatever that is, but I seriously doubt AAR hasn’t passed the numbers of RT yet.
All I’m saying is that if one is going to compare things, you have compare apples with apples, not apples and zucchinis. It just doesn’t work.
So, does RT get press credentials or does it fall into the same limited scope as the rest? I’m asking that not to be snarky but simply for clarification.
Personally? I don’t have a clue.
But I’d also want to know if they are comping any RWA members or org reps into their conferences, or giving us any perks or discounts for promotional space at RT (the magazine or the conference). Because aside from the publicity/reporting we may be dealing with a quid pro quo situation between conferences.
Or not. Again. I have no idea.
As far as giving ‘national outlets + blogs’ a pass, ahead of ‘really large blogs’? I’d want to know if we were getting long term exposure, articles and interviews out of these press visits, in addition to on-the-spot reporting. Because, in theory, there could be added value in having both. If we could get press during the conference, and then press about the conference in next months issue of something, it’s a longer term investment and that would be something to think about.
And should we consider financial need in any of this? Because if the big blogs are selling ads, then they have operating capital for news gathering, that smaller “I love romance and kitties” blogs do not. How much help do they need from RWA?
Just one more thing to be considered.
But not by me. Because I do not want to be head of any committees, or run for any boards, or answer any hate mail. I am a follower, not a leader, and prowd of it.
Really, this was a decision made by people who have no hidden agenda, but needed to draw a line somewhere.
We could run ads. The guest author day set up alone is more than some people put into ‘spotlights’ they get around 200 dollars for and up.
It is a shit load of work for me, from finding the book (pub contact, author contact), getting the book, reading the book, once I like it and know I want to do a full day – it is a matter of researching the author, their books, their interviews and gathering pics.
Sending info and ideas to the author, following up with the author, getting the info from the author, formatting the posts, setting the posts, getting the word out and contacting the editor or publisher if I want to give away more copies of the book.
Then following up with the authors, publicist and editors with links of posts and syndication. For a year I did 2 to 4 a month by myself. The last year or so gwen has been a huge ass help.
Add in two line weeks – Brava Bad Boys, Avon Red, Alluring Tales, Harlequin Historical
Add in Spooktacular and the upcoming Valenduckie Week
Add in the Halequin Newsletter we will be doing monthly and the Harlequin Spotlight.
Add in the random events like Hwang’s reserve. Add in the up coming 411’s and other random things we have planned and have done. And I think, I could be wrong, that we have more than paid for my press pass last year. Which was the reason I went to RWA – for the blog.
Not to add into that Jane and I volunteered for the book set up at 8 am. And were there until 12:30. I helped set up Bantam’s and St Martin’s booksigning because of the fact I was comp’ed, a reader and I felt I should give whatever lil back that I could.
Was it worth it for me to be there? Maybe… maybe not… but the blog did very well, the traffic more than doubled and our ranking is up (although down now). Could an one print article do more than we have… maybe.
Did it matter to the big picture the live RWA feed went down during the RITA’s but Dear Author was still able to give out the info? maybe… maybe not…
Did it matter we helped Romance Novel TV round up winners? Prolly only to Romance Novel TV. It is what it is… I am just saying IF RWA does any press passes to weigh the requests against what they can and can’t offer.
Gwen is so gonna keel me for animal cruelty.
I think the whole comp thing confuses the issue too. I’ve read the discussion over on Dear Author and so many people seem to be interchanging the press pass with the comp that it becomes unclear whether they’re the same thing or at least completely linked. I mean I can understand the organizations need to limit the number of press passes if those truly are linked to the free comps going out. What I’m finding totally unclear is why can’t there still be press ids that have nothing to do with having things “free” even if it comes down to seperate identifications for either online categories or reader-oriented things such as what we’re talking about here. (And frankly, it’s not like any of this is new. AAR has been doing this very thing for years. I would think RWA would already have a category ready and waiting to assign to the various online groups.)
That’s what I’m getting at and I suspect that lack of “recognition” may be what’s lingering in several other minds as well. It’s one thing to have money worries. We all have those. It’s a totally other thing to not recognize reader support when it’s out there and staring one in the face in several different forms and in several different approaches. Not all of them snark.
All I’m observing is that readers, at least online, have evolved from simply being passive visitors who show up only for booksignings into considerably more active participants who truly do want to know more of what’s going on behind the scenes. Yes, the “official” organization representing the authors can choose to ignore this phenomenon, but does that truly serve their membership’s best interest in the long run?
It’s a lot of work but ALL GLADLY DONE because we love the genre and we love reading and we love to share and we love the industry.
And I’ll pass the cheese to Sybil’s whine. And she knows she sounds whiney, but I think she is saying something important: I think she’s just sick of people saying we’re only in this for ourselves.
We’re not. We do it because we love this industry and want to share the love with other people. This stuff is very time consuming (all gladly spent) and expensive for some (all gladly spent) and definitely not done simply because we want something free. Ain’t nuthin’ free about this.
We’re here because we love this industry and literature. Just want some acknowledgement of the effort that goes into sites like this and the fact that we’re industry focused and bring a hell of a lot of attention to an otherwise ignored part of the writing industry. Think about it – who would pay attention to it if not for DA, SmartBitches, and other similar blogs??
And who is volunteering at these events to set up and tear down, if not people like Sybil and Jane?
Crap. Now I’m beating that poor dead horse.
What I’m finding totally unclear is why can’t there still be press ids that have nothing to do with having things “free”
Well I guess you’ve been told, Syb! LOL
Christine Merrill – what is the source of your quote, please?
awwwwww dammit.
That has no source, other than me typing away like an idiot, while trying to eat a hamburger.
Ignore the blueness and blockiness.
So ashamed.
~And who is volunteering at these events to set up and tear down, if not people like Sybil and Jane?~
I’ve done it. Paid my conference fee, in full, and helped set up at the literacy signing. I’ve helped set up publisher’s signing. A lot of the writers attending volunteer for various chores. It’s the way it’s always been, and long before the internet and bloggers.
I certainly appreciate whatever you do, but please don’t assume you’re the only ones doing it. I believe last year was the first Sybil and Jane attended, and the events were set up and torn down for a couple of decades previously.
The press passes are comps, as I understand it. What the complaint seems to be is having to pay to attend. Nobody’s stopping anyone who’s paid the conference fee from reporting on the conference, on workshops–which the fee would entitle them to attend–and so on. You don’t need press credentials to attend anything if you’ve paid the fee.
I’m sorry, Gwen, because I get the sense you’re really upset and feel slapped down. I just don’t see that’s what’s happening here.
Definitely, I do not want you guys to think that you’re not wanted, or that the membership overall, favors one type of press over another, and is trying to screw the little guy. And I’m not trying to come in here lookin’ like a hater.
I don’t mind who shows up at national, and I don’t think it needs to be closed to non-memebers, or be a writer-only zone. I figure, if I get roaring drunk and start grabbing titties in the bar (and that was NOT me, BTW) someone is going to report on it, even if there are no bloggers present.
But the percentage of members that go to this, and are published is small. And the percentage of people, published or not, that can really, honestly say that they make enough money from their writing to pay for this without guilt, is even smaller. Some of us have gone into serious debt on years of bombed pitches and rejection letters and dead-end conferences, before finally seeing a profit.
As members, if we volunteer to help out, which is a great way to make business contacts, we get no discount.
If we present a workshop, there is payment, but it’s nowhere near the price of the membership and travel.
More people than you would think are there on scholarship.
And a lot of us end up spending a buttload of money, on top of fees and travel, on stuff like business attire, hair and make-up, since we’ve been writing all year, and are too scary- looking to leave the house, for what amounts to a 5 day job interview.
It’s not like we don’t party while we’re there, and you don’t need to know the secret writer handshake to hang out with us.
But if the press is getting in free, even if they are adding value by promoting the genre, a big portion of the conference attendees are not benefitting from press, since they have nothing published to promote.
So I think, I should pay, you should pay, and I will show you were the free booze is (that would be my room), because we are all on a tight budget and could use a drink.
Too true. Did you know someone posted video on YouTube of the conga line dancing at the Harlequin party? Eek!
Ah hell. I didn’t mean it to sound like a whine, but I see in hindsight that that’s all it sounds like.
I recognize that blogs are relatively new to this whole thing. I didn’t want it to sound like we were shouldering any kind of burden. Hey – if all blogs dropped off the face of the planet tomorrow, it would still keep spinning, RWA would keep meeting, with nary a hiccup except from the few fans. I’m surprisingly comforted by that fact.
I think what I’m trying to say is it’s a little irksome for “online media not associated with national press media” to be singled out as not worthy this year. THAT’S what feels like a slap down. We were judged and the privilege was withdrawn.
I realize we could all pay appropriate fees and attend with no problem, and, in fact, some bloggers are doing just that. It just needles me to have online media singled out as being “not press,” despite all the efforts we make toward that aim.
We work hard at making TGTBTU feel like an online magazine about reading with Op/Eds here and there, and with lots of participation from our readers by way of comments. It just stings a bit that something like RWA doesn’t see it.
And I prefer a nice Double Gloucestershire and pears. I’ll bring the whine.
LOL Caroline but that wasn’t a reader blogger, was it? Cuz Jane didn’t even twitter the Harlequin party. I was sitting at the bar with Kensington and didn’t go. Eventhough I could have as I was invited and didn’t “crash” anything.
Kristie J couldn’t even hold on to her camera much less something to vid. And Wendy’s out too. If the bitches did it… well we would know it would be all over their blog.
Ten to one it was the Romance Divas? I think it was them that has drunk pics up from the year before on some flicker thing.
Jane made the conscious decision to not take photographs at the Harlequin party. People were there to “let their hair down” and she thought it would be poor form to snap candid photos of them. By that point Kristie had lost her camera. I got fed up with carrying mine around and didn’t snap a single picture after the Librarian Event on Wednesday. I’m not sure the SBs went to the HQ party? I’m thinking they didn’t – but there were quite a few people there and lord knows I didn’t see/meet everybody. So yeah, it twasn’t us. We behaved ourselves like good girls.
OH! you know Wendy you are right… cuz I remember introducing SB to Kate Duffy and they were with… uh Tor? maybe? So yeah not them. Because Sarah, sweetie she is caught my eye and asked how I was feeling and I remember saying I was surprised they weren’t at Harlequin.