HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing

Well, look at what we have here, apparently RWA have found a way to still stay friends with HQN, after taking away their eligible publisher status in a stand-off akin to the one that took place at the Alamo back in eighteen something or other. I can’t believe it took them so damned long:

Taking into account emerging trends in publishing that may offer opportunities to writers, the task force recommended that RWA adopt methods used by other trade shows and conventions and to shift its method of evaluating publishers as a whole to evaluating publishers by divisions, imprints, or lines.

Under this revised method, RWA will extend invitations to a wide pool of publishers. Invitees may only represent their non-subsidy/non-vanity publishing programs (imprints, divisions, or lines) at RWA’s conference. Space for spotlights, workshops, and booksignings will be allocated to lines, imprints, or divisions that best meet the requirements for “Qualifying Markets.” This new process of evaluation will likely increase opportunities for small presses and e-presses that previously have been excluded.

Of course I’m not surprised, I knew RWA wouldn’t be able to stick to their principles, they need HQN more than HQN needs them. In the words of Mrs G:

RWA 0 – Harlequin 1

I hate to say I told ya so, so I’m just gonna post what my cynical self wrote back in November:

I’m with Mrs Giggles, I wonder how long it will be before the RWA change the terms of publisher eligibility in order to welcome Harlequin back into the fold?

Now let’s wait and see how long it takes before they ‘invite’ HQN back to the fold.


Via Dear Author


  • Amanda
    January 29
    4:12 am

    That was quick, but it’s true RWA needs HQN more.


  • I dunno… I think there’s a lot more going on and a number of things being discussed.

    Admittedly, due to personal issues this week, I haven’t been following things as closely, as I could have, but I’m trying.

    There was some a thoughtful post at Jackie Kessler‘s blog that I liked reading, and it’s part of why I’m reserving judgment.

    One of the biggest problems I had, from the get go, was those who’d had their works rejected by HQN would get ‘referred’ the ‘assisted self pub’. If that’s not happening, then one of my biggest issues has already been dealt with. From many of those I’ve talked with, that was a common concern, if I recall correctly-all the links, “BECOME AN AUTHOR”-which are gone. The name thing was changed.

    So until I know more? I’m reserving judgment.

    **I should clarify-some of the points she brings up are questions I already had, which is why I’m just waiting to see.


  • Randi
    January 29
    5:39 pm


    while I tend to agree with you, I think the good news here is that E-authors will now be included. If RWA had to go through this whole rigamorale just so E-authors could be considered “real” authors, then I think it was all for the best.


  • eggs
    January 30
    10:06 pm

    I agree with Randi. This is a good outcome. Everyone knew RWA would have to change their rules to allow HQN authors back in. A massive percentage of their membership writes for/has written for/hopes to write for HQN. A voluntary membership based organization has to represent their members or the organization will collapse.

    The RWA seemed to have become confused over whether they represented authors or publishers. Recognizing that E-authors are really truly real authors is a huge step forward for them, putting the emphasis back on authors instead of publishers. They’ve taken a negative situation and used it to have a genuine re-think about who they represent – and I think that’s great for them and for their members.


  • Some days it seems as if the whole book industry is in convulsions. (see Macmillan versus Amazon) So many *olde* ways taking broadside hits from technology, the recession, and an array of business models that none of us can quite wrap our heads around; paper publishing, vanity publishing, self-publishing, e-publishing . . . And nowhere in sight is the “new normal.”

    Really, in the end, book people, including various associations, publishers, agents, and authors are just plain flummoxed by changes happening too fast to assimilate; they make a decision one day that turns out to be either brilliant (as they’d hoped it would), reeking bad, totally inane, or just plain questionable on the next. It’s crazy out there!

    Makes me glad I’m not someone that hundreds or thousands of people are looking to to make those decisions. 🙂 No doubt, I’d screw it up royally.


  • THIS is why I was reserving judgement… 🙂
    From RWA’s site, link here

    Look who is now listed as qualifying markets.

    List updated Feb. 19, 2010

    BelleBooks, Inc.

    Ellora’s Cave

    Harlequin Presents
    Harlequin Presents Extra
    Harlequin Romance
    Harlequin Superromance
    Harlequin American Romance
    Harlequin Intrigue
    Harlequin Historicals
    Harlequin Historicals Undone

    Harlequin Teen

    HQN Books

    Kimani Romance
    Kimani Press


    Mills & Boon:
    Mills & Boon Romance
    Mills & Boon Modern
    Mills & Boon Modern Heat
    Mills & Boon Medical Romance
    Mills & Boon Historical
    Mills & Boon SuperHistorical


    Samhain Publishing, Ltd

    Silhouette Nocturne
    Silhouette Nocturne Bites
    Silhouette Desire
    Silhouette Special Edition
    Silhouette Romantic Suspense


    Spice Briefs

    Steeple Hill:
    Love Inspired
    Love Inspired Suspense
    Love Inspired Historicals
    Love Inspired Classics

    St. Martin’s Press

    TOR Romance

    The changes made will allow the smaller and epresses a chance. Yes, HQN is there, but it’s been made very clear that RWA isn’t allowing anybody to solicit for a vanity press-it’s been in several notices I’ve received.

    That was one of my main concerns, and it’s been dealt with. And not only was it dealt with… EC and Samhain can now attend as publishers. Plus, there will be workshops on digital publishing. :o)

    IMO, it was a good change.


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment