Amazon v Hachette: Round Two (Featuring 100% More Monster Porn!)

20140515-161639.jpgI honestly thought I had said everything I wanted or needed to say about the current face-off between Amazon and Hachette; and when I read John Scalzi’s angle last week, I figured this discussion was done. 

Amazing what complete and utter absurdity writers can kick up within 24 hours.

It started first on Chuck Wendig’s where he brought to light a petition making the rounds on the Internet.

Well, it’s not really a petition as a petition is defined as “a formal written request, typically one signed by many people, appealing to authority with respect to a particular cause.” This it is more of an open letter to Amazon saying “You are a winner, bro! Keep that up!” with an appeal to independent authors everywhere to sign this, acknowledging why Amazon is so star-spangled awesome.

Here’s how the “petition” closes:

“It is fitting that Independence Day is upon us. Amazon has done more to liberate readers and writers than any other entity since Johannes Gutenberg refined the movable type printing press. With the advent of e-books and the ability to ship paper books to your doorstep in record time and at affordable prices, Amazon is growing overall readership while liberating the voices of countless writers, adding to the diversity of literature. A large percentage of the e-books sold on Amazon are from independent authors. You have validated our decision to write and to publish. Don’t let the wealthiest of writers convince you to turn away.

We urge you to support the company that supports readers and authors. Amazon didn’t ask us to write this letter, or sign it. Amazon isn’t aware that we’re doing this. Because in the end, this isn’t about Amazon. It’s about you, the reader, and the changes you’ve helped bring about with your reading decisions. You are changing the world of books, and you are changing our lives as a result.”

I was trying to process exactly why I would want to add my name to this when, later in the same day, I got a note from the Science Fiction Writers of America, announcing their endorsement of an open letter from New York Times Bestselling Author Douglas Preston. Here’s a selection from this letter the SFWA president is signing and the SFWA Board are inviting members to co-sign:

“Many of us supported Amazon from when it was a struggling start-up. Our books started Amazon on the road to selling everything and becoming one of the world’s largest corporations. We have made Amazon many millions of dollars and over the years have contributed so much, free of charge, to the company by way of cooperation, joint promotions, reviews and blogs. This is no way to treat a business partner. Nor is it the right way to treat your friends. Without taking sides on the contractual dispute between Hachette and Amazon, we encourage Amazon in the strongest possible terms to stop harming the livelihood of the authors on whom it has built its business. None of us, neither readers nor authors, benefit when books are taken hostage. (We’re not alone in our plea: the opinion pages of both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, which rarely agree on anything, have roundly condemned Amazon’s corporate behavior.)”

Seriously. This “Pick A Side” bullshit has got to stop. Now.


First, let’s just state the obvious: New York publishers, the people who make my books, have brought all this on themselves. That’s abundantly clear. You are told how no one is really buying books any more which is why advances are being scaled back, but then you read where New York publishers are pulling in record profits. See, the Big Six have been enjoying the eBook revolution just as much as the indie authors, and Amazon—the biggest distributor of books—noticed this. Now, the publishing empires are dealing with a perfect storm they themselves created. Amazon, after all, wants to do business fairly.

Does this make Amazon my friend? No. Not at all.

Amazon is a business, a business that finds itself in the red. Amazon needs to make money. If they want to make their shareholders happy, Amazon needs to make a lot of money. They are gunning for the New York publishers not to be a champion for published authors, but for money. Simple as that. If Amazon really kept the author’s interest at heart, then what happened when Amazon suddenly changed the rules over at ACX? With a sudden cut in royalty rates from between 50% to 90% to a non-escalating 40%, I’m supposed to believe Amazon looks out for the author?

But hey, don’t ask me. Ask an erotica author how they feel about Amazon’s concern.

glamorladyMaybe it’s easy to dismiss all erotica as nothing more than digital smut; but for friends of mine who were involved with independently-published erotica, their books paid for mortgages, medical bills, and reliable transportation. Shortly after news stories began to break about some erotica testing Amazon’s terms of service for publishing and authors pulling down impressive incomes on (brace yourself) monster porn, Amazon quietly changed their search algorithms, effectively shutting out these authors from their system. Writers I knew suffered an 80-90% drop in sales.

Before criticizing the quality of monster erotica, let’s just get this out of the way first: Erotica sells, and won’t be disappearing anytime soon. Am I going to pass judgment on authors writing erotica? No. I’m not. Was it bad publicity for Amazon? Considering some of the titles Amazon were approving, coupled with vague guidelines like “We don’t accept pornography or offensive depictions of graphic sexual acts…” and “What we deem offensive is probably about what you would expect…”, made the Internet’s largest retailer look like they were still operating out of the basement of mom’s house. It was terrible publicity, so Amazon took action.

At the expense of the author.

And if you are new to my blog, and step up to say, “Well, Tee, you don’t understand independent publishing because you’re blinded by the New York publishing machine!” allow me to educate you, Sparky. I’ve been a published author for over a decade, and I got my start in 2002 with Dragon Moon Press, a small, independent publisher out of Canada. I not only designed elements for my cover layout, I handled interior design. Everything — and I mean everything — in the production of that book ran by me. I took a lot of pride in my titles with Dragon Moon. It was when I would attend science fiction conventions, writing festivals, and book events, where I’d find myself swimming upstream. No, not all authors kept me at arm’s length; but a good amount of New York authors and editors (many of them, members of SFWA) reminded me of publishing’s pecking order. In that time, I learned very quickly of the differences between authors and professionals.


So yeah, I was an indie author before it was trendy to be an indie author. And even with The Ministry of Peculiar Occurrences, I still independently produce fiction in digital, print, and audio formats.

And this notion of “taking a side” in this power struggle is ludicrous.

time_magazine-KINGThose taking up the proverbial sword and shield against Amazon, I’ve noticed, tend not to be that invested in independent publishing. Concerning the Douglas Preston letter, it’s reported being signed by the likes of Stephen King, Nora Roberts, and James Patterson (who was very outspoken against Amazon at Book Expo America). When was the last time any of these writers self-published their works? Anyone remember Stephen King’s brief foray with Amazon into self-publishing back in 2000, and how that ended? Sure, if you want high profile authors taking a stand against Amazon, these authors are as high profile as you can get. Considering their credibility as authors affected by Amazon’s tactics, I find their ire merely an echo chamber for their publishers.

Besides, when was the last time you “struggled” to pre-order or purchase a book from King, Roberts, or Patterson?

The other side, those eager to sign this “You’re Balls Awesome, Amazon!” letter, are either exclusively independent authors, or authors who claim being slighted by the New York publishing machine. Amazon has empowered authors, I would never question that. They even paid a few bills when I was invited to be a part of Kindle Worlds. However, I don’t mistake opportunity for allegiance. Amazon’s first job is to make money. Their second is to maintain a positive public image. Amazon is not the author’s “friend” or “business partner” in this or any other world. Amazon, at any time, can change the rules on us. They’ve done it before.

So, after all this ranting, will I take a side?

I’m taking the side that looks out for my family, my well-being, and my writing career. I’m taking the side that makes a priority the decisions I’m making, the end result of those decisions, and what’s the best path for me to take as a writer.

I’m taking my side.

I am continuing to develop my own properties and titles for publication. Some of these ideas my agent will take to a major publisher. Others, if the passion and time is there, will go on to be self-published. If some of the ideas my agent picked up move forward, we move forward. All this, and I’m keeping a schedule open for audio editing and layout services for authors.

iron_writerI’m continuing to diversify my career. Fiction. Non-fiction. The Big Six. Imagine That! Studios. I have options, and in this Amazon-Hachette throw-down, it is important authors understand and recognize those options. When the dust settles between New York and Amazon, those taking the hard hits will not be any of the publishers or Amazon. It will be the writers. Not the Pattersons, the Kings, the Rowlings, or the Martins, but the mid-list and new authors feeling the hit of missing pre-orders and ridiculous delivery times. Both sides of this argument appear to be screaming for solidarity, but it’s a conditional solidarity. It’s solidarity for writers, provided you pick a side.

Much like the way the word “petition” was being used earlier in this post, authors should better understand what “solidarity” means. If you want to show solidarity for your authors, talk with them about options.

But if you want to hear a perspective different from an author’s, sit back and have a listen to this podcast. It’s a point of view more people should hear in this matter.



  1. Amen, brother. The way I see, the only side we should be on is for the readers. If we do right by them, they’ll do right by us, no matter how those books are published. The rest of this b.s. is just an excuse to not write the next book.
    P.S. Love the pix of you Tony!!!


    1. Exactly right. The writer’s only real friend is the reader gobbling up the stories.


    1. If you mean the opening picture, yeah, that was how I felt when I got the SFWA letter. The “You have GOT to be kidding me…” moment.


  2. Wait a minute… Amazon is not in the red. They are not losing money. They aren’t making as much profit now as they were back in 2011, but they are not losing money.

    So this isn’t about keeping flying, this is about making ever bigger profits for the stockholders. I really hate how people equate the value of a company with how the stock does. Yes, stockholders are angry. They’re not making as much in dividends as they were before.

    Boo hoo. They’re still making money for doing nothing.

    I still say that neither Amazon nor Hachette have a right to the money they’re fighting over. That money should go to the authors. And in the end, they authors are the ones who will pay through the nose for these kinds of squabbles.



    1. Which brings us all back to what started this standoff. Money that should have been going to the author, hence why Amazon saw it (as mentioned in the Shared Desk podcast) as low-hanging fruit.

      But what Amazon is doing by punishing Hachette’s authors is inexcusable. It’s authors getting caught in the crossfire, sure, but I don’t think in any way is Amazon “looking out” for authors. Not by a longshot.


    1. Thanks for the read, Michael. Much appreciated…

      …and yeah, picking a side in this battle is ridiculous. (Reminds me a bit of the last Virginia election.)


    1. Thanks, Scribe. Not that I’m searching for validation…but at least, I’m not losing my mind.

      No, I don’t want to pick a side. Both sides kinda suck.


  3. All things being equal, I can’t help but chuckle at the idea of James Patterson ranting about the “rights of the author”, when he hasn’t actually written a word in years…


    1. THANK YOU!!!

      Although…there is that rumor that he has been writing under the pen name Nick Castle.

      Dear Lord, I hope that is true.


  4. Somehow I had a feeling that’s the side you’d be on 😉 All in all an extremely well-balanced piece.

    The first thing I would say here, and I hesitate because I didn’t want to come here to be disagreeable in your house, is that while the Howey/Konrath open letter was expressly stated to be a direct response to the Preston letter. That letter, of course, is rife with misinformation and misleading bias. While on the one hand he says don’t pick a side, he immediately picks a side and explains why everyone else should do the same.

    I agree that no middle man between writers and readers is a friend to either group. They are businesses trying to maximize profit for their interested parties. We all have to decide where we get the better deal. I think you and Pip are doing a marvelous job of diversification.

    The second bone I would pick is in saying that Amazon is “punishing Hatchette authors.” Like you said, they’re being caught in the crossfire of a business negotiation. The dispute seems centered on the preorder function being removed. If they are in negotiations over price, it makes sense that Amazon cannot be sure when it will be able to fill preorders.

    A similar thing happened when they removed MacMillan buy buttons. Retailers get to decide what to carry and what not to. Yes it sucks for Hatchette authors. A lot. But expect the same thing when the next publisher goes into these high-level negotiations. It’s not about punishing anyone, the only thing it’s about is leverage.

    You’re right about one thing though, despite where it begins or motive involved, these Hatchette authors are hurt more than the deep-pockets of Hatchette itself


  5. I agree with you there. Amazon is not “looking out” for authors. Not unless you mean in the sense that street thugs look out for people who might have change in their pockets.

    Hachette isn’t smelling like a rose either. If they’d passed those profits back to the author (to promote loyalty, encourage future production, etc, etc) they wouldn’t be in this quite so badly. It might not have stopped Amazon from trying to gouge them for more profit, but they’d at least be in the position of saying “That’s not our money. We can’t give it to you!”



Leave a Reply