I am disappointed by SFWAs call for a boycott of Amazon. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. When B&N and Borders drove dozens of independents into the ground by underpricing them, SFWA didnt call for a boycott. When B&N refused to stock Simon & Schuster titles, SFWA didnt call for a boycott. When B&N refused to stock Thomas & Mercer, 47North, and Montlake titles (they still dont stock them), SFWA didnt call for a boycott. Instead, SFWA turns a blind eye while some of their officers rant publicly -- and in lewd terms -- against female authors; bars entry to a hundred 47North authors (who chose to forego a small or moderate advance in favor of higher royalties); and issues a boycott on Amazon for disallowing pre-ordering of books that they cant stock while Amazon/Hachette negotiations remain unresolved. Whats being negotiated? In general, we know that Hachette wants ebook prices higher than $9.99 while Amazon wants to keep them lower than $9.99 so they can sell more volume (which, by the way, means more dollars for authors). What are the specific terms being disputed? Well, actually, we have absolutely no idea, because the two parties have a non-disclosure agreement. We dont even know if the argument started because Hachette said they wanted to see prices go up or because Amazon said, Hey, we sell 70% of your volume and make you a lot of money, what do you think of dropping the price under $9.99 so we can sell even more? We just dont know which, because of the NDA. Hachette has made some vague claims couched in highly emotional language to the media and to their writers in an attempt to exert pressure on the negotiations, but they cant legally disclose what theyre actually negotiating. Everything we have is hearsay; everything the New York Times has to report on it is hearsay. We do know that Amazon has publicly offered to create a matching fund with Hachette to pay Hachette authors until negotiations complete and Hachette resumes shipping stock to Amazon. We also know that James Patterson, who hires a legion of ghost-writers, has made very public speeches about how Amazon is destroying literature. How Amazon is doing this, were not quite sure. But James Patterson says it, so it must be so. Apparently, on the basis of this scarcity of facts, SFWAs board feels justified in calling for a boycott, despite not having done so in several much larger cases in the past, and despite the fact that they dont seem at all bothered that the worlds other largest book retailer still doesnt stock (at all) titles by one of the worlds largest scifi imprints. From the perspective of an author who publishes with 47North (and elsewhere), this looks very much to me like a form of retaliation on behalf of one group of writers that will produce a similar effect on a different group of writers (the 47North writers), some of which are barred from having voting rights in the SFWA. (And for the purpose of keeping this succinct and to the point, Ill refrain from making more than a passing mention of yet another large group of writers, the successfully self-published, many of whom see 70-80% of their sales through the Amazon bookstore.) Call for a boycott, by all means. Part of the beauty of America is that we can do that. But if you arent going to be total hypocrites, then if you are going to boycott Amazon for removing pre-order buttons on Hachette titles that Hachette isnt shipping to them, then you need to also boycott Barnes & Noble for making a policy of not stocking ANY 47North, Montlake, Lake Union, and Thomas & Mercer titles. Otherwise, your boycott is hypocritical, and far from being an action in the best interest of authors or in service to any ideal, it is merely the SFWA board choosing to play the pawn in undisclosed negotations between several large corporations. Stant Litore
Posted on: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 01:16:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015