With recent HWA issues I was reminded that on October 6th 2024 Mary SanGiovanni posted about a need for changes within the HWA on her blog. I've copied what she wrote to here verbatim, and have taken the liberty of posting replies to each of her points in bold bracketed italics within the body of her text. She makes some very good points, though to the best of my knowledge none of what she talks about has come to pass. make of it what you will:

On the HWA

Posted on October 6, 2024 by Mary SanGiovanni

 So… I’d like to talk about writing organizations and the Horror Writers Association (HWA), from one professional writer to another, and to our industry at large.  I have been plucking the strings of this particular harp for many years, and I think I may have, in the past, come across as critical, but that’s because I want to be proud of the HWA and see it do well.  I have served as a Trustee, so I understand the inner workings to some extent.  I am an Active member, and have been, on and off, for almost two decades.  I see all that the organization could be and I can’t — I just can’t – give up on it without trying once more to generate some discussion about how to utilize the HWA to strengthen our position in the publishing world. 

The following is what I would like the HWA or any other writing organization that I am a member of to be,- in a perfect world — or maybe just a fantasy world.  If the HWA would like to use any of these ideas, please do so with my blessing and enthusiastic support.  Also, please see the disclaimers which follow, as I imagine they will address any number of complaints people may have with the following essay.

DISCLAIMERS:

I am not criticizing or badmouthing the HWA membership, the current or recent HWA administration, or the administrations of any other professional writing organization.  This is more of a wish list in terms of what I would like a writing organization to be, and what I would look for in considering membership (and why).  I understand running an organization of any size is a complex and multilayered endeavor, with a lot behind the scenes that the public is unaware of for, perhaps, legal reasons or occasionally, humanitarian reasons.  I know that some careful forethought and consideration is required before making statements that represent an organization and its membership in an official capacity, and I know that to make ideas happen, it requires people who are willing to put aside their own best interests sometimes and their own career climbs and work for the benefit of their fellow writers.  Sometimes such people are hard to find for paid positions, let alone volunteer work.

(I totally understand the need for this disclaimer as it’s all too easy to be attacked for having an opinion about the current state of affairs within the HWA and suggesting that things could be improved. I’m absolutely with Mary SanGiovanni on this, though I know from experience that anything one might wish to implement for the benefit of the community at large is going to be a solitary endeavour which for the most part will fall on wilfully deaf ears as enacting change is mostly considered to be difficult, therefore ‘someone else’s job’.)

“I don’t know whether revamping the organization or rebuilding it from the ground up is the better option, but I respect the legacy of the HWA and the work of its founding members.”

(Neither are optimal. It’s my opinion that the HWA does need revamping, but it isn’t going to be any good doing that on existing foundations as they are now four decades old and suffering from institutional rot, so from my perspective the HWA would need to have a ‘full audit’ of every department, with cohesive planning across the board rather than the current method of trying to shoehorn things in where they don’t really fit. A complete tear-down and rebuild would of course be preferable, but that could only be truly effective if it was meticulously planned in advance and the website’s architecture as well as all required operational procedures were put in place parallel to the current established platform. My approach to my own site was along these lines, although I didn’t already have an operation site in need of revamping I thought about what was potentially helpful and put it all in place before opening it to the public. There are still parts of it that are built but unreleased as those depend on whether there’s a need for them, but if there is they’ll be easy to implement because a solid architectural foundation has been laid and the groundwork is done. The HWA may well have an established reputational foundation in the community, but its website’s foundations are in dire need of reinforcing or replacing.)

 “I honestly want our organization to do well, to thrive and grow and become a real force for good for horror writers.  We NEED someone in our corner on the world stage.  We need the networking and support efforts that an international organization affords.  I believe the HWA can be what we make it, what we RE-make it over time.”

(The very fact that Mary SanGiovanni wants the HWA to ‘become’ a real force for good is a great indicator that she doesn’t already consider it to be one, and from my angle she is spot on. I’m on the outside looking in, and I don’t see it accomplishing anything of value to the greater horror writing community at anywhere near the scale that it could be doing and in my opinion should be doing if it wishes to uphold its supposed status in the community.)

“I am aware that the HWA already does some of these things or is planning to.  As I said, I know a lot of work has happened in the last few years, and a lot of innovative people have put time and effort into learning what professional writers want.”

(Here’s where we find a huge issue as the HWA is putting time and effort into learning what ‘professionals’ want but not offering much of any value to beginners who seek the guidance of professionals from the beginning. All a beginner gets is initial hurdles to jump as they need to qualify for membership, pay a fee that many these days can ill afford, and then face general ignorance once their dues are paid. At the end of every year I see people saying that they are not going to renew membership, and during the year I see others saying they can’t see the value of joining as there’s nothing on offer from the HWA that they can’t get elsewhere for free, except of course for the prospect of being able to vote for someone to win an award that the majority of horror writers won’t get a sniff at as the Awards are allegedly based on a popularity contest rather than on the contents and quality of the books.)

“Finally, I will put my money where my mouth is.  If HWA wants to tackle these kinds of reforms, I will do whatever I can to support their work.  I want the HWA, the organization that represents me and my interests as a writer, to be a career advantage, a protector of my rights, and a source of opportunity for me to take my career to the next level.  That doesn’t happen if people throw out ideas but offer no way to make them happen.  Where I can, I have offered ideas about how to put these suggestions into practice, and if that involves volunteering to see a project through, I will do my best to make that happen.”

(Admirable, but one may as well be barking at the moon for the good it will do. ALL decisions in the HWA are done via a committee, and that’s a bit like elephants mating in that it’s all done at a very high level and it’ll be a couple of years before anyone sees the result, unless of course the ideas are immediately voted against as they’ll interfere with the current regime and give everyone more work which they won’t want to do. Given the length of time it recently took for them to arrive at what was a really straight-forward policy decision on the use of A.I. in relation to the Stokers I don’t hold out much hope for speedy resolutions.)

“MISSION/FOCUS

Some years ago, the HWA opened the doors of its membership to Associate members, which, at the time, included editors, publishers, agents, booksellers, librarians, etc.  Now, I absolutely think that it is crucial for writers (and for the organization as a representative of those writers) to work with people in other facets of the publishing industry.  I believe the HWA should be able to facilitate such relationships through networking opportunities, introductions, directories, etc.”

(Yes, to all of that. It SHOULD be able to facilitate building strong relationships with other figures and organizations itself, and by extension it should ENABLE its members to do so, but far too much emphasis is put on the optics of the HWA’s standing in the community and on the Stoker Awards instead of focusing on building better relationships with its members and giving them the real help they wanted and believed they would get when they signed up.)

“That being said, I also think that a writing organization should never lose sight of its primary goal, which is to protect the rights of and foster opportunities for writers.”

(This is where they score a straight FAIL. The HWA as an organization with the desire to be known for excellence doesn’t do much for writers, it scarcely does anything for its own ‘members’. There are no ‘perks’ that are worth the high membership fees and the ridiculous amount of red tape one encounters when attempting to become a member. A tell-tale sign that the HWA as a fee-based organization doesn’t offer value is that it has a Facebook page with more members than the actual site. From a purely business perspective it makes no sense to have an organization with membership fees which has around 2,500 members when the Facebook group that has 29,000+ members provides much of the same very limited information. The Facebook page should be a feeder for pushing traffic toward the organization’s website, it should promote the values and benefits of being a member, but instead of it being welcoming and guiding I found it to be relatively hostile with people asking for help and being ignored, others regularly being threatened with a ‘ban hammer’, and a general elitist attitude running throughout. I think I’m still a member of the group, but haven’t used it in years, though I still get to hear about it, and what I hear is never good. So as far as fostering opportunities for writers is concerned, I’d say the Facebook group would be a great place to start.)

“There are times (e.g. contracts) when the best interests of writers and the best interests of, say, publishers, may be at odds.  It is important to have a steadfast supporter of writers to guide the business transactions and best practices whenever possible.  That is harder to do if the writing organization’s loyalties are split between two factions.”

(It’s actually split between three factions as there’s the writers they wish to aid to get the best deal, the professionals they also seek to help to get the best deal, and of course the HWA itself which will allegedly broker those deals based on their staff’s own biases and the HWA’s preferences, with the result that instead of making equitable choices they’ll favour one side over the other which can lead to one thriving whilst the other gets screwed over.)

“Maybe some rule or by-law (or general practice which governs decisions and official actions of the board) should generally reflect or default to writers’ interests.  Perhaps the organization can find ways to work out compromises that all might be satisfied with, but writers’ interests should come first.”

(I’m 90% in agreement with this, except to say that consideration needs to be given to the likes of publishers who also need to conduct business in a fair manner. Having a rule or by-law in place won’t amount to much if those tasked with implementing those rules don’t bother to. Take for example the HWA having a firm stance on not indulging in activism at the same time as employing activism in favour of marginalized demographics.)

“Also, I believe that a professional writing organization should foster an environment of professionalism — should insist on it, actually, at least in the spaces where the organization holds some dominion.  Many of us think of our industry as a community or even a family of sorts, where business and pleasure in a sense often mix.  Of course they do.  We’re colleagues and co-workers, but also close and cherished friends, even lovers and spouses.  There are people in this business I would take a bullet for.  Of course we care about each other.  BUT…

This is first and foremost an industry, a business.  We need to treat it like one, and we need an organization, if called upon, to shepherd that professionalism.  We need it to make wise and shrewd business decisions concerning the well-being of the membership.  We need it to arbitrate in business matters, to support efforts of writers to demand fair treatment, equal pay (or hell, payment at all), and help navigate contractual snares, and to examine ways in which it can promote fairness and equality in the professional arena for all writers.”

(In theory that’s fine, but in practice it has a major flaw in that the HWA has no authority over anyone except its own staff. It doesn’t even have authority over its own members as they are free to act as they please with the only repercussions for any wrong actions being potential suspension or banning from the very organization that is essentially powerless to do anything worthwhile. For example the HWA could contact me and say that my site contravenes whatever they want to argue about, but my reaction to this is that I am not a member of their organization, not affiliated with them in any way, and as they have no legal standing outside of their own administration I don’t have to listen to anything they say.)

“RESOURCES

I think a writing organization’s strength lies in being able to offer its members things they can’t get on their own (or can’t get as easily without help).  To me, the types of resources made available by an organization to its membership would be a huge consideration in my deciding to join.  Below, I’ve outlined some resources that I believe would benefit newer writers, followed by those I believe would benefit more experienced writers.  I recognize that many of these things would require a good degree of research and work to overcome inherent obstacles or to put a framework in place, but I believe they are worth considering.”

(Agree. Especially with what is contained in brackets as one of the reasons I have built this website is that people sought help that was either non-existent, not readily available, scattered to the four corners of the internet, or paywalled by sites and organizations who want to charge you for something that you could get for free if you knew where to look, what to look for, and had the time to do it. Like Mary SanGiovanni I believed it worth considering, which is why I’d already done it.)

“New Writers

Contracts
When I first joined the HWA, the monthly newsletters featured a series of sample standard contracts, where each clause was broken down and explained.  Clauses that should be struck out or amended were highlighted, as well as clauses which covered the crucial elements of fair treatment for writers.  Some page, perhaps, on the website could serve this purpose – sample contracts for work sold to magazines and anthologies, small presses, NY-size publishing houses, media tie-in publishers, comics, audio plays, foreign markets, TV and film, etc. could be featured here, with a breakdown of what these contracts generally look for and what can reasonably be negotiated.”

(This is very helpful to writers and I have some on this site, though legally it’s a minefield as any examples shown MUST be declared as being ‘examples only’ and not to be taken as ‘carved in stone’. It’s ultimately up to the author to decide the sort of contract cover they require, but educating authors on the potential pitfalls included in poorly worded or deliberately misleading contracts is in my opinion highly valuable. It’s also a topic up for repeated review as more avenues for selling using new technologies etc arise.)

“Markets
I remember as a new writer that while I could usually scrounge around and find places to submit work to, I always appreciated a curated market list.  While I believe there are still a few websites out there who do this, I would like to see a writing organization give us a jump on new leads, new markets, new personnel at changing markets, and unique opportunities.  I would like to build toward an organizational reputation where markets will want to abide by the professional rate that a unified force of speculative fiction organizations set as fair.  I would like editors and publishers to want their market in front of the eyes of the membership because they can be confident they will get good work from professional writers as a result.”

(A curated market list is helpful to authors, which is why I have created one. Regarding markets abiding by professional rates, that’s not likely to happen as in the end it all comes down to the individual’s beliefs regarding ‘competitive edge’. There are publishers out there, ‘established’ publishers, getting stories for free for their anthologies as they allegedly cannot afford to pay the writers, this being in spite of having a dozen anthologies on sale. I look upon that as slave labour, it’s taking the piss out of writers by offering them ‘exposure bucks’ which anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows is worthless. If they cannot afford to pay, then they shouldn’t be operating as a publisher as it is undermining and devaluing a writer’s work.

Talking of which, we see Indie authors pushing out their books for $1 because they believe that it will give them the advantage over those charging $3.99, which it does from the buyer’s financial standpoint, however a collective strategy wherein nobody prices their books below $3.99 as a base price would absolutely lead to training the readers to value the books more than if they are getting them for .99c. The mass book giveaways are also a great way to cripple a market as people ‘stuffing their kindles’ with 300 free books in October are not buying many more through the year as they already have more than they can read and know that they will soon have another giveaway to stock up with.

There’s no fair price when the cost to the consumer is zero, AND they can even return the book, costing the author money for a book they technically haven’t sold.)

“Mentoring
My understanding (from pure rumor and scuttlebutt, admittedly) is that while a mentoring program currently exists, it is struggling to be as effective as it could be.  I do believe a mentorship program is important, as there are a lot of nuances of this business that are best taught by someone with experience in the field.  Again, I suggest perhaps mentors might have a deeper investment if the position were nominally paying as opposed to pure volunteerism.  This would also give the administration the right to a greater degree of oversight.”

(Regarding making mentoring a paid position, I’d have to give that a ‘Hell No’ as I wouldn’t trust any self-appointed organization to pay a fair rate for actual valuable professional help, because as soon as there’s money involved it’ll become a stampede by those with little to no actual knowledge who have been appointed to such positions by their buddies on the board. I’ve heard the same thing about the mentoring program’s level of competence too, with at least one of the mentors openly admitting that they were being mentored at the same time as providing mentoring to others. The blind leading the blind doesn’t make for a roadmap to success.

 In my opinion mentoring should only be given by those with proper accreditation, not for cash but through the desire to help others succeed. The HWA used to have a lot of incredible resources in the days before many of those resources were redesignated as ‘old white guys’ and ‘the patriarchy’ and were basically told to fuck off. It looks to me as if when they did fuck off they took a significant amount of knowledge with them, leaving a vacuum behind. There are however a few exceptions, as we see the HWA sometimes offering ‘masterclasses’ from certain ‘big names’ but instead of those being open to all as part of their membership fee they are limited number paid classes enriching certain authors at the exclusion of the majority. Gatekeeping anyone?)

“Scholarship
I have always fully supported the idea of educating our membership, and more pointedly, for offering aid to those who are often prevented from pursuing opportunities because of financial constraints.  I would like to see the scholarship program continue to thrive and to provide academic, travel, and material opportunities to those pursuing education or professional development in writing and publishing.  I believe one way to strengthen the market for horror fiction is to legitimize it as a form of literature which has intellectual criticism and analysis.  I believe another way is to make sure our members are as well-read and well-informed about the past, present, and future of horror fiction as possible.”

(This is another thing I mostly agree with; however I am coming to this from a different angle. “Educating our membership” is just a clique looking after their own and helping to keep the circle of truly successful authors small.

Although a scholarship seems fine on paper, yet again we have a situation in which there’s a likely stampede for qualifying and the odds of success will be near nil with the same selection protocols being in place to ensure that only those from a particular circle stand a chance of getting a financial benefit. Having the whole selection/rejection process will be a huge waste of time and resources spent on finding one or two recipients, when that effort and energy could be pointed toward something far more valuable for the whole community.

It’s a given that the HWA providing payment for academic, travel, and material opportunities benefits few, whereas releasing the same funds into creating free courses to educate the whole community would have a far greater impact. Education should be available to the masses, the better informed they are as to what can be done and how, the more likely they are to succeed in their ambitions with professionalism that helps to elevate the genre.

Regarding elevating the genre to a state where it has legitimacy among other genres, yes, I can see the value there, but intellectual criticism and analysis has already been going on for decades and hasn’t changed the perception among the ‘literati’, nor will it. The HWA cannot ‘make sure’ that its members are well-read, it can only hope for that unless one will not only have to pay a high fee and prove sales, but will also be required to take an ‘entrance exam’ in order to be deemed fit to join what is already considered an ‘elitist club’. Being generally well-read is a definite asset, but I would absolutely disagree that it’s necessary to be well-informed about the past, present, and future.

The past is given far too much attention. It’s done, it’s over, and we’re not writing in the past. The fascination with hanging on to horror’s heritage has far less benefit than a focus on the present, and as for the future, any debate on that would be one of myriad possibilities, none of which have any validation as they are yet to come, and it is what we do right here and now in our present that will shape the future of the genre. All of the intellectual criticism and analysis in the world won’t change that.)

“State Chapters and Meet-Ups
I understand that many of the individual state chapters of the HWA host monthly meet-ups.  I think this is an excellent way to bond, network and share information, talk shop, try out new work, etc.  I admit that I know little about the current way in which state chapters are run, what rules govern their online and in-person presence, and what funds are allocated to supporting their endeavors.  I believe there should be clearly defined roles and responsibilities in the by-laws dictating the state chapters’ support, freedoms, restrictions, financials, and rules to ensure fairness across the board.”

(All of this is positive. The only issue I would have here is that more meetings could be had with more ‘comfort’ for all if they were informal gatherings at small venues rather than having the expense and logistical nightmares of getting a large groups of people into a hall or hotel for something that looks important but loses the human touch. It shouldn’t require that the ‘head office’ funds regional gatherings as that’s a waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.)

“Tax Information
Tax laws vary from state to state and country to country, but a generalized guide regarding things writers can and should be keeping track of for taxes would be immensely beneficial, and I believe writers should learn this early on.  How much of an advance or royalties should be set aside for quarterly or yearly taxes, what can be a write-off, what kind of forms to look for, what to count as income and what to count as an expense – all these can result early on in tax refunds and later on in sound advice to prevent getting hit by a big IRS bill.  Perhaps a panel of members who are also accountants or lawyers can collaborate on this documentation.”

(I’m in favour of this, which is why I have a section for it on this site. I do believe however that there’s an education component in that I have spoken with a great many writers who believe that they are ‘creatives’ and ‘hobby writers’ who aren’t actually operating a business, and do not believe that they should be paying tax at all. Even when I have explained the reality to them, they still tend to ignore it as there’s a general attitude of “They’ve got to catch me first” which overrides common sense.)

“New Member Packets
I don’t know if new or returning members still receive these, but when I joined the HWA, I received a new member packet and I was thrilled.  If this is not a current practice, I suggest it be reintroduced.  It makes new members feel welcome, respected as colleagues, and enthusiastic to be part of things.  This packet could be electronic and include by-laws, members-only login info, the dues schedule, free downloadable swag, purchasable swag like HWA bumper stickers, mugs, t-shirts, pens, mousepads, etc., and links to all the information so far outlined (markets, mentoring, state chapters, scholarship, tax info, contracts, etc.).”

(On acceptance a simple ‘welcome’ email would enable new members to find out the by-laws and schedules etc as they are already on the site so only require a link. I find physical member packs and ‘swag’ to be pointless garbage. They take time, effort, and money to establish, and the costs of designing, creating, and physically shipping them by far outweigh any possible use they are. The rest falls under ‘Merch’.

When I joined the HWA I wanted two things from it, one of which was practical help through access to information and guidance, the other was camaraderie. I got neither. Would I have been happier were I to at least have a lapel badge and a fridge magnet? NO. Would I have been happier if I had been made to feel welcome by actual human beings bringing me into their environment in a friendly supportive manner? Hell yeah!)

“Experienced Writers

HWA Database Overview
Let’s talk about spreadsheets and databases.  I love a good spreadsheet and especially a good database from which to draw spreadsheet content.  As writers (and marketers/promoters of our own work), we need to keep track of a lot, and I believe a writing organization could in part serve as a repository for crucial information regarding other areas of the industry.  Now, I realize that for every database here, a person would have to manage it, providing access, possibly guarding against abuse of the information, and regularly maintaining it.  Otherwise, it becomes a dead link, a waste of digital space.  Ideally, there would be some oversight and open communication between the organization board/appointed committee and the database managers to facilitate their receipt and implementation of timely information related to their databases, as well as possibly vetting the legitimacy of the content to be added (as we once had someone vet and maintain our list of pro-paying markets).  Ultimately, though, it would fall on the individual manager to shoulder the responsibility of upkeep.  Maybe instead of the manager or database committee roles being volunteer positions, the organization could set aside a budget sum to pay a monthly or quarterly fee to keep it going (rather than, say the cost of membership, which is a nice gesture but, unfortunately, easily forgotten when it’s not dues time).  This would provide incentive to stay on top of the content and maybe even initiate new ways to make it more effective.  Further, we might install these positions with a serving term of about two years to prevent burnout or absentee managers from hindering the effective upkeep of the databases.”

(This again is ‘resource heavy’ in both people-power and cost. It’s possible to collate and present information at scale without having to have boards and committees and dedicated funding. I know because I’ve done it on this site. Yes, it’s a hell of a lot of work, yes it takes a lot of effort to update, but if I can collate and alphabetically organize 6,000+ names for just my ‘women in horror’ section alone, not to mention the dozens of other lists and resources I have put in place, with no help from anyone, and at no cost to anyone other than myself, fuelled by love of the community, then why can’t the HWA? Why does it always have to come down to ‘paying jobs for the few’ when it could become a task for the whole of the HWA membership to help to create and maintain resources?)

“Libraries
I know the HWA has done some amazing work in partnering with a tireless group of librarians who have enthusiastically supported horror fiction/comics in their libraries.  A database of libraries across the country (or the world) who are eager to have writers offer presentations, Q&As, book signings, book club talks, and the like, with accompanying how-to documentation and/or suggestions for author events, would be helpful for those of us planning to hit the road to promote our next book.  Contact information for librarians who want to work with horror writers on various literacy projects would be good, too.”

(This is something that although I have the basics in place for it I haven’t started to ‘populate it’ as it’s a huge task and I am focused on more important issues. All good things in time though.)

“Independent Bookstores
A similar list of independent bookstores that specialize or emphasize horror or promote speculative fiction would also be useful.  As a current bookstore co-owner, I know support of local horror bookstores by horror writers and publishers is a mutually beneficial arrangement, and honestly, it does draw new readers and book sales, because word of mouth and trust of one’s local bookstore owner’s recommendations still goes a long way.”

(Again this is something that I have in place, though populating it will also take time.)

“New York Times-Reporting Bookstores
Although the full list of New York Times-reporting bookstores across the United States is a closely guarded secret of the NYT, I still think some diligence and educated guesswork can produce a list of bookstores across the U.S. which might possibly increase one’s visibility at the least and contribute to NYT or USA Today book sales ranking at most.  The HWA could possibly work toward developing such a list of recommended high-profile bookstores that members could book signings with.”

(This is a narrow-field approach with very few available spaces which will be filled by the same bankable names. I would much prefer spending the time and effort on something beneficial to the whole community and would reach the masses as opposed to the dwindling readership of a couple of news sources that will soon be made redundant by other media outlets.)

“Media Outlets
I believe that security and opportunity in the writing business rely heavily on being prolific but also being visible.  People buy what they recognize, and they recognize what they see in multiple places in a relatively short time frame.  Therefore, I think some working relationship with media outlets could be beneficial.  Perhaps we can develop a list of contacts at local newspapers or online news sources that are interested in running pieces about a writer’s career or new release.  Maybe we can compile a list of podcasters who regularly feature horror writers as guests on their show.  Maybe we can cultivate a list of book reviewers or influencers on social media who offer subscription boxes or feature books in their video, audio, or written content.”

(I’m ahead of the game on this one as well seeing as this site already has lists of Podcasters, Booktokkers, Bookstagrammers, BookTubers, and a wealth of other reviewers/interviewers/promoters who are all either dedicated to the horror field or heavily feature it. My lists are by no means exhaustive, but as I have already said, I am one person doing this alone. Why the HWA, which was already an established entity when the new technologies were emerging didn’t use their staff and members to immediately implement such lists is a mystery to me. It’s not even as if they’ve taken decades to finally have their finger on the community pulse because according to Mary SanGiovanni’s post the HWA are still lacking such resources.)

“Guest Speaking
I would also like to see organization members become a reliable source of guest speakers.  This was an idea floated to me by members of the HWA, and they should have credit for this particularly awesome idea.  Speaking engagements can be a lucrative way to supplement writing income and increase one’s visibility in the reading world.  It would be useful to compile a directory of organization members and the topics on which they can speak, with some effort on the part of the organization to make this information available to those who might be looking for speakers.”

(I’m on the fence with this one. On the one hand the idea of people supplementing their incomes will always appeal, but on the other hand it’s yet again restricted to those who can afford it. A speaking engagement requires outlay for a venue and considerable expenses such as travel, accommodation, and fees, for those who seek to hire a guest speaker, as well as costs of inconvenience and money to those wishing to attend. There are much better ways of doing this, and much else to consider as this could potentially open a floodgate for people with little-to-no real ability to present themselves as experts in a given field, for example the plethora of ‘editors’ with no actual certification in the field who still claim expertise. This is not to say that someone should not be hired unless they have bona-fide qualifications, however it should be made perfectly clear on any registry exactly what they are qualified to talk about, to what extent their ‘expertise’ is valuable, and why)

“I don’t know the logistics of how to make this happen, but I would like to see members called on more often to speak on topics for documentaries and other streaming or television programs (new avenues of visibility) that explore aspects of horror fiction, movies, comics, video games, etc.  Perhaps this will come about as a result of the HWA guest speaker directory.”

(My site already has sections for horror fiction, movies, comics, video games, true-life crime and so many other sections covering the broadest spectrum of involvement in the horror genre as part of my overall resource directory. I also have potential opportunities open to me that the HWA as a non-profit organization cannot take advantage of.)

“Visual Media Opportunities
I would like to see if we can open lines of communication with IP developers at multimedia companies, development and production companies, film and television studios, video game companies, etc.  We have a number of screenwriters, comics writers, video game script writers, show runners, media tie-in novelists, and fiction novelists who could benefit from branching into other areas of writing and publishing, but have no idea how to make the leap.  Maybe there is a way the organization can build relationships with these companies so that more writers, diverse writers, can get work optioned or dip a toe into writing in a different format.  Again, it comes down to visibility and job security.  As we plan for the future by working with multiple publishers so that if one fails, we are not left orphaned, it would be good if we could work on multiple types of writing projects as well.”

(My site is also at work to create those link opportunities. It’s a slow ‘work in progress’ as again I am one man working alone, but the framework will be there for this to eventually be a valuable resource. There’s no forward motion without actively linking and promoting but as with the majority of issues that are faced in the community there’s a lack of education and the need for cohesion. The visual media opportunities as with all other potential opportunities are effectively hampered by the HWA’s structure as in order for the members to reach out to those who could help them in their advancement they first have to be members in order to access the information, and a great many would also require knowledge before taking the first steps to contact in order to facilitate a better outcome. It’s also unlikely that the companies involved would reach out to HWA members as they generally have their own channels and contacts for such things, which would mean that the HWA would need to have certain allocated staff as liaisons, which in turn means them taking the time and effort to create ‘first point of contact’ relationships with the various entities.)

“Marketing Plan Template
I would like to see developed a template marketing plan for the current marketing climate that writers can download and amend to suit their promotional needs/budgets.  It can include information about where to find and how to use print and online advertising, how to access places like Netgalley and Bookbub, some cost-effective ideas, and other ways to make use of emerging technological tools to promote our work.”

(At the risk of sounding like a broken record I already have this in place with an entire section comprising of several of my forums dedicated to marketing. I provide multiple approaches via up-to-date mediums along with established advertising methods, legal ‘guerilla methods’, and ‘outside the box’ thinking, all of which are ‘tried and tested’ and none of which would break the bank, or indeed ‘the law’.)

“Televised Events
One other idea about visibility – it would be nice if we could have the Stokers televised, like the Chainsaw Awards are.  I think the audience there would certainly overlap, and it might bring awareness of Stoker winners and of the HWA to a larger audience.  I admit that the practical application of this idea would need to be developed by those with more experience in this than I have.  A plan would have to be made to develop proper contacts and review contracts for this endeavor.  Maybe it would involve having an entertainment lawyer or film/TV agent either as a one-time representative or on retainer, which means considering the cost.  It might also require developing some type of pitch to approach a streaming service with.

Still, I think it is a good idea for a writing organization to build relationships with channels like Shudder, Midnight Pulp, or new ones on the horizon, given some of the other suggestions regarding expanding our networking reach in this essay.”

(Expect failure. The reason I say that is because The Stokers are of limited interest inside the horror author community and virtually unknown outside of it. People want to be entertained, not to watch a bunch of people they have probably never heard of getting awards they’ve never heard of for books they’ve probably never heard of. Whilst the intention to generate interest is applaudable the HWA already has a presence on the most valuable broadcasting channel available to them (YouTube) and have so far failed to take advantage of building an audience by putting out truly valuable and interesting content. With great coverage comes great responsibility. To truly take advantage of TV as a medium it would be much better for the HWA to have a ‘fly on the wall documentary’ showing the backstage dramas involved in the selection process and dealing with the annual outcry from the thousands of authors in the community who are tired of seeing many of the same people being shortlisted every year. It needs to step out of being nano-niche into presenting an entertaining face to the wider viewing community.)

 “Non-HWA Events
Conventions and events which are author-centric or have a strong author presence or aesthetic are worth making members aware of.  Many of us only have so much money to dedicate to traveling to conventions and events, and it could be useful to have some forum-like discussion of the ones where writers are treated well and sell a lot of books.”

(I have a forum section for that.)

“Subsidiary Rights Resources
I would like to see market listings for subsidiary rights.  There are occasionally foreign, audio, visual, theatrical, online, experimental, and podcast markets for fiction that have open calls and take unsolicited submissions.  However, finding them is often a difficult and obfuscated process, and it feels like leaving money on the table.  It would be nice if there was a resource which simplified the process and even offered some instruction as to how to pursue those markets.”

(I have a forum section for that including articles outlining the wide variety of options to generate income from a single book and how to ‘futureproof’ for all eventualities and new technologies.)

“LEGAL/GRIEVANCE

I recall that prior to The Horror Show With Brian Keene ending, we reported on a lot of bad actors in the industry.  This ranged from publishers who were predatory or negligent with contracts to people who were sexual and/or violent predators.  As a podcast (and not an organization who served as the public face and voice of paying members) we could do that.  We didn’t mediate so much as listen to victims, corroborate testimony, and report facts.  Sometimes, the public reporting of these bad practices was enough to initiate correction.”

(I’m not in the business of calling people out as bad actors on my site, but I do have ways of dealing with certain things. For example, trolls, scammers, spammers, bigots, and sex pests are not welcome and will either be refused initial entry or removed. For that to happen I need to have concrete evidence of wrongdoings and it must be something which works against the site’s purpose and all who use it. There is also no room for petty squabbles either as I have noticed a lot of arguments across social media with various people fighting over things unrelated to the genre. This site has been created as a safe space for creatives to thrive, and I’m determined to maintain it that way).

“Now, I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think the HWA is legally equipped to do that with its Grievance Committee, so far as issues which are not contract-related or publishing-specific.  It has been my understanding that before the end of The Horror Show, traditionally, the committee relegated personal issues (even those which may involve writers/publishers) to the realm of personal resolution, except in super-rare instances of one member using HWA resources like the membership directory to stalk or harass another member.  It is my opinion that a Grievance Committee opens itself up to potential legal issues if it doesn’t define exact, factual, and objective parameters of its involvement with its membership.  I believe a Grievance Committee should adopt a model of serving only in the capacity of protecting writers from publishing industry pitfalls.  This also applies to an organization’s legal resources.”

(I agree. As a self-appointed unofficial body with no actual power to legally act, the HWA cannot take on issues which are none of its business. The best it can do is to provide such things as contact information to those seeking to use legal channels to resolve disputes.)

“That being said, I do applaud efforts of the HWA to make its events an inclusive and safe space for all, where all members can feel welcomed, respected, heard, and free from personal harm.  I believe a writing organization should, as I have mentioned and will likely mention ad nauseum in this essay, look out for the interests of all its writers.

Adopting the approach I’m proposing may sometimes come at the expense of maaaaybe pissing off editors, agents, and publishers – at least, those who are involved in malfeasance practices anyway.  And why should the organization take that chance?  Because we need our organization to put us first.  And really, if we lose the good will and/or a publishing opportunity with some publisher who was going to violate our contractual rights and not pay us anyway, that is no loss to us.

This is first and foremost a business.”

(Writing with the intention of selling your work is first and foremost a business, but the HWA shouldn’t be operating as one seeing as it’s a non-profit with a charitable arm. It also shouldn’t be arbitrating disputes without legal grounds. I do however see the case for taking a stand against those who indulge in confirmed malpractice, but rather than the usual witch-hunts that go on over various social media I believe a brief statement and a sitewide HWA boycott would go a long way toward creating better practices from those acting as professionals within the membership. As for those outside of the membership, how they conduct themselves is none of the HWA’s business, so that can lead to a whole slew of potential legal problems.)

“TRANSPARENCY/COMMUNICATION

I don’t claim to speak for anyone else on this topic, but I sense I’m not alone in believing certain fundamental ideas regarding open communication and transparency from any organization that takes and uses my money. 

Official Statements
With the understanding that as an official representative of horror writers, the board of a writing organization must consider the wording and content of any official statement so as not to do damage to its membership or invite litigation for misspoken stances, I believe it should be common practice to issue a statement that the board is carefully considering the circumstances and effects of X and will issue a formal and official statement as soon as possible.  This should, ideally, be followed up by said statement within two to three days.  If, for whatever reason, a statement cannot be issued in that time, then another “placeholder” statement could avoid the optics of appearing as if the board is ignoring or avoiding the topic. 

This is, of course, contingent on the topic being something that the HWA should, for the sake of protecting and supporting its membership, speak officially about.  If this is unclear, there should be in the by-laws some means of defining what the HWA should and should not make an official statement about, with the caveat that this may, at some point in the future, need to be amended for circumstances which arise.”

(There’s a need for complete clarification as to exactly what the HWA can and cannot hold influence over as there is a misconception that the HWA as an organization has power over the entire horror writing community. It needs to be made clear that any influence the HWA has only applies to those within its own membership and does not extend in any official capacity outside of the organization.

Making official statements within the remit of the HWA can take time, I believe that’s mainly because of the decisions behind those statements being put before a committee to reach a general agreement upon. Certain things, such as the recent policy decision regarding the use of A.I. for writing fiction and/or creating book covers would on the surface appear to be a ‘no brainer’, however there are ‘nuances’ to observe which warrant broader discussion. If it were something affecting my site which was brought to my attention I would be able to more rapidly assess the information and make a far swifter decision, as there is only one person filtering the information, so I would not have to wait for committee members to be available for the discussion and take a great length of time working on the pros and cons of a dozen people’s individual perspectives and have to work through compromises and stalemates. It is those that slow down a process, so it would be in the HWA’s best interests to have a much smaller number of people making the decisions, and those people should be the ones with the greater knowledge of the subject and have no personal bias toward it or indeed personal involvement with it.)

“As a former Trustee, I know avoidance/ignoring is seldom if ever the case.  However, some issues which arise can stir anxiety, confusion, misinformation, etc. and it might benefit the administration to have certain prepared statements ready for various occasions which require visibility of the board.  No one can please everyone all of the time, but transparency of board actions (within legal and reasonable limits) may diffuse a number of vocal criticisms which could be damaging to a productive resolution of various matters.”

(Agreed. Even if at the very least it’s a boilerplate document requesting patience as the issues can often be complex and require an in-depth investigation. Trading accuracy for haste rarely works out well.)

“Funds
Another topic which I believe writing organizations should transparently communicate to their memberships is the use of official funds.  I want to clarify something here: I am not a lawyer, as I said.  I am also not an accountant.  Nevertheless, I would like to see a yearly accounting of what is earned and what is spent, with explanations where relevant and legally possible.  I would like to know how much money is not being used, and if it could be allocated for new initiatives. I would be interested in seeing if there are ways to cut costs and save money, which could affect how much I pay in dues or how much I pay to attend HWA events.

As a not-lawyer/not-accountant, I would assume the money in the organization budget is derived primarily from dues, fund-raisers, donations, grants, and maybe even inheritances. There may be other sources of income that I am not aware of or that I have not thought of at this writing.

Regarding expenses, I assume money is allotted for website maintenance, the Stoker Awards weekend and dinner, the production of the awards themselves, the scholarship fund, and the hardship fund.  I figure some money perhaps is given to the various chapters for state-specific events.  I also know that in the past, members were entitled to certain business discounts, and I assume that some of the budget went to covering those discounts, but that is pure speculation. 

I would be interested in seeing a kind of audit of organization finances, and possibly, if it is allowable in the bylaws, some discussion by the board and/or active members about best use of funds for the upcoming year.  It is possible that the budget structure may need an upgrade or even a redesign.  It is also possible that the way it exists right now is the most efficient.  As a member, though, I would feel some degree of comfort in seeing a yearly check-in wherein it was explained to me how my membership dues were being spent.”

(This is a quagmire. The very first thing that should be ascertained is exactly who is in overall charge of the collecting and distribution of finances, and that person (preferably three people) should have the correct qualifications for the position. The dues alone would account for a supposed income exceeding $250,000 per annum, so transparency over income and spending would certainly be welcome seeing as there’s little evidence of that money being put to good use.)

“AI
I speak for myself here and this is not meant to reflect negatively or detrimentally in any way on anyone who is involved in class-action lawsuits (disclaimer, just in case), but I support those lawsuits and I believe a writing organization should absolutely, positively, 100% be against any AI usage which undercuts or eliminates job opportunities for writers, uses writers’ content without permission or payment, or performs not as a transcription aid or tool but as a substitution for the creativity, heart, blood, sweat, and tears that writers devote hours, days, months, and years of their lives to developing and perfecting over their lifetimes.”

(Agreed. Though it relies heavily on the ‘honour system’, and that is basically worthless. I would also like to see the same perspectives on the use of A.I. rolled out to those using ‘ghost writers’ for fiction as in my opinion the use of another human to write a story is no different to getting a machine to do it as in both instances it is not the name on the front of the book who is the actual writer of the words within.)

“Publishers
While we’re on the topic of potentially hot takes, I believe a writing organization should absolutely, 100%, speak in support of writers calling out publishers who are not paying writers, violating contracts, not reverting rights that they are contractually obligated to revert, selling books they no longer have rights to, or other shady business practices. 

A writing organization should protect and support writers first.

Yeah, yeah, I know.  Ad nauseum, like I said.”

(Unfortunately, this is outside of the legal sphere of influence of the HWA, however having a ‘verified blacklist’ would of course be a great help to writers. Regarding publishers not paying writers I believe that the Indie Horror Writing industry is long overdue for being officially regulated though that would require things to be ratified on the Governmental level for all countries involved. Having certain agreed upon ‘basic international standards’ would not prevent people from deciding to be publishers, but it would mean that they would have to comply with regulations that would show they are both intellectually and financially capable of running a business and that they can pay writers at an established ‘minimum rate’ or greater instead of the current favoured model which appears to be following the ‘20 Books to 50k’ method to pump out a load of anthologies while paying ‘exposure bucks’ for the stories. As things currently stand, anyone can set up a ‘publishing company’ on a whim, and create ‘charity anthologies’ for which they don’t have to pay writers and don’t have to provide transparency over earnings. Basic standards would expose those selling services they have no certified ability with, which wouldn’t prevent them trading, but it would allow those hiring them to know the exact level of professionalism to expect.

I have heard many arguments opposing regulation, but the strongest voices of opposition are generally those who stand to lose the most if ever the writing industry became regulated. I have seen many publishers openly state that they ‘cannot afford to pay writers at the moment’ and then go on to produce a great many books over years with still no payouts made to ‘the talent’. The business world as I have always understood it operates on the basis that if you cannot afford to sustain a business and pay your way then you are not viable and should close down or BE closed down.

There is also another issue here in that the beginner writers are being taken advantage of by the unscrupulous who work on the basis that a beginner will be only too happy to provide a story for free as it’s a ‘foot in the door’ and for many their first publication. There are many options for beginners to get their work out there to much broader audiences without having ‘publishers’ take advantage of them, especially as there are online ‘zines’ which don’t pay, but also more importantly don’t charge the writer OR the readers. There are of course other avenues such as the ever-growing number of websites on which they can publish their content behind a paywall and have fans read their work for a token fee, though I find many of those are restrictive.)

“AWARDS

In the interest of transparency myself, yes, this is about the Stoker Awards, although I think it’s applicable to any organization which also presents an industry award.  There is no perfect and fully objective system for awards; they are, by nature, to some degree a popularity contest.  However, I believe the awards should represent literary excellence over campaigning.  Note that I didn’t say “over popularity or visibility;” this is because it is quite possible that the books/stories/etc. that are popular and highly visible have earned both popularity and visibility because they are really well-written and enjoyable.  That being said, it is incumbent upon the voters to read the books on the ballot as widely as possible so that they are not ONLY voting for books simply because they have heard of the titles or know and like the authors. 

Again, I know this is nearly impossible to police or prove.  It’s naïve to think otherwise.  I simply include this sentiment here to encourage the voting membership to strive for recognition of superior literary merit.”

(The ‘campaigning’ aspect is pointless as all entries are then subject to what appears to be rigged voting as the majority of people voting have likely not read the books, however it’s a terribly poor system that has two pathways of getting into the ‘final ten’, one by public vote, and the other by the voting of the HWA selection panels who can override the public vote, as it makes the public vote redundant, rendering its true function to be ‘drumming up interest’ rather than selecting any meaningful winning entry. It is also ridiculous to have a system in place in which someone who hasn’t gone through any prior selection rounds could be voted in at the last minute by the selection board, taking the place of someone who has made it through all the prior hurdles. That kind of ‘last minute switcheroo’ is a great indicator of personal bias as well as an obvious nod to who the most likely winner will be.)

“Whether the awards process should be restructured has been a matter of debate for decades.  Whether it can be is another story.  It does little good to say the awards should be restructured and then not offer a way to do so.  I do believe the addition of a jury to seek out lesser known works by diverse authors was a definite step in the right direction.  I believe the wider the selection of books to consider and the more well-read the voting membership, the better.”

(The current structure is flawed, so a restructure with a focus on fairness would be welcomed by many, me included. ‘Fair’ would require a veritable shopping list of changes. For example, the HWA could make it so that only HWA members in good standing would be allowed to submit their works for awards. Those works would have to have been published within a rigid set time frame as confirmed by the publication date as that would also be the date of submission for the awards. That takes care of the whole ‘popularity contest’ aspect as the book hasn’t propagated through the reader community and it therefore becomes solely a matter of the book’s contents rather than how popular the author is or how much advertising the book has had.

At this point I’m going to disagree regarding the diversity jury as it shouldn’t be necessary. As I have stated above, if a book is released and at the same time it is put forward by the author for award consideration then that removes all issues of diversity as the book should have exactly the same chance of winning an award regardless of the colour or gender or other identifying status of the author. The only diversity component then becomes the personal choice of the diverse author whether or not to put their book forward for consideration. The books themselves having previously been stripped of any identifying markers to eliminate ‘friendship bias’ should go to an anonymous jury who are expected to join a closed discussion group where the HWA can be certain that all longlisted books were read by everyone in the group, and each book’s merits were properly discussed in that group before the shortlist is released.

The authors and all staff of the HWA must not make any details of the submissions public until such times as the shortlist is finally selected and an official announcement is made. Any ‘leaks’ from the author would result in that book being removed from the running and the author banned from future submissions as well as being removed and blacklisted by the HWA. Any leaks from the HWA staff side should result in the offending staff member similarly being removed from the HWA. Anyone with ‘insider knowledge’ betting on the outcome should also be banned.)

“I believe that the administrative board (and possibly some volunteers) should NOT be eligible for the Stoker Award during the year in which they are serving.  This was an old rule, instituted (I think by Joe Nassise, but I can’t be sure) to ensure the real and perceived legitimacy of the awards.  I believe the awards should recognize superior achievement in our field, without being tarnished by the optics of self-service.”

(This is another thing I am almost on board with; however, I believe that nobody involved with the running of the HWA in any capacity should be eligible for a Stoker Award EVER. The optics of self-service are gloriously abundant to the point where every so often it appears that new award categories are suggested so that those of service can gain even higher prominence. It’s got to the point where it is less about being a literary award and more about a round of back-patting for the HWA elite.

I also believe that seeing as the HWA does not fairly and adequately represent the entire horror writing community it should stop pretending that it does. It should throw the doors open to everyone by lowering its membership fees and sales requirements to a level which is achievable by the poorer members of the community and those with fewer sales credits behind them but an obvious desire to succeed as authors. There are tens of thousands of horror writers out there who may consider joining if the HWA wasn’t such an elitist organization.

It would also be much better optically and factually if any author who has won a Stoker Award in any category is exempt from submitting to the Awards for a period no shorter than five years. This would prevent the same names cropping up on the winners podium time after time as it defies all logic that out of a community of tens of thousands of writers, or even of the 2,500+ actual registered members of the HWA, it would appear that there are only a couple of dozen writers who are good enough to win a Stoker, and in some cases several.)

“LEGACY

Many writers with the most experience, history, and accomplishment in our field are feeling those first tugs of fear about their legacies after they are gone.  Some fear irrelevance now and obscurity later.  Some worry about who will manage their literary estates when they are gone.  Too many writers I know and care about have passed, and with them, the sum total of their lives and literary loves have been reduced to books in cardboard boxes and uninterested family members who let their legacies languish in limbo.

I would like – I would really appreciate – a writing organization that can do something to ensure a legacy continues on, if for no other reason than because remembering our roots strengthens our branches and leaves.  A writing organization should be a source of information about the formative and quintessential works of the genre, the touchstone books and stories that have defined and continue to define horror literature in the world.  I know that the HWA has a recommended reading list; I believe this list is primarily of works by past and present members rather than the genre as a whole, but I could be wrong.  I would like to see it reflective of the genre as a whole, perhaps with some highlighting to indicate members’ works.”

(I’m doing exactly this sort of thing on my site, except of course for highlighting HWA members as that again smacks of serious self-interest bias. The HWA could really do with being more inclusive not just with diversity issues but with ‘wider community’ ones as it claims to be an association for horror writers yet only bothers with a fraction of them.)

“Estate Planning
One thing a writing organization can do to ensure the legacies of the genre is to provide a template for setting up a literary estate, and some general best practices for estate planning.  It may sound morbid, but no one is guaranteed old age, so it is a good idea to have a plan in place which one can work from and modify as need be.  This might also be an objective which can be completed by a panel of lawyer members contributing their knowledge across multiple states and countries.”

(I have a category for this.)

“Memorial Libraries
A writing organization could have a downloadable library of members’ works in the genre, obtained with express permission in writing from the writer prior to passing or from the heirs to the literary estate.  This might be ebook or PDF versions of works by members who have passed but have arranged for their work to be part of the HWA Memorial Library.  Perhaps money from downloads goes to the estate heirs, or, in the event of HWA inheritance of the legacy, to the scholarship and hardship funds.

A writing organization might also facilitate an agreement with a publisher like, say, Vallencourt Books to keep the works in print or to bring out anniversary editions of works in the memorial library for various occasions.”

(Once again this would be the HWA only serving the HWA, with ‘prosperity’ taking over from ‘posterity’. Instead of organized ‘grave robbing’ for the HWA’s financial benefit would it not be better to enable the works of deceased authors to reach the ENTIRE horror reading community in order to spread their work farther than just the membership? Facilitating print publishing agreements will just lead to legacy books being produced in small numbers at high prices which once again restricts the reach to those with the deepest pockets. It’s also worth noting that the community doesn’t need the 2000th reprint of H.P. Lovecraft etc as most if not all of the books already exist, so a new edition with a new cover isn’t going over new ground, whereas the works of certain lesser-known authors, for example some of the ‘one hit wonders’ of the 1970s and 1980s would be worth preserving and releasing in a digital version.)

For those of you who have read this to the end, thank you.  I appreciate that you care about the horror genre and are open to ideas which might help strengthen it.  The genre needs you.

Erm... Thanks!

(So, there you have it, Mary SanGiovanni‘s opinions on the HWA and my response in bold, and italicized, with brackets. Your thoughts on what we’ve both said are welcome, but keep it civil okay 😉 )

The following article also appears in 'The Nooseroom' section of this site.

The Horror Writers Association Is Running Out of Trust

Introduction: Legacy Is Not Leadership

Horror writers deserve an organization that fights for them, not one that asks them to keep believing in an outdated legacy that no longer seems earned.

The Horror Writers Association (HWA) could be a rallying point for horror literature: an organization in which writers feel protected, represented, challenged, and proud to belong. It has the history, the chapters, the public name, the member network, the Stoker awards, and it once had the cultural weight to speak for a genre that has spent decades being dismissed as pulp, exploitation, or guilty pleasure. That is exactly why its failures matter so much. When an organization with that much symbolic power feels hierarchical, reactive, opaque, and slow to adapt, it does not merely disappoint its members. It squanders the suggested authority those members helped build.

The problem is not that the HWA is worthless, it is that the HWA should be worth fighting over. It still matters enough to anger people, and that anger should be understood as a warning, not an inconvenience. The horror writing community is not asking for perfection, it’s asking for transparency of widespread issues as well as responsiveness from a professional association that understands the world they are actually working in. If the HWA continues to treat reform like an attack, it will not be betrayed by its critics, it will be abandoned by the very people still trying to save it.

The case against the HWA is not one complaint but a pattern of failures, it maintains authority without adequate accountability, governance members cannot easily see, policies built for an older publishing world, operations stretched by volunteer labour, crisis response mistaken for leadership, and a member base already learning how to organize elsewhere.

1. The HWA Wants Authority Without Enough Accountability

The HWA’s bylaws describe an organization formed for charitable and educational purposes, with goals that include encouraging public interest in horror and dark fantasy, fostering appreciation of the literature, sponsoring and disseminating high-quality work, supporting literacy, and conducting conferences, forums, lectures, and seminar programs. In practice, members tend to experience the HWA through a more immediate set of benefits: membership status, the Bram Stoker Awards®, local chapters, newsletters, promotional opportunities, education, scholarships, networking, and access to member-only resources.

That is the heart of the contradiction. The HWA wants the moral weight of a public literary institution and the loyalty of a professional home, but it has not always offered the transparency that makes that loyalty possible. A nonprofit mission cannot be used as a curtain. If writers are paying dues, lending prestige, promoting awards, volunteering labour, defending the organization in public, and trusting it with their professional credibility, then the organization owes them visible processes, timely explanations, and a clear route for accountability, none of which, according to the numerous complaints I’ve seen, appears to have been forthcoming.

2. The Governance Is Too Hard to See, and That Is a Failure

The HWA’s hierarchy may make sense to insiders, but from the outside it can feel like a locked house where members are asked to keep paying rent. Members should not need institutional folklore to understand who holds power, who enforces policy, who supervises committees, who manages awards processes, who oversees publications, or how complaints move through the system. When that basic map is missing, members do not experience governance as necessary complexity. They experience it as exclusion.

This is not a minor communications issue. Power that cannot be easily mapped cannot be easily challenged, improved, or trusted. The HWA does not need to disclose confidential personnel matters or legal details to be transparent. It does need to make its structure legible. Members should be able to look at the organization and understand where decisions are made, where responsibility sits, and how to push for change without guessing who will listen.

As things stand it’s difficult to see with any precision who deals with what, and where to contact them. The HWA should have total transparency of who is staffing what, not just in the main organization, but in all of the chapters wherever they may be. It’s also important that any changes in the hierarchy are immediately declared and properly listed, rather than having members accidentally discover long after the fact that someone has stepped down from their position, no matter how unimportant that position may seem.

3. Its Policies Belong to a Publishing World That No Longer Exists

The horror economy has changed faster than the HWA’s categories appear to have changed with it. HWA materials list active, affiliate, associate, academic, and supporting membership categories, while also defining eligible writers across books, periodicals, stage plays, screenplays, graphic novels, comic books, computer games, and internet-based material. Writers now build careers through trade publishing, small presses, self-publishing, audio, games, comics, screen media, newsletters, crowdfunding, serial platforms, conventions, podcasts, and direct reader communities. Some writers earn more from a mixed portfolio than others earn from a traditional book contract. Some have loyal audiences without fitting the HWA’s older gatekeeping metrics. If the organization still treats only certain pathways as the default proof of seriousness, it is not protecting professionalism; it is narrowing it.

The HWA should stop asking modern writers to squeeze themselves into yesterday’s definitions of legitimacy. Horror has always thrived in the margins, in small presses, on cheap paper, in outlaw venues, in fan communities, and in experiments that respectable institutions noticed only after the fact. A horror organization should know better than to mistake gatekeeping for ‘standards’. It should set a clear standard for contemporary professional labour: not only book publication, but also indie publishing, small press ecosystems, audio performance, game writing, criticism, editing, translation, teaching, community-building, reader-supported work, and hybrid careers. The same urgency applies to AI. Vague language and reactive statements are not enough when generative systems threaten authorship, payment, trust, and the value of human creative work.

Another complaint I see regularly regarding ‘gatekeeping’ is that the barrier to entry is set so high. Whilst I understand that they are an organization aimed at the ‘professional’, it is yet another stumbling block as part of its remit is to provide ‘education’, which is one of the reasons that new writers want to join the association. They wish to learn, and believe that the HWA by its nature must contain the best options for learning, but this becomes a ‘Catch 22’ when those who require the instruction on how to become writers do not qualify to become members until they’ve already learned enough, and earned enough, to get through the gate. Either the HWA is supporting ALL horror writers, or just those who are already enjoying some measure of success. It’s clear that it’s not there for the community as a whole, so perhaps it should change its name from the ‘Horror Writers Association’, which implies it is there for all horror writers, to the more accurate ‘Horror Writers Private Members Club’. Without throwing the doors open to the entire community it’s deserving its reputation of being a gatekeeping clique.

4. Volunteer Passion Is Being Used to Hide Structural Weakness

Volunteer labour is not a business model. It is not a communications department, a crisis team, an accessibility plan, a technology strategy, or a substitute for professional administration. Volunteers are the beating heart of many literary communities, but they cannot also be treated as the skeleton, bloodstream, and emergency generator. The HWA’s own member-facing materials encourage volunteering and state that volunteers help the organization thrive, but an organization cannot keep leaning on unpaid goodwill while expecting members to accept inconsistent service, uneven communication, and slow institutional response.

According to online sources, the HWA as an organization appears to have around 2,000 members globally, which given that I used to run an author website called Writers Dock with 5,000 members isn’t that big a number. I spent around 16 hours a day, seven days a week on it, looking after multiple forums and chatrooms, and administering to the needs of all of the members. Although I took the brunt of the workload, I had volunteer moderators helping out, though their input was severely limited as they had careers and family to consider, and the site was more of a ‘hobby hangout’ than a professional operation. This resulted in no clear structure as to when they were available, therefore no ‘expectations’ could be placed upon them, meaning anything that went beyond basic community interaction was essentially down to me to take care of. I know from experience that although volunteers can indeed be exceptionally valuable, the fact that they are not gaining financially for their time and input is a large factor in how much of a damn they give about things running smoothly. I understood that volunteers were not slaves, they were decent people giving up their valuable time to help with something they believed in. This is an area in which the HWA is struggling, as can be seen by the volunteers who have ceased helping, some of whom have left the organization altogether.

Modern members are not unreasonable for expecting professional standards from a professional association. They need predictable workflows, clear points of contact, accessible events, reliable digital systems, timely statements, and policy enforcement that does not depend on who happens to be available or willing to absorb the emotional cost. If the HWA cannot fund or staff its essential functions, then it needs to say so plainly and rebuild its operating model around reality rather than nostalgia, because there’s only so much public good will that the Stokers can gather, and that’s currently being stretched thin.

5. Crisis Response Is Not Leadership

Recent public controversies involving the HWA show how quickly internal decisions can become external reputation crises. Reports in 2023 described the HWA Board of Trustees expelling Thomas F. Monteleone and banning him from HWA events after statements the organization said violated its anti-harassment policies.

I remember the Monteleone incident well, and in my opinion it was badly handled. For those who don’t know what it was about, Monteleone questioned the credentials of two Lifetime Achievement Award winners, this resulted in Monteleone, once a highly respected member with his own Lifetime Achievement Award, to be stripped of that as well as having his membership revoked and his previously good name trashed for weeks. Deserved? He said inflammatory misogynistic and racist things not just about the two winners but about others in the community, so in my opinion the punishment does fit the crime, but as I said before, it as badly handled with the usual ‘knee-jerk-reaction’ that the HWA regularly exhibits.

In 2026, public commentary and reporting described a backlash over a pro-AI HWA newsletter column written by ‘HWA Trustee’ Sèphera Girón and subsequent disciplinary action. Whatever one concludes about the particulars of each case, the governance lesson is the same: professional associations cannot rely on after-the-fact statements alone. They need proactive standards, review processes, clear editorial oversight, transparent disciplinary pathways whith fair and equal applications, and member-facing explanations of how policy is applied.

Because some controversies involve public reporting, commentary, and organizational statements rather than a single complete public record, those examples should be read as evidence of governance pressure rather than as the whole history of the disputes.

Members should not have to wonder whether the HWA acts because a principle has been violated or because public pressure has become impossible to ignore. That uncertainty poisons trust. A serious organization does not lurch from controversy to statement to disciplinary action and call that governance. It builds systems before the fire starts: editorial oversight, conflict-of-interest policies, harassment procedures, appeal pathways, reporting timelines, and clear rules for moderating and protecting member-facing spaces.

Importantly it also needs to ensure that the rules apply to everyone equally, with the lowliest member facing the same consequences for their actions as the President of the HWA or any member of the organizational ‘Staff’.

6. Modern Members Are Already Outgrowing the Old Model

Many contemporary writers join professional associations with different expectations than earlier generations. They are used to rapid communication, digital transparency, inclusive policy language, remote access, searchable archives, public accountability, and direct member engagement. They also operate in a market defined by precarity: advances are uneven, small presses come and go, social media visibility affects careers, generative AI threatens labour and intellectual property, and many writers combine multiple income streams to survive.

That is why the HWA’s current approach feels unsustainable. It asks writers to buy into ‘institutional prestige’ while too often failing to provide institutional clarity. It asks for patience without always offering evidence of progress. It asks for volunteer energy while not protecting volunteers from burnout. It asks members to trust processes they cannot easily see. There is only so long a community will keep pouring faith into a structure that will not give them a peek behind the curtains. Eventually, writers will do what writers always do when institutions fail them: they will build elsewhere, and they will take the future of the genre with them.

That does not have to be in the form of another ‘Association’, though over the past few years several people have tried to establish one, often stating that they are going to be the better alternative to the HWA. None have yet gained traction.

My own website, on which you are reading this, is basically aimed at those in the community not served by the HWA, though even HWA members are welcome as my site is truly inclusive, with the only qualification for membership being that you’re not an asshole.

7. The Fix Is Not Cosmetic Reform. It Is a Transfer of Trust Back to Members.

The reforms that follow are not cosmetic communications tweaks. They are the minimum infrastructure of trust: members must be able to understand the institution, see how decisions are made, know how policies are reviewed, and believe that essential work is supported by systems rather than improvisation.

A. Publish a Plain-Language Governance Map

The HWA should publish a plain-language governance map immediately. Not someday. Not after the next controversy. Not buried inside bylaws. Immediately. Members should know who decides what, how committees are formed, how complaints are handled, what timelines apply, and where accountability begins and ends. If an organization wants trust, it must first make itself visible.

B. Modernize Membership Categories

The organization should modernise membership categories, so they reflect actual careers rather than inherited assumptions. Professional standing should not be measured only by the comfort level of older publishing systems. If horror writers are earning, publishing, teaching, editing, performing, adapting, translating, crowdfunding, and building readerships, the HWA needs a framework that recognises that work without diluting standards. It should also take a look at the fee structure so it may be able to implement a low fee entry point for newbies who want to take advantage of some of that ‘education’ the HWA states it offers. It’s not difficult to implement, I have a lot of instructional and helpful stuff on this site and members get it for free, so an organization such as the HWA should be able to come up with ‘something’ worth the membership fee, and on a similar subject I believe it is also a dreadful practice to charge a membership fee and then charge members for such things as videoed mini-courses at $35 a time, again putting education out of the reach of the poorer members. Those should be included in the membership fee, not added as a ‘Pay-Per-View’ bolt-on.

It’s also noteworthy that at the time of writing the HWA Facebook group has 27.9 thousand members. Over 25,000 more than the actual organisation. Were the HWA to review the fees and force their gates open just a crack, some of those 27.9k members might be able to be enticed to join the actual Association. It has always seemed ludicrous to me that the HWA doesn’t take advantage of social media to any worthwhile extent as a ‘feeder’ for their site. My perspective on that is perhaps they are struggling with the membership level they have, so adding to it might overwhelm them. Either that, or they gatekeep for exclusivity. Who knows!

C. Create a Transparent Policy Review Cycle

Policy review should be scheduled, public-facing, and member-informed. Harassment, accessibility, AI, awards administration, conflicts of interest, newsletter standards, chapter conduct, and event safety should not be handled as emergency patches after damage is done. Drafts should be shared when possible, revisions should be explained, and members should be told what changed and why.

It should also be the case that members suspected of wrongdoing should not be tried, found guilty, and executed, in the ‘court of public opinion’ with the Hwa dishing out the sentence. The HWA should have enough wisdom within its ranks to be able to handle its affairs transparently, and independently of what is being said about members on social media.

D. Professionalize Core Operations

The HWA should professionalise its core operations and be honest about the cost. If dues need to support paid administration, communications support, technology, accessibility, legal review, or event safety infrastructure, then make the case openly. Members are more likely to accept costs when they can see the services those costs buy.

E. Build Member Trust Through Regular Reporting

Quarterly reports should become standard. Members should not hear from leadership only when there is a controversy, an awards cycle, or a dues reminder. They should receive regular updates on board actions, policy work, budget priorities, committee progress, membership trends, accessibility improvements, and unresolved challenges. Trust is not rebuilt through slogans. It is rebuilt through repetition, evidence, and follow-through.

F. Treat AI as a Labour and Ethics Issue

The HWA must treat AI as a labour issue, not a novelty or a clever debate-club topic. Its policy should address awards eligibility, newsletter content, member promotion, disclosure, training data concerns, and the line between assistive tools and the replacement of human creative labour. Horror writers do not need an organization that shrugs at technology capable of devaluing authorship. They need one that understands that a genre built on human fear, imagination, grief, rage, and wonder cannot afford to be casual about machines trained to imitate and/or replace its workers.

Choose the Members, or Lose the Future

The HWA does not need gentler criticism. It needs a reckoning, and it needs one while there are still enough members willing to care. Leadership should not wait for the next scandal, the next resignation, the next public rupture, or the next generation of writers deciding that the institution is simply not worth the effort. Publish the governance map. Rewrite the membership categories. Fund the work that cannot responsibly depend on exhausted volunteers. Build real AI policy. Report to members regularly. Explain decisions before silence curdles into suspicion. Invite criticism before it becomes revolt.

And members should not confuse loyalty with quiet. If the HWA is to survive as more than a logo, an awards brand, or a nostalgic credential, members must demand the organization they actually need: transparent, modern, accountable, inclusive, and brave enough to defend human writers in a changing literary economy. Ask questions. Run for office. Serve on committees if you can. Push for policy. Refuse vague answers. Protect volunteers. Defend marginalized members. Insist that dues buy more than access to an institution that will not show its work or provide anything of value for the money you’ve paid.

The choice is no longer between tradition and change. The choice is between reform and irrelevance. If the HWA wants a future, it must choose to stand with its members now as the human beings within the Association are the truly valuable aspect of the Association, not the Stokers.

Am I a member? NO. I was once, about a decade ago, but found that it had nothing of value worth the fee, and the scandals it faced even back then were enough of a warning sign that I shouldn’t stick with them. Would I join if they got their act together? Probably not. I have this site, which to me is worth far more in terms of what it offers, so there really is no value component for me to be interested in a return to the HWA.

Bibliography

1. Horror Writers Association. Horror Writers Association Bylaws. Official/staging HWA PDF. Source.
2. The Bram Stoker Awards. “The Horror Writers Association.” Source.
3. Horror Writers Association. HWA Member Handbook, version 2.1, 2026. Source.
4. Locus Online. “Monteleone Expelled from HWA,” February 1, 2023. Source.
5. Chuck Wendig, “Regarding The Pro-AI Tantrum In The HWA Newsletter,” August 5, 2026; Dream Saga, “Horror Writers Association Expels Trustee Following Controversial Pro-AI Column,” August 6, 2026. Source; Source.

Click the link below to download my 'dual purpose' Magazine Creation Course. It is a step-by-step procedure for creating and launching your own magazine as well as the procedures for you to teach others how to create magazines.

Good luck with your mags.

By Brennan Lefaro

Book 22 in Try Not To Die.

You're Matty, a High School Senior with aspirations of becoming a horror author. Your friend Nate invites you to explore a notorious haunted house. Things don't go as well as you would have liked as you have to try not to die in the Weeks House. 

By Mark Tullius

Book 21 in Try Not To Die

This novel contains graphic violence, disturbing imagery, religious horror, possession, and psychological torment.
Reader discretion is strongly advised. For mature audiences only.

What follows is a basic overview of podcasting platforms relevant to us as horror authors. These options support either hosting your own podcast (e.g., author interviews, writing advice, horror fiction readings, or genre discussions) or appearing as a guest on existing shows (e.g., promoting books, sharing craft insights, or reading excerpts). I'll provide examples here but will also create expanded lists in dedicated posts on the site, so bear in mind that the ones included here are not exhaustive, nor are they included as the best examples.

Podcast Hosting Platforms for Launching and Distributing Your Own Show:

These services store your audio files, generate an RSS feed, and automatically distribute episodes to major listening apps like Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, and others. Most offer analytics, monetization tools (ads, subscriptions, donations), and basic editing features. Many are beginner-friendly with free tiers or trials.

Spotify for Creators (formerly Anchor): Free hosting with unlimited uploads, built-in recording/editing tools, video podcast support, and easy monetization via ads or subscriptions. Great for beginners and wide distribution.

RSS.com: Affordable with IAB-certified analytics, programmatic ads, unlimited storage on paid plans, and strong distribution. Includes a free tier for niche/community shows.

Buzzsprout: Beginner-friendly with a 90-day free starter plan, AI tools for transcripts/show notes, and reliable analytics. Paid plans start low (Around $19/month).

Podbean: Free limited tier or paid plans with unlimited storage, built-in website, advertising marketplace, and live streaming. Good for monetization.

Libsyn: Long-established with strong distribution, dynamic ad insertion, video support, and analytics. Popular for professional creators.

Captivate: Unlimited podcasts/storage on all plans, strong monetization (low fees), and growth tools. Focuses on audience building.

Transistor: Clean interface for multiple shows, private podcasts, and team collaboration. Excellent analytics and no per-download fees on higher plans.

Simplecast: Professional tools, custom websites, and robust analytics. Suited for teams or branded shows.

Blubrry: Integrates well with WordPress (via PowerPress plugin) and offers solid analytics.

Acast: Strong monetization marketplace, dynamic ads, and global distribution. Good for growing shows.

RedCircle: Free core plan with ad monetization thresholds and easy tools.

Castos: Private/subscriber-focused podcasts, website integration, and membership features.

Beehiiv: Newer podcast tools with hosting, migration from other platforms, automatic distribution (to Apple, Spotify, etc.), and normalization features. Strong for newsletter creators.

Other notable options: Alitu (all-in-one production), Spreaker, Podcast.co, Hubhopper, Ausha, Megaphone (enterprise-level), CoHost, Fireside, and ART19.

Choose a platform with good analytics and easy clip creation (for social promo of scary excerpts). Most auto-distribute to Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Start with a free/low-cost option like Spotify for Creators or Buzzsprout if you're testing the waters. Apple Podcasts also maintains a partner directory of approved hosts/distributors.

Major Listening/Distribution Directories (Where Your Podcast Appears)

Once hosted, submit your RSS feed here for maximum reach. Horror content often performs well in genre-specific playlists or searches.

Apple Podcasts (primary directory with strong curation)

Spotify (huge audience, video support, personalized recommendations)

Amazon Music / Audible

YouTube Music / YouTube (for video podcasts)

Google Podcasts (via YouTube integration in some regions)

iHeart Radio, TuneIn, Pandora, Overcast, Castro, Pocket Casts, Castbox

Podcast Index (decentralized, supports Podcasting 2.0 features)

Others: Listen Notes (searchable database), Stitcher (now part of SiriusXM)

Horror shows often get featured in seasonal or genre playlists on these platforms.

Platforms and Methods for Appearing as a Guest on Someone Else's Podcast

Horror authors frequently guest on shows for interviews about their books, writing process, influences, or horror tropes. Many horror-specific podcasts welcome author guests.

General guesting platforms and directories:

MatchMaker.fm — Connects guests with hosts; filter by genre (including horror/fiction).

PitchPodcasts.com — Lists shows actively seeking guests, with horror categories.

Podchaser or Listen Notes — Searchable databases to find horror/book podcasts and contact hosts.

Social media (X/Twitter, Facebook groups like Horror Writers Association or podcast guest communities) and direct outreach via host websites/emails.

Horror-focused opportunities:

Submit short stories or scripts to anthology-style horror podcasts (they often pay small amounts and credit authors): NoSleep Podcast, Pseudopod, Creepy, The Dark Magazine Podcast, Nightmare Magazine Podcast, Knifepoint Horror, Thirteen Podcast, and others in the Simply Scary or BloodyFM networks.

Guest on interview/discussion shows like Writers of Horror, This Is Horror, Talking Scared, Books in the Freezer, Ladies of the Fright, or Dark Minds (many feature horror authors regularly).

Networks like Bloody Disgusting's BloodyFM or Simply Scary Podcasts Network often include author interviews or collabs alongside fiction.

Tips for guesting: Prepare a strong pitch (e.g., "New horror novel with " or "Tips for writing effective scares"). Check submission guidelines on podcast sites. Horror author podcasts like Writers of Horror are hosted on platforms such as Acast.

Additional Advice for Horror Authors

Genre-specific reach: Horror thrives in audio (atmospheric narration, sound design). Consider fiction-focused shows for story readings or interview shows for book promo. Many horror podcasts accept submissions year-round or seasonally.

Monetization: Most hosting platforms support ads, Patreon integration, or Apple/Spotify subscriptions once you hit listener thresholds.

Discovery: Promote via horror communities (e.g., Reddit's r/horrorlit, r/NoSleep), author newsletters, or cross-promos with other genre creators.

Trends in 2026 and beyond: Video podcasts (Spotify/YouTube), AI-assisted editing, and private/subscriber content are growing. Platforms like Beehiiv blend newsletters with podcasts.

This list covers the main options based on current popularity and features. Although not impossible to exhaustively list all of the options (new ones emerge regularly), it is massively time-consuming especially when taking into consideration that I'm updating hundreds of lists across a slew of subjects. However, the above represents the most widely used and accessible in the currrent marketplace.

Research pricing, storage limits, and distribution reach for your needs, and test a couple with a trial episode. If you're just starting, Spotify for Creators or Buzzsprout are low-barrier entry points.