Friday, July 27, 2007

New Podcast for Ruthless Acts

I've posted the podcast for an excerpt from Ruthless Acts this morning. You can listen or download it at Adrianna's Broadcasts.

Elizabeth Anthony and Isandro Santario are two people who should never have met, should never have loved. But in Esmerelda, anything is possible.

This story is now available at Amber Heat, the erotic imprint of Amber Quill Press.

Ruthless Acts is also available in the "Esmerelda's Lovers" anthology of erotic stories, now available in paperback at

Have a great day!


Tuesday, July 24, 2007

About Faeries and Podcasting

I was away this weekend attending the Faerieworlds Festival in Veneta, Oregon. That was fun and I've got some pictures up, if you'd like to see them. Here's the link:
2007 Faerieworlds Festival Pix. I will be blogging a bit about the festival.

Also, on Friday, just before I left, I broadcast my latest excerpt from Graphic Liaisons. You can listen to it, or download it at: Adrianna's Podcasts

It was interesting as I went to check out my podcast site this morning to find that on the front page of, my podcast was listed there among the most active podcasts today. I don't know how long it will stay there, but it was pretty cool to see this morning. Currently, you can listen to podcasts of chapter excerpts from "The Boy Next Door," "Sylvie's Gift," "Nights in White Satin," "No Choice," and "Graphic Liaisons." I'll be broadcasting a new excerpt on Friday.

The other great thing about this weekend was the release of my latest story from Amber Heat, "Tempt Me Not" which is an erotic dark fantasy. Read a short excerpt and/or purchase it at: Tempt Me Not.

Hope your week is starting out to be a great one. :-)


Sunday, July 15, 2007

New Podcast for No Choice Excerpt Now Available

This week's broadcast is the opening excerpt from my erotic menage short story "No Choice."

No Choice is also currently available in my paperback erotic anthology, "Carnal Carnivale" now available at Amazon.

Title: Adrianna Dane, Author of Sensual and Erotic Romance
Episode: No Choice (an erotic story excerpt)



Friday, July 13, 2007

Recent RWA Board Decisions - Part II - PAN Eligibility

It appears that yesterday there was open discussion about these new policy changes and definitions and they may be altered. Several blogs to read more about this are at:

I'm sure there are others. These are just a few that have been posted on various loops I'm a member of.

Regarding PAN eligibility. PAN is the acronym for "Published Author Network" within the RWA organization. PAN-eligible is defined by RWA as "a General or Honorary member who is eligible for PAN membership" as described in the RWA Policy and Procedures Manual.

According to the June issue of RWR, one of the goals of the proposed changes was to separate the eligibility requirements between "publisher recognition (eligibility)" for such things as entering the RITA awards and related RWA organization activities, and eligibility for PAN.

PAN mission statement as noted in the June RWR (and in the Policy and Procedures Manual):

PAN's purpose is to establish within RWA a network of communication and support to effectively promote and protect the interests of published romance authors, to open channels of communication between those romance authors and other publishing industry professionals, and to encourage professionalism on all levels and in all relationships within the publishing industry.

In other words, a network for "career-oriented" published authors.

Currently, the membership requirements include:

"Any RWA General or Honorary member who has published an Eligible Novel with an RWA-Recognized Publisher shall be eligible for membership in PAN. To prove publication, the member must submit a copy of the Eligible Novel's copyright page to the Office.

For purposes of determining PAN membership...there will be no grandfathering of books published by publishers that went out of business prior to the adoption of RWA publisher recognition standards."

An "eligible novel" is defined by RWA as:

a non-subsidy, non-vanity work of Romantic Fiction of 40,000 or more words that is offered for sale to the general public by a publisher through a readable or audio format, for which the author receives payment as stipulated in a written contract from a publisher, and is published by an RWA-Recognized Publisher.

RWA has indicated the following change to PAN eligibility policy:

There are two methods in which to become members of PAN (and I will excerpt the relevant parts of these options rather than reprinting the whole thing):

Option One: Any RWA General or Honorary member who has earned at least $1,000 in the form of an advance from a single romance novel or novella published by a non-Subsidy, non-Vanity Publisher may join PAN either as a full member (once the title is published) or as a provisional member for an eighteen-month period while awaiting publication of the title...

Option Two: Any RWA General or Honorary member who has earned at least $1,000 in the form of royalties or a combination of advance plus royalties on a single published romance novel or novella published by a non-Subsidy, non-Vanity Publisher may join PAN as a full member following the publication of the title...

The definition of vanity/subsidy publishers has far-reaching effects to all corners of the current and proposed policies of the RWA that will affect a wide number of currently published authors.

By the new definition of vanity/subsidy publisher (defined in yesterday's blog entry), slight though it may seem, essentially all small press and electronically published authors are denied professional support by this organization.

I will note that originally, according to RWR, the proposal threshhold income was for a $2,000 advance/royalty and I do note that this number has been halved to $1,000. Also, they are allowing either a novel or a novella which I believe opens to the current trend in publishing.

I do have a problem with the fact that this income is based solely on one book. When I made comments to the committee, I did suggest that the amount, rather than being based on one book, should have reflected an across-the-board amount, which would more obviously reflect a "career-oriented" person as opposed to a "hobby-oriented" career. One book does not establish a career in the majority of cases.

In my opinion small steps forward in some areas, yet major leaps backward in others. The new RWA definition of vanity/subsidy stops essentially every forward move to new policy. The rationale RWA uses to support a number of the proposed changes that other organizations do it this way, so we should, too, doesn't fly with me. It didn't work with my kids when they did something wrong either.

One thing I did mention in my comments to the committee was the "grandfathering" of members who had already met the criteria to join PAN. A serious problem in many instances was each time the board decided to shift the earth and scatter things to the four winds, everyone had to go back to square one, again and again and again. Organization morale seriously suffers because of that mentality. According to these recent decisions, as far as PAN eligibility, grandfathering will take place for those authors who were general members of PAN before July 10, 2007.

It is unfortunate that any ground they gained by the small changes have been far outweighed by the new definitions. I can only hope they reconsider.

One last point of note is regarding the RITA. It is the very last notation on the recent changes to policy:

After extensive discussion, the Board decided not to add an erotic romance category to the contests due in part to the inherently indefinable nature of erotic romance."

Hmmm, do they even realize they have a chapter devoted to erotic romance writers who have quite clearly defined the parameters?

Please, please, please, get your heads out of the sand, RWA, and see what's going on around you. Pay attention to the words you are using to define your policy. Don't you think it's about time? And if you've got someone else writing policy, pay attention, because they don't know the membership, but you are supposed to.

Oh, and this will end my rant on RWA recent decisions.


Thursday, July 12, 2007

Recent RWA Board Decisions - Part 1 - Publisher Recognition Issues

As many of us know the Romance Writers of America (RWA) is holding their annual convention this week in Dallas, Texas. The recent decisions by the board are leading to some very heated discussions, particularly by electronic publishers and authors. I number within that group, but have refrained from entering into the passionate discussion thus far. I thought it might be better served from me to share my thoughts on my blog instead.

It truly is difficult to know where to begin. From the face of the recent decisions and to be as fair as possible, on its surface, it looks like there were tiny steps forward and major steps backward. But let's look a little closer at exactly what sort of impact this will have and the authors they say they are here to serve.

RWA in the past has dug its heels in on many issues and the "old guard" has remained firm, even within the rapidly changing atmosphere of technology and its continuing impact on the distribution of literature in all its forms. Some advances may possibly have been made here, but not enough, and the new decisions certainly indicate that RWA National continues to not understand the changing industry and climate of publishing.

Regarding publisher recognition, it seems to me they have responded with a knee-jerk response to certain recent activities of failed enterprises and will attempt to use this as their banner and validation for their mind-boggling decisions. Sadly, this will not stand.

As I address these amazing decisions, and try to clarify to myself exactly what they have done, and what good can come out of it, if any, I have four documents spread out on my desk. The first is the June 2007 issue of the Romance Writers Report (RWR) and the article regarding PAN Recognition, which also includes their "mission statement" regarding Publisher Recognition. The second document is my email input regarding proposed PAN eligibility changes which was quite lengthy I might add, that I sent to the committee. The third document is "A Summary of RWA Board Decisions" which I just printed out from the RWA National website. And fourth is the Policy and Procedure Manual for historical reference. I wanted to be certain I had the exact words from the "horse's mouth" so to speak before attempting to address any of this.

Keep in mind that all of this is strictly my personal opinion.

And, yes, I am a member of RWA and have been so for several years, as well as being a member of my local chapter. Some of my personal questions, of course, are: How will this affect me as a published author? Will my work be recognized by my peers within the organization? How will it affect my publishers? Does RWA's stance reflect my feelings and career choices as a published author in the romance market?

I think before I can address anything else, I have to look at "Publisher Recognition" and how RWA now seeks to define subsidy/vanity press because this has a direct bearing on all of the other decisions regarding these matters at their board meeting.

In the June, 2007 issue of RWR, the article states:

"Publisher recognition" is not and never has been a stamp of approval of a publisher's business practices. It is not a guarantee that a publisher's contract is a good deal for the author. It merely indicates that a publisher has met certain bare-minimum standards that may indicate that the opportunity exists for an author to build a career there. ... To that end, the Board of Directors is considering revamping publisher recognition standards so that there will be "RWA-eligible publishers" for individual RWA programs rather than having a single, overriding program called "publisher recognition."

I read this as meaning publishers who are not recognized by RWA may not participate in RWA activities such as conferences, etc. As in speaking or talking with potential authors about possible submissions, or putting on workshops at these events.

A quick question here: Does this mean that authors who are published with these non-recognized publishers cannot sell their books at RWA-sponsored signings? Will they be banned as well in this regard?

So what is the benchmark to which RWA has attached its wagon for publisher recognition?

Old policy per manual:

To be an "RWA-Recognized Publisher," a publisher must be a royalty-paying publishing house that (1) is not a subsidy of vanity publisher, (2) has been releasing books via national distribution for a minimum of one year, and (3) has sold a minimum of 1,500 hardcover or trade paperback copies or 5,000 copies in any other format,including print on demand, of a single novel or novella or collection of novellas in book form, in bona fide arms-length transactions, and continues to sell a minimum of 1,500 hardcover or trad epaperback copies of 5,000 copies in any other format of a subsquent romance novel each year.

[[In my opinion item no. 3 is what needed to be addressed. This they did, but in a bent and skewed manner and without understanding the current markets or the position of their published authors, at all.]]

Old policy definition of subsidy/vanity publisher:

"Subsidy Publisher" or "Vanity Publisher" means any publisher that publishes books in which the author participates in the costs of production or distribution in any manner,including publisher assessment of a fee or other costs for editing and/or distribution. This definition includes publishers who withhold publication or distribution costs before paying royalties (net proceeds) and publishers whose authors exclusively promote and/or sell their own books.

The changes as noted in the recent "Summary of RWA Board Decisions."

We must first look at the new definition of subsidy/vanity publisher. "New" definition of subsidy/vanity publisher:

Commencing with RWA's 2008 National Conference, for official publisher participation, a romance publisher must verify to RWA that it: (1) is not a Subsidy Publisher or Vanity Publisher; (2) has been releasing romance novels via national distribution for no fewer than three years, with no fewer than two full-length romance novels or novel-length romance anthologies published in each of three consecutive years; (3) provides per book advances of at least $1,000 for all books; and (4) pays allauthors participating in an anthology an advance of at least $500.

A Subsidy Publisher or Vanity Publisher means any publisher that publishes books in which the author participates in the cost of production or distribution in any manner, including publisher assessment of a fee or other costs for editing and/or distribution. This definition includes publishers who withhold or seek full or partial payment or reimbursement of publication or distribution costs before paying royalties, including payment of paper, printing, binding production, sales or marketing costs; publishers whose authors exclusively promote and/or sell their own books; publishers whose primary means of offering books for sale is through a publisher-generated Web site; publishers whose list is comprised of 50% or more of its books written by authors who are principals in the publishing company; and publishers whose business model and methods of publishing are primarily directed toward sales to the author, his/her relatives and associates.

The sections that I have bolded are what I take strong issue with from these particular policy changes. How a valid publisher chooses to pursue marketing and selling their books to the general public is not something to be addressed in policy by the RWA. A website is international, not just national; a distributor like Fictionwise is international, not just national. So what exactly are they trying to say here?

Nor should an advance be a prerequisite for any publisher. If an author proves sales generated at a career level as opposed to a hobby level [I will address this in my next blog on PAN recognition] at the $1,000 mark, that should be sufficient. To hold with this policy asks that a publisher, especially small, solid presses, to turn toward bankruptcy, much as selling through Ingrams encourages returns that can also push a small press to bankruptcy, insolvency, and loss of revenue for authors, that could have had the potential to survive without these backbreaking front-end costs.

And thus RWA has blocked from providing informed and up-to-date information for RWA members, both published and nonpublished, the very publishers who could provide knowledgeable insight and advancement in the modern publishing world.

These two statements do not mark the difference between vanity and recognized publisher status in any way, shape, or form, and should be stricken.

Regarding the RWA decision-making process, these policy changes indicate huge steps backward and absolute non-recognition of the digital age of publishing.

Shame on you, RWA, for still not understanding and embracing the electronic age of publishing and supporting your authors and their needs in career advancement.

My next blog entry will address PAN recognition for published authors.


Friday, July 06, 2007

A new podcast for Nights in White Satin

Each week I post a new first chapter story excerpt. Here's where you can find them. Or check my profile at myspace.

Title: Adrianna Dane, Author of Sensual and Erotic Romance
Episode: Nights in White Satin (an erotic excerpt)

Adrianna's Podcast

Enjoy and have a great weekend!