Today finds Mmmmm the Author's world rife with controversy courtesy of Harlequin Enterprises venture into a vanity press or upay publishing scheme, Harlequin Horizons. The published author and writers lists I'm a member of are alive with an unusual mix of end-of-times outrage and rah-rah for the censure issued by several author organizations against Harlequin Enterprises and its new business unit. The issue being that most of the author organizations require their published members to be published by royalty and/or advance-paying publishers that do not charge the authors for ANY services related to their books. In other words, publishers pay authors, not the other way round.

Harlequin's reaction to this avalanche of condemnation is to drop the overt Harlequin branding link to the new upay publishing unit and change its name.

Seems to me that response is an attempt at misdirection that one might see in a spy thriller adaptation. The plotline runs something like this: If a operative acting on orders does something to bring bad press down on the Alphabet Agency, the operative gets disavowed as in, "We don't know that criminal or about anything he may or may not have done. He has no connection to this agency." Meanwhile, the operative gets a new name/identity as he continues to contribute to the Agency's 401K in the spy business as usual scenario. Other than the name, nothing fundamental to the Agency's business model or its operatives has changed. According to this model, it follows that Harlequin is still operating and will profit from a vanity publishing unit whether its name/branding is on the letterhead or not. And the hardline being Harlequin Enterprises would need to completely divest itself of any financial or otherwise interest in the vanity press venture to meet the qualifications or definition of a non-vanity publisher of some author organizations.

However, not everyone agrees. An MBA and several other businessmen I've consulted on this issue say it's common practice for a company to distance itself from a troubled business unit by changing the unit's name and burying linkage back to the parent company. The perception being that though the parent company is still a stakeholder to whatever degree in the questionable unit, the parent company should not be held responsible nor penalized for its ownership.

If author organizations accept Harlequin Horizons' name change and welcome HE back into the fold of "approved" non-vanity publishers, many of their members may feel that their organization has stood up for their interests. And as is their right within the law, Harlequin Enterprises will continue to do business as usual and by whatever name.

The poet said, "A rose by another name would smell as sweet." A vanity upay publishing scheme by any other name still smells like writer beware to

MMMMMMMMMMMMMelinda