It is with some trepidation I write this post, as apparently there are solicitors’ letters flying around. But I feel it is important to spread the word, and warn new writers and comp entrants about potential problems. Many of you may already be aware of the saga involving Brit Writers Awards.
I don’t know the exact chronology of events, so I will start with the earliest concerns that I know of. Last December, Jane Smith of How Publishing Really Works, At that time the concerns raised were mainly about the BWA’s apparent lack of experience, both in running a competition and in publishing. Jane Smith visited the subject again recently in this blog post. Jane talks about how the BWA have now started an agents division. The BWA say that they are in touch with publishers who are asking them to help find novels (commercial and literary fiction), children’s novels and short stories for anthologies. Anyone who’s ever tried to sell a short story to anything other than a magazine will tell you that agents and publishers are not hammering writers’ doors down asking for short stories and poems, so they’re unlikely to be asking anyone else to find those for them. I know because I’m a short story writer and I can tell you that the markets for short stories are shrinking fast. The full text of the BWA email can be found on Claire King’s blog here. Claire King has also discussed the BWA again recently, in this blog post. She asked the BWA a series of important questions. The response came that the BWA had referred the matter to their solicitors.
Now Harry Bingham has bravely entered the fray, asking the same questions and more about the way the BWA is run.
I would suggest that you don’t just read the blog postings. You should also read the comments sections as they often contain more information.
The BWA’s response to most of the questions asked is to refer the matter to their solicitors. It seems to me that the questions being asked are perfectly reasonable, and in no way libelous.
I have now taken the personal decision not to include the Brit Writers Awards on my comps calendar or in my comps listings in Writers Forum again. Not necessarily because I believe the comp is a fraud, but because of the way the BWA have responded to perfectly reasonable questions about their operation. Writers have a right to know and to ask questions about the comps they enter and the authoring/editing services they use. It does not make it libel to want details and as a champion of writers’ comps I am the first one to insist that organisers make all the details available. If I ask a question and it seems to me an organiser is dodging the questions, or becomes antagonistic, then I tend to go to the default mode of not trusting the comp.
I suggest you read the evidence, and follow any links to other discussions (there are far too many for me to list here) and make your own decision about whether you enter the BWA comps or sign up for any of the publishing services.
Please could I ask that you keep any comments on this blog on the right side of the libel laws? Just to be clear, as I know from what David said in the comments that it’s not clear what is the right side of libel, when I posted this originally what I really meant was that I did not want any name-calling or unsubstantiated accusations about the BWA or anyone else involved in this discussion. Reasoned discussion on this blog is welcome, but I don’t want (and I’m sure none of the others involved in this want) it to turn into one of those internet ‘pile ins’ where half the people who comment have no real interest in the issue at hand. I’m very grateful to those who have responded so far for their reasoned responses.
Note: I want to make it clear that on this blog I only speak for myself and not for Writers Forum magazine.
If you are standing up to be counted, Sally, then I, for one, am alongside you.
One more dawn … one more day … Oops, sorry, wrong revolution!
I am following all this with great interest. It puzzles me as to why the BWA people will not answer what appear to be straightforward questions – especially when people make it clear they are just seeking information. If you enter into a contract with someone then you want to know what the terms and conditions are and you also want to be certain that you know something about the company’s reputation. That is just commonsense. That being the case it makes sense for a company (organisation or group) to make that information available.
It is really strange. Someone could make a detective story out of this!
I certainly think that if an organisation is charging over £1000 for one of their initiatives they should be willing to answer questions.
Sally, I applaud your considered approach to this, and also appreciate your support.
Sally, thank you for taking the trouble to analyse this and bring it to our attention.
A writers fragile ego can often leave us vulnerable to making unwise choices as to where to send our ‘masterpieces’ It’s good to know that the likes of Sally Q are watching our backs.
I speak as someone who’s been conned in the past, Elaine (thankfully not to the tune of thousands of pounds). So the way I see it, we’ve all go to watch each other’s backs.
Thanks for posting about this Sally.
Harry’s questions were quite reasonable, and the legal threat he’s received does not reflect well on BWA.
Downright peculiar behaviour from the BWA. Surely they don’t think that threatening legal action is a sensible and normal way to react to questions – simple questions – not even criticism?
It seems to me that they’re taking the questions as implied criticism, and also object to the fact that the matter is being discussed so widely. But there are better ways to deal with it.
It reminds me of some internet forums I’ve been on where heated discussions invariably end with someone threatening legal action. It’s a way of bringing the discussion to an end and thereby preventing further discussion. But it doesn’t reflect well on the person threatening to call their solicitors because it’s so clear that’s what they’re doing.
Meanwhile, in other markets, companies are paying people to stimulate discussion about their products and services in the social media.
I saw Harry’s questions and thought they were eminently reasonable and temperately worded, given the circumstances. It’ll be interesting to see what sort of response they get.
Firstly, I applaud your standing up for your beliefs in what would appear to be a difficult time and place to do so. Bravo.
Secondly, it’s difficult for the unqualified (such as myself) to know if they are on the ‘right side’ of libel laws, when those laws are cited in gagging attempts aimed at scrupulously balanced reporters by people who, one has to assume, *are* qualified. No wonder it is proposed to overhaul the UK law in this field. (On which note, if you feel the need to remove this comment for your own comfort, I quite understand)
Thirdly, of *course* it is quite normal for people to want to know exactly what they’ll get for the thick end of two thousand pounds. Writers, more than most, will be acutely aware that that is a lot of money. If one is going to spend that kind of cash on consultancy, one wants to know who the consultants are, and how they are qualified to consult. Ditto the publishers in a publishing proposal, the workings and beneficiaries of a charity, or the agents who, we are told, are asking for something that has heretofore been nigh on impossible to shift…
What kind of business asks you to invest time, money or trust in it without being clearly and voluntarily up-front about the value, contents and workings of its product proposition? Not one, I respectfully submit, with which one would want to start a relationship.
David, welcome to my blog, and thank you for your intelligent and considered response. You are definitely on the right side of the libel laws. The reason I said that was because I did not want this to turn into one of those internet car crashes where people with no interest in this issue whatsoever just pile in with offensive comments, either about the BWA or those of us discussing this. I apologise for not making that clearer in my post.
You make a very valid point. How does one know if one is on the right side of the libel laws when those laws are used to gag people holding reasoned discussions? But as far as I can see, all discussions on this matter, including yours, have been very reasoned.
I also agree that if any organisation is offering services for money, whether they be for writing or other businesses, all information should be offered clearly and voluntarily up front.
Thanks again for commenting!
If the winner did receive the £10K prize, then this is not a con. One finalist,this year, posted her experiences (plus photo) on a writers’ site. She had a good time, was well treated, and presume received some positive (certificate) recognition of her success. The only worrying part seems to be the suggestion signing up to them will result in a publishing contract.
Thanks for sharing your experience of Brit Writers. I was about to upload my masterpiece for the 10000 pound prize. I shall not be doing that now. I wish I’d seen these posts sooner, it would have saved me 11 quid! Do you think if I contact Brit Writers and say I’ve changed my mind they’ll refund it?
You can try, Joe, but much depends on the rules. The £11 is not actually a comp entry fee. It’s membership of the BWA. But that doesn’t mean you can’t ask for it back if you’re dissatisfied.