Romance, Historical, Contemporary, Paranormal, Young Adult, Book reviews, industry news, and commentary from a reader's point of view

REVIEW: Romantic Times Update: RT confirms Comment by Kathryn...

I spoke with Carol Stacy who will be making a post either today or tomorrow in response to my claim that RT reviews are biased. Stacy’s explanation tend to prove that they are not and I am of the opinion that the reviews are not based on ad revenue, except for ebooks and small press.

Ms. Stacy confirms that the blog post made on Karen Scott’s blog was Kathryn Falk. She wants to apologize if anyone was offended but she will not comment on Ms. Falk’s post more than that. I also don’t know that Kathryn Falk will come and provide explanation for what she meant.

One other comment before I have to get back to work and that is Ms. Stacy wanted to convey some details about the gay romance author promotional materials issue. According to Ms. Stacy, the hotel manager had several complaints by businessmen about the poster featuring men loving each other up. The hotel manager removed the poster and refused to put it back up. The promotional items were left on “Promotional Lane” and the author participated in the book signing.

Jane Litte is the founder of Dear Author, a lawyer, and a lover of pencil skirts. She spends her downtime reading romances and writing about them. Her TBR pile is much larger than the one shown in the picture and not as pretty. You can reach Jane by email at jane @ dearauthor dot com

48 Comments

  1. bam
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:15:07

    dear science, what could possibly happen next?

    *biting nails*

  2. Rosie
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:16:38

    Unbelievable.

  3. Alessia Brio
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:33:56

    The poster these alleged “businessmen” complained about (an assertion I simply do not find credible) can be seen on Ms. Baumbach’s blog. It has ONE man on it. I seriously doubt a “businessman” would even be aware it promoted homoerotic romance. It’s far more likely that an influential client of the Hyatt — say one who brought in a large convention and 500+ guests — complained to the management. How easy it becomes, then, to hide behind the “businessmen.”

  4. Karen Scott
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:34:15

    Wow…..

  5. The Good, The Bad and The Unread » Updates: Hot Off The Press
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:35:23

    […] Don’t let it burn your fingers… Dear Author Update three: RT confirms it is Falk […]

  6. Kate
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:42:47

    Thanks for posting the update on Falk. Maybe the crazies (ie Betty) will go from Karen’s blog now. Thanks for checking up.

  7. Anne
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:45:59

    Like sands through the hour glass, so are the Days Of Our Lives. *que music*

    LOL! The insanity!

  8. Shannon Stacey
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:49:07

    I have this visual now of RWA management scrambling to change the venue of all future Nationals to Hyatts.

  9. Wendy
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:54:15

    Lord help me, I don’t know whether to be entertained or horrified. I haven’t had this much fun since the RWA graphical standards and the brouhaha that was the RITA awards in Reno.

  10. Jules Jones
    May 02, 2007 @ 13:54:59

    Quite apart from the somewhat odd description of a poster featuring one man with a sheet tastefully draped over him, there is a slight conflict between that nice bland “The promotional items were left on “Promotional Laneâ€? ” and the description of events over on Laura Baumbach’s blog.

  11. kardis
    May 02, 2007 @ 14:00:11

    Wow is right, this is turning into quite the to-do. I’ll be over with Bam biting my nails!

  12. bam
    May 02, 2007 @ 14:04:32

    I can’t take all this suspense! Will someone be ripping off somebody else’s wig or shoving someone into a pool or throwing acid on someone’s face soon?

    I CAN’T WAIT!

  13. Suisan
    May 02, 2007 @ 14:19:02

    Damn. This is going to take a LOT OF POPCORN to get through.

    And I’m leaving town on Friday morning. And I can see that this is going to take a few days to play out, at least. Damn.

    Nobody say anything else quite as stupid as Mrs. Falk has over the weekend. Mmmm-Kay? Thanks.

  14. Nicolette
    May 02, 2007 @ 14:22:30

    Bam,
    I’m waiting for the sharks with laser beams…or the ill-tempered sea bass.

    Why don’t these people get that THIS is more embarrassing to all of us than the original reviews could ever be?

    I was telling my husband about this just this morning, and mentioned Ms. Falk bringing up Bertice Small. I was talking about the summer I read Skye O’Malley, and how there was a guy with a big d*ck, but in my morning stupor said there a buy with a big gick. Or was in a dan with a big mick? Anyhow, spoonerisms over cereal are always fun.

  15. Devon
    May 02, 2007 @ 14:23:01

    So it was her. But no follow up comment yet. Hopefully, Sybil is right and she’s hunkered down under the covers with a bottle of water and a killer headache, wondering what she did yesterday. If not it is a sad, sad thing. The lack of savvy and intelligence shown…I really don’t think she even read the review in question, just depended on what people were telling her.

    Almost as sad as the fact that I was desperate all day to get back to my laptop and find out what was going on. And I forgot to subscribe to comment, yet again.

  16. Teddy Pig
    May 02, 2007 @ 14:30:47

    Dang, I do not know what is worse? Saying it, or admitting you said it?

    She should have totally kept a poker face and said “huh?”.

  17. Bev(BB)
    May 02, 2007 @ 15:02:33

    [quote comment="27559"]I have this visual now of RWA management scrambling to change the venue of all future Nationals to Hyatts.[/quote]

    I haven’t even finished reading all the comments and I just guffawed at this one. That’s all I know to call it. Either that or a squawk. It just sort of emerged from my mouth. Loudly. :D

    This is all so unreal.

    And yet not.

    You know that fragmentation we were talking about a while back, Jane? I think it may have just reached seismic proportions.

    I’m serious. I may actually have to consider reviewing, just to be contrary about it.

  18. Nora Roberts
    May 02, 2007 @ 15:16:53

    ~You know that fragmentation we were talking about a while back, Jane? I think it may have just reached seismic proportions. ~

    Please, please, this is ONE person being a complete fuckwit. One person doesn’t equal fragmentation–especially since every single one of the sane (non-troll) responses to the letter were of stunned insult and outrage. NOBODY agrees with Falk on this, at least not in public on any blogs I’ve read.

    Please, please, don’t paint the rest of us with this sticky brush, or think for a moment that any reasonable person–author, reader, blogger or all of the above–chants the same weird tune.

    The author whose book was reviewed here and on Karen’s blog, hasn’t posted with whimpers or curses. In fact, has kept a professional and respectful silence. She should be commended for that.

  19. Sarah McCarty
    May 02, 2007 @ 15:40:47

    I agree, Nora,

    I don’t know Lynne, but I do know reading those reviews had to hurt, but not once in private or public loops has she put forth a hint of negativity. She’s been a complete professional. I admire that.

    Sarah

  20. LinM
    May 02, 2007 @ 15:44:36

    Wow – colour me stunned.

    To me the biggest problem with Falk’s post (other than the fact that it is off the walls) is that it derailed an interesting discussion on EC with quite contrasting viewpoints from established authors, anonymous new authors (probably including some fictional posters) and readers.

    To Jane: I apologize because when you responded to this post this morning I was sure that you were responding to an identity thief. I have to admire the knowledge/instinct that made you believe this was real.

  21. Karen Scott
    May 02, 2007 @ 16:01:06

    Actually, I agree about Lynne, I think she’s been remarkably gracious throughout all of this kerfuffle.

  22. sybil
    May 02, 2007 @ 16:02:46

    Hell I thought it was fake. I still hold hope it was a drunk post though or she posts a I am very sorry I was an ass and painted all blogdom with a meangrrl brush because the publisher in question is putting out a book with my feel good name on it.

    Because don’t you really want to read all about how I can help you find inner peace now?

  23. Jane
    May 02, 2007 @ 16:04:41

    Don’t give me any credit. I’m more wrong than right.

  24. Kate R
    May 02, 2007 @ 17:19:33

    There are some serious implications to all this fuss and bother here and at Smart Bitches and Karen’s place.

    That is who the heck will take the time to read romances when the Lives and Loves and Loathings of Romance Writers Reviewers and Bloggers is so fascinating?

  25. bam
    May 02, 2007 @ 17:27:11

    mine isn’t. I’ve been sitting here all day watching the drama unfold while listening absently to the Phil Spector murder trial.

  26. Romance BrouHAHA, oh the inHumanity! | the way there
    May 02, 2007 @ 18:01:59

    […] 2, 2007Romance BrouHAHA, oh the inHumanity! Dear Author says Carol Stacy says the amusing (cackle and fall out of your chair) letter was indeed penned by […]

  27. Gretchen
    May 02, 2007 @ 18:47:32

    [quote comment="27570"]So it was her. But no follow up comment yet. Hopefully, Sybil is right and she’s hunkered down under the covers with a bottle of water and a killer headache, wondering what she did yesterday. If not it is a sad, sad thing. The lack of savvy and intelligence shown…I really don’t think she even read the review in question, just depended on what people were telling her.[/quote]

    Seriously….do you really think that a handful of blogging women causes a catastophe in the the romance-reading market? It doesn’t. Your blog or any other’s isn’t all that important. I would bet that Kathryn Falk isn’t brooding at all about her post. She stated her opinion, you stated yours. End of story.

  28. Bev(BB)
    May 02, 2007 @ 19:22:45

    [quote comment="27574"]Please, please, this is ONE person being a complete fuckwit. One person doesn’t equal fragmentation–especially since every single one of the sane (non-troll) responses to the letter were of stunned insult and outrage. NOBODY agrees with Falk on this, at least not in public on any blogs I’ve read.

    Please, please, don’t paint the rest of us with this sticky brush, or think for a moment that any reasonable person–author, reader, blogger or all of the above–chants the same weird tune.

    The author whose book was reviewed here and on Karen’s blog, hasn’t posted with whimpers or curses. In fact, has kept a professional and respectful silence. She should be commended for that.[/quote]

    Oh, I agree with you completely, Nora. Most aren’t going to agree with her. God, I hope not.

    Thing is, though, that isn’t even the type of fragmentation I’m talking about. I’m talking more about how the romance portion of the web has grown and changed in just the six months, year maybe, that it would bring even the “great” Lady Barrow out of the woodwork to post on a blog about a review, whatever her motivations. Good, bad or simply strange.

    And is anyone really going to say that she doesn’t have a following? What happens if she stands by the things she said?

    Now that’s mind-boggling.

  29. Jackie L.
    May 02, 2007 @ 19:28:49

    Oh, man, I hate this!!! I had to get out my unabridged dictionary to verify that the word is VITUPERATIVE, not viputerative. Doesn’t Ms. Falk have spell check? Actually, it was a good exercise. I ran across another good word–vitriolic. Yeah, that’s it–Ms. Falk penned a vitriolic note about bad bloggers.

  30. Emily
    May 02, 2007 @ 21:15:30

    Is that I what I have to do to get my own tag on dearauthor ;)

  31. CindyS
    May 02, 2007 @ 22:04:11

    Holy shit. I really thought it would be a fake. I guess even nut jobs have careers. Ugh.

    CindyS

  32. Bev(BB)
    May 02, 2007 @ 22:15:53

    [quote comment="27597"]Holy shit. I really thought it would be a fake. I guess even nut jobs have careers. Ugh.

    CindyS[/quote]

    I think I was hoping it would be fake but suspected it wouldn’t be. No reason except that it was just so unexpected I guess.

  33. Amelia Elias
    May 03, 2007 @ 02:29:23

    … wow. I still can’t bring myself to believe that was real. I mean, I read that entire looooooooooonnnnngggg comment and could hardly see how it even applied to the blog or the comment-discussion that was going on. No specifics were ever mentioned, so I really thought it was a hoax. Damn.

    No, I’m sorry, I’m still on the fence. Say it ain’t so, I don’t want to believe it. Please tell me it was some random crazy person! I have no interest in Falk aother than the fact I think it’s cool to be a Lady of something… then again, nobility used to be so inbred that they frequently went off their rockers, so who am I to say it’s impossible?

  34. Alison Kent
    May 03, 2007 @ 05:08:10

    Your blog or any other's isn't all that important.

    Funny how Ms. Falk found it important enough to waste over 2500 words accusing a blogger of all manner of things, including causing resignations and suicide contemplations …

  35. Kate R
    May 03, 2007 @ 05:09:01

    AE,
    She’s kind of like you. she bought her title. (yours was a gift) She’s amurican

  36. azteclady
    May 03, 2007 @ 08:15:05

    (Coming over from SmartBitches)

    Gretchen, just so you know, it’s not the ‘handful of blogging women’ who matter, but the many thousands who read the ‘handful’ of blogs. And the people with whom they share what they read online.

  37. Emily
    May 03, 2007 @ 08:53:22

    Un-named business men wo object to male semi-nudes but not the fully nake menage material right next to it.

    riiiiiiight. And they were fee-paying conference attendees too?

    I smell an excuse.

  38. PJ
    May 03, 2007 @ 09:15:57

    I’ve seen fifteen-year-old fanpoodles whine less.

    I’m really, really tempted to start reading romances again and sum them up with either “Sucked” or “Didn’t Suck”, and let this person and her ilk bewail themselves to death.

  39. Amelia Elias
    May 03, 2007 @ 13:09:28

    Ahh. Thanks for clearing that up, Kate R. Yes, Cat Marsters bought me a title from Sealand, and that officially makes me way cooler than she is now.

    Lady Amelia of Sealand *snerk*

  40. Amelia Elias
    May 03, 2007 @ 14:10:46

    … er, “she” being Kathryn Falk, not Cat Marsters. Just to clarify.

  41. Emma
    May 03, 2007 @ 14:47:07

    Please note, Mediabistro’s GalleyCat has picked up this story and is running with it. Oof.

  42. Danielle
    May 03, 2007 @ 16:26:01

    This is better than a soap opera

  43. Emily
    May 03, 2007 @ 17:26:24

    It’s a smut opera, or a blog opera?

    …anyway, there should be a word for it.

  44. Ann Wesley Hardin
    May 03, 2007 @ 20:26:31

    How about Crock Opera?

  45. Don
    May 06, 2007 @ 15:51:40

    [quote comment="27623"]I’ve seen fifteen-year-old fanpoodles whine less.
    [/quote]

    ::snicker:: Excellent.

    I’ve wandered into this drama peripherally. It’s a fascinating train wreck of a thing.

    Must. Stop. Reading!

  46. Rosemary Potter
    May 08, 2007 @ 03:20:58

    Hi Everyone

    It has recently been brought to our (Margaret Bell and I) attention by some concerned bloggers (thanks very much for advising us) that a rather inflammatory post was made by Kathryn Falk and co-signed by Margaret and myself.

    I would like to confirm that Margaret and I were guests of Kathryn's at the time the post was made, however we were out sightseeing in Galveston all day and were not aware of what had transpired.

    Having read the post, we would like to state that for the record that this “Rhetoricâ€? does not represent either Margaret's or my views. We have further advised said blogger of our feelings on the matter.

    As Australian Book Sellers and Lovers of Romance, we love all aspects of our business and quite frankly this kind of bullshit just pisses us off.

    We are all about, putting Romance into our readers' hands, giving authors the opportunities to talk to Aussie readers, selling autographed/personalized books, distributing Pre-release bookmarks and giving readers the best service possible.

    All of these things make a difference to readers and authors, keep the good stuff coming.

    Cheers
    Rosemary and Margaret
    Australian Book Sellers

  47. Dear Author.Com | RT Update: Comment by Rosemary Potter and Margaret Bell
    May 08, 2007 @ 09:37:01

    […] Potter and Margaret Bell left a note here regarding the Falk comment and I felt important to bring attention to it. Not because I want […]

  48. Cat Marsters
    May 13, 2007 @ 15:03:48

    [quote comment="27634"]… er, “she” being Kathryn Falk, not Cat Marsters. Just to clarify.[/quote]

    Yeah, I’m way cooler than you, Amelia *snort*

%d bloggers like this: