Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Book Expo America’

Jun 8

2 Comments

BEA 2012: Wrap-up and Programming Suggestions for 2013


NOTE: This is the fourth (and final, I promise!) post on BEA 2012. Unlike my last three posts (here, here, and here), this doesn’t re-cap the expo’s last day. Instead, I’ll try to collate my thoughts and offer concrete, workable suggestions for how to improve the BEA Blogger Conference and BEA programs for next year. And after this, we’ll back to our regularly scheduled weekly programming, I promise!

Thinking back on BEA 2012, I realize how ultimately disappointing the event was for me. Sure, it was great to see old friends and meet new ones. While that’s the most important part of such events, it isn’t enough to make up for programming that falls flat. Especially, when it didn’t have to: both the BEA Book Blogger Conference and the expo itself could easily have been amazing, insightful, informative experiences. But sour grapes don’t help anyone, and so what I’m going to do is make some concrete, practical, and workable suggestions for how Reed Exhibitions can improve their program for next year.

These suggestions come in two parts: the BEA Book Blogger Conference, and Genre Programming at BEA.

BEA Book Blogger Conference: Get an Advisory Panel of Real Book Bloggers

The biggest complaint I have heard about the BEA Book Blogger Conference is that it evidenced blatant ignorance and disinterest in book blogger needs. Considering that the conference is supposedly aimed right at us, that’s a damning criticism. And while I know that Reed Exhibitions tried to collect insights through both a survey and a focus group before the conference (full disclosure: I participated in that focus group), the fact that they missed the mark so widely suggests that something more concrete is needed.

So here’s my suggestion: Reed Exhibitions should put together a Book Blogger Advisory Panel. A small group of book bloggers, no more than six or seven, who would be able to weigh in and help construct the program for the event. Essentially, let the most qualified and interested people create the program. If such a panel were given actual teeth, if it had real power to affect programming and were more than a rubber-stamp body there to give Reed’s poor programming a measure of legitimacy, it would go a long way to both improving the quality of the BEA Book Blogger Conference and its brand amongst book bloggers.

It is not difficult to identify experienced, knowledgeable book bloggers. Coordinating communication is a snap: they are all very well connected through their blogs, Twitter, Facebook, etc. In fact, they are right now using those (public) platforms to loudly criticize the Book Blogger Conference. To set up conference calls, an e-mail group, etc. is the work of several minutes. And even though I can’t speak for everyone, I suspect that many book bloggers would – given real influence – be happy to take part in such an advisory panel in exchange for a free pass to BEA and perhaps a nice dinner in NYC during the event itself. Essentially negligible cost.

Such a panel would also have an added advantage for Reed Exhibitions: it would give them the opportunity to make their programming decisions transparent. The most significant and dangerous criticism I’ve seen (and offered myself, actually) is that Reed Exhibitions puts the interests of their exhibitors above those of their paying conference attendees. By getting an advisory panel and giving it real influence, Reed can better communicate to the community the practical constraints within which the Book Blogger Conference operates. That kind of transparency mitigates the long-term threat of such criticism, and would earn a far greater degree of trust and respect within the community.

If you think this kind of Advisory Panel is a decent idea, then here’s what I suggest: let Reed Exhibitions know. Reach out to them:

Community/BlogWorld & BEA Bloggers Conference Joe Vella
Community Manager/BlogWorld and BEA Bloggers Conference
jvella@reedexpo.com
Twitter @beabloggers
Event Management Steve Rosato
Event Director
srosato@reedexpo.com

Courtney Muller
Senior Vice President
cmuller@reedexpo.com

BEA Conference/Education Programming: Add a Genre Track

For the BEA programming itself, my major suggestion is to add a genre track, with programming profiled around the particular issues of different categories of fiction. Speculative fiction wasn’t the only genre poorly represented on the program: mystery, romance, basically anything that wasn’t YA got ignored. So my suggestion would be to take a look at the least popular (least attended) parts of the program, and replace them next year with a track modeled on this year’s graphic novel programming.

Offering 3 – 4 sessions focusing on each genre over the course of a three day trade show is perfectly manageable. Every year, speculative fiction puts on several multi-day professional (i.e. without fan features such as cosplay and the like) conferences devoted exclusively to the genre. I think BEA can manage something interesting, particularly in that it attracts a large audience that most genre cons don’t: booksellers and librarians. There are many topics that can be addressed and which would be of practical interest to booksellers and librarians, and which would definitely appeal to Reed’s exhibitors. Consider these off-the-cuff suggestions:

The Hottest Science Fiction and Fantasy in 2013 Modeled on Graphic Novel Reporter’s excellent graphic novel panel, I see no reason why this format couldn’t be extended to other genres. This one would appeal to booksellers and librarians because it gives them compact insight into what to stock and what to focus on in their handselling. And it would appeal to publishers for the exact same reason.
Not Just for Boys: Women and Science Fiction This one could be a panel discussion by booksellers, librarians, and authors devoted to the subject of how to get women into science fiction. Apart from doing some good (i.e. promoting women in speculative fiction, and speculative fiction to women), it’d also be useful to booksellers and librarians because it gives insight into how to actually sell speculative fiction to their statistically largest audience. What’s not to like about that?
Engaging Fandom: Getting Science Fiction/Fantasy Buyers to Come in the Door This one could be a panel discussion devoted to in-store events designed around bringing speculative fiction fans into the bookstore/library. Whether it’s “gaming nights” or signing practices, or any other type of event, there are lots of interesting techniques that people are using to attract this audience of frequent buyers (who, BTW, also tend to be heavy Amazon users). Since it again would offer practical advice to booksellers/librarians, I think it would be very valuable.
Small Is Beautiful: Exciting Books in Science Fiction/Fantasy Small Press I understand why BEA is not traditionally a good event for small press (it costs too much), but it would be great to give small press publishers a chance to talk about what they are doing with booksellers and librarians. And if BEA were to put together a panel of small press publishers talking about what they’re doing, and how booksellers and librarians can get value out of it, it would not only be interesting, but might net Reed Exhibitions at least one or two new exhibitors.

Smarter people than me can come up with many more topics like these (this year’s Tor panel was good, for example). From a practical standpoint, they offer value to BEA’s attendee audience (booksellers, librarians, the press, etc.) and they support the primary goal of BEA’s publisher exhibitors: selling more books. Over the past several years I have seen the genre exhibitors gradually dwindle at BEA, and when I ask people why, they tell me that “BEA is no longer really relevant”. This might be a method for Reed to rebuild that relevance.

If this is the kind of programming you’d like to see at BEA, what I suggest is that you reach out to BEA to let them know:

Conference/Education Programming Sally Dedecker
Director of Education
sdedecker@aol.com

Maggie Donovan
Conference Coordinator
mdonovan@reedexpo.com
Twitter @BookExpoAmerica
Event Management Steve Rosato
Event Director
srosato@reedexpo.com

Courtney Muller
Senior Vice President
cmuller@reedexpo.com

Hopefully, the programming of both events will improve next year. In the meantime, that concludes my BEA reporting. It’s been a busy week, and I’m off to get a desperately needed cup of coffee.

Jun 5

13 Comments

BEA 2012 (Day 0): The Book Blogger Conference


NOTE: Since I’m spending this week at BEA, my plan is to post a daily recap of my perceptions of this year’s event. Today – Tuesday – is the first day of the expo itself, so here is my review of yesterday’s Book Blogger Conference.

Several weeks ago, I wrote (here and here) about Reed Exhibitions’ stumbles and strategic missteps in the run-up to the 2012 Book Blogger Conference. Now that the event is over, a brief follow-up might be helpful.

The Weaknesses of BEA Book Blogger Con

On the whole, I was quite disappointed. I can look past communications screw ups (provided they get fixed). I can shrug off logistical blunders the day of an event. I can even tune out the occaisional poor speaker. But, as feared, Reed’s earlier missteps have proven where the organization’s priorities lie…and book bloggers do not make the cut.

The day started with an author/blogger networking breakfast. Tables were set up, and authors went on a “speed dating” trip…rotating between each table every fifteen or so minutes. The same setup was repeated for lunch. Speculative fiction – and generally fiction beyond YA – was woefully underrepresented. The morning literally had none, while the afternoon offered only two speculative fiction authors. While I was personally disappointed by SF’s absence, this part of the program did not bother me. It worked reasonably well, and likely provided value for the conference’s other attendees. I don’t mind being pitched when I expect it, and when the rest of my conference is goign to be full of insight into blogging practice.

But then we got to the keynote, which was presented by Jennifer Weiner, author of The Next Best Thing: A Novel. Weiner was an interesting (and for many book bloggers surprising) choice of keynote speaker: she is a popular author first, and a blogger second. What could she have to say that is both relevant to book bloggers and significant? In fairness, Weiner gave a good speech, and she made a herculean effort to focus on blogging. Yet it was clear to everyone in the room that she was there for one reason: to promote her upcoming book. The closing speaker, Jenny Lawson (a.k.a. the Bloggess), at least had a closer connection to the community…but she, too, was there to promote her recent book Let’s Pretend This Never Happened: (A Mostly True Memoir).

This was a common theme in much of the Book Bloggers Conference’s programming: it was skewed to align with the interests of authors/publishers in promoting their books to the book blogging community. I understand the motivation, and I understand the temptation: after all, publishers spend a lot of money on booths at BEA. The breakfast, the keynote, (to a lesser extent) the panel which followed, lunch, and the closing presentations all were oriented around pitching to the book blogging community. I for one regret having – apparently – spent $135 to be not-so-subtly pitched.

The Good amidst the Bad

Yet that being said, the day was not without value. Out of seven elements of the program, there were two which actually focused on the audience’s interest. The afternoon featured two breakout sessions, where we could each choose panels to sit in on that addressed either monetizing blogs, engaging community, critical review craft, or the publisher/blogger relationship. I sat in on the panels on monetizing and engaging community, and both were actually on-topic, interesting, and insightful. I walked away with at least one significant insight from each of these two panels. Had this ratio been maintained for the other program features, I would have been quite satisfied.

The Verdict: Reed Exhibitions Either Doesn’t Care About or Understand Book Bloggers

Unfortunately, $135 is a lot to spend for two insightful hours out of nine total. What I hoped for from the event was an in-depth discussion of blogging practice, offering relevant expertise from people who know whereof they speak. There was plenty of such expertise in the room. But – with the exception of the two panels I mentioned – there was terribly little on the program itself.

If this were an isolated incident – a programming snafu – it would be unfortunate, but reasonably acceptale. But this was not an isolated mistake: it is yet another indication of the conference organizer’s condescending attitude towards book bloggers. It leaves me to wonder: would critics for national news organizations get such treatment? Somehow, I think it unlikely. Other book bloggers, notably Read React Review and The Reading Ape, saw this coming. And I am sad to say that their fears were proven prescient.

If you are a book blogger, and if you were at the 2012 BEA Blogger Conference, you might have a different opinion. I know some people thought the conference was a valuable and enjoyable experience. But for me, it failed to provide the concrete insights I was looking for, and unless I see a dramatic improvement in Reed’s communications and programming, then I will skip it next year. Better to save my time and treasure for BEA itself.

Apr 6

4 Comments

BEA’s Follow-up to the “Press Pass” Controversy


As I wrote yesterday, Reed Exhibitions (the organizers of Book Expo America) stirred up bit of controversy by unexpectedly and summarily rejecting press passes for a large swathe of book bloggers. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many folks took to their keyboards with blog posts and tweets questioning both Reed’s decision and its handling (thanks everyone!). Today, BEA show director Steve Rosato posted an official response to this controversy over on The BEAN, and I urge everyone to take a look here.

Looking at this response, I have somewhat mixed opinions. As I said yesterday, my concerns were with the transparency of Reed’s criteria, the timing of their communication, and the broader implications suggested by both. So how does the official response score on these points?

First, I have to give them credit for recognizing that the timing/process of these press pass rejections was unfortunate. Since many bloggers (most of whom do it as a labor of love) have already shelled out cash for hotels and flights, it is encouraging that Rosato says:

For that we are very sorry and we apologize to those individuals (and are working with those individuals to resolve amicably in a way that will make sure they are able to still attend BEA).

What this means concretely, I don’t know. But it is an encouraging sign, and I’m pleased that BEA was able to both recognize that a mistake had been made, and to proactively try to address it. How they will do so, it is likely too early to know, but nonetheless this is encouraging.

On the transparency front, the post goes a little ways to help explain the criteria according to which press passes are issued. On the one hand, it is helpful that BEA lays out some of their criteria. It is a valid, and worthwhile step in the direction of transparency. And yet, I don’t think they’ve managed to actually achieve meaningful and helpful clarity.

Reading these criteria I don’t know if I qualify or not, and I imagine many book bloggers are in the same boat. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what does and doesn’t work about these “standards”:

BEA Criteria My Comments
No one under 18 years of age. This is great! It is clear, unequivocal, and absolutely unambiguous.
Professional editorial coverage of BEA in trade magazines, electronic media (TV, Radio, etc.), blogs, periodicals, etc. What does this mean? By “professional” does that mean that the journalist needs to be paid for it? Or does “professional” in this case imply a certain level of quality/professionalism? Would bloggers – most of whom are unpaid – be disqualified by this criteria?
Subject Matter & Focus A good, common sense criterion. If the journalist doesn’t write about books or publishing, why should they go to BEA?
Content Update Frequency A good criterion to judge on, but what’s the cut-off? Does someone who writes a monthly column not make the cut? What about (like me) a weekly columnist? What matters more: frequency or regularity?
Community & Traffic Also a reasonable criterion. Someone who is only read by their pet cat might not be right for a press pass. But what level of readership sets the cut-off and according to whose numbers? The bloggers’ own? comScore? Nielsen Online? Alexa? Compete? For print, you’ve got the ABC, MRI, and a host of other sources. I know book bloggers with the kind of traffic that I’d love who got rejected while others (much smaller) got through.

Overall, I’m encouraged by BEA’s response to this issue. They’ve at least recognized that a problem exists, and are trying to address the community’s concerns. But if BEA wants to maintain good relations with the book blogging world, I’d suggest that they make their criteria less ambiguous.

BEA Press Pass Standards Still a bit Translucent

Transparency and translucency aren’t the same at all, and as it stands I find their criteria a little translucent…which is still an improvement over opaque.

May 31

1 Comment

Representing Genres at BookExpoAmerica 2011


So last week was pretty fun, what with BEA 2011 and the Book Bloggers Convention (BBC) both taking place in New York. This was my second year attending BEA, although my first as a blogger. While I did manage to post some brief thoughts last week, I wanted to take a little time to discuss a disconnect I noticed during both events.

Genre, Genre Everywhere…

Everywhere I turned at BEA and at the BBC, genre was plainly visible. Whether it was mystery, thrillers, horror, science fiction, fantasy, paranormal romance, steampunk – every major publisher was promoting the heck out of genre titles. Even those who traditionally keep their toes out of genre waters seemed to dabbling, with “magical realism” or “magical romance” offerings.

Particularly noticeable was the degree to which young adult and middle-grade publishers were aligning their publicity machines with speculative sensibilities. While there are few YA/MG publishers who specialize within science fiction, fantasy, or horror, almost all of the galleys handed out at BEA had some fantastical element – however sleight. Many of these galleys were riding the post-apocalyptic/dystopian wave currently cresting, but nonetheless it was clear that publishers feel that kids read books about monsters, fairies, and ghosts.

…and Not a Home for It

Despite the ubiquity of science fiction, fantasy, and horror titles, there was a noticeable absence of niche booths. The major publishers had consolidated their imprints’ such that niche-market imprints were exhibited under their corporate umbrella. This trend was universal across the major publishers, and I would argue that it failed to serve the niche imprints well. As a general rule, it made it harder (though not impossible) to find people at the booths who could cogently discuss either the galleys being handed out, or the niche imprint’s other speculative titles. Don’t get me wrong – the Javitz floor was full of niche imprint editors, publicists, salespeople, and authors. But they had other things to do there than man their imprints’ booths, and so the folks stuck “back at base” ended up getting mobbed.

There are – of course – notable exceptions. Prometheus Books in particular stands out for how they handled their PYR imprint. Not only was the PYR side of the booth well-supported, but even PYR’s non-fiction cousins were well-prepared to talk about PYR’s list. That ability to cross-promote books across imprint lines was unique on the Javitz floor, at least from what I could see.

A Lack of Genre Programming…

Equally startling – from my perspective – was the lack of science fiction, fantasy, and horror programming. While there were some “author buzz” sessions, outside of the YA and middle-grade segment, there was a startling lack of BEA sessions devoted to discussing trends in SF/F/H. Instead, just about every session focused on one aspect or another of digital publishing.

Are booksellers and librarians no longer interested in learning about trends in particular genres? Or has BEA gone astray by focusing too heavily on promoting individual books and particular authors? I for one suspect the latter: while it’s great to hear about author X and their new genre book Y, there is clearly a place for a discussion of the aisles that by some counts, are the most frequented in any bookstore/library. Is BEA that place? Judged by the conversations on the floor with booksellers and librarians: certainly. Judged by the programming set up by BEA’s organizers? Not so much.

…Especially at the Book Blogger Convention

Even more startling was the paucity of niche programming at the second-annual Book Blogger Convention. Don’t get me wrong, this was an excellent event – and one which I cannot recommend strongly enough to anyone who wishes to attend next year. As a relative newcomer to the world of book blogging, I walked away from the one-day BBC with insights and relationships just as valuable as those I developed during the four-day BEA. But the genres represented at the BBC both within the audience and on the BBC’s programming were surprising.

First, the BBC’s audience struck me as primarily focused on romance and YA. That probably shouldn’t come as a big surprise, considering the size of the romance and kidlit blogospheres respectively. And while my own speculative predilections might bias me, I think the SF/F/H genres generally don’t slouch when it comes to online representation. Heck, just a couple of weeks ago I mentioned the awesome list of SF/F review blogs curated by Grasping for the Wind. Were so few speculative bloggers able to attend BBC? For whatever reason, we were thin on the ground in the audience on Friday. Perhaps as a consequence of this skewing of the BBC’s audience, speculative fiction didn’t get much representation in the programming. For example, the “niche blogging” panel had one speculative fiction representative, compared to four YA bloggers. And during the (incredibly valuable) publicist panels, only mainstream or YA publishers were represented.

Representing Speculative Fiction at BEA and the BBC

Despite all of this, both BEA and the BBC were useful for different reasons. BEA remains a great place to get new galleys and chat with industry professionals about books and the industry. Plus, it’s always fun to meet authors and get books signed. The BBC was useful because it allowed me to learn more about book blogging, to share techniques and best practices with other book bloggers who’ve been at it for longer than I have. Would both events have been better for more speculative programming? Overall, yes. Consolidating for cost purposes makes sense, but ultimately it’s a balancing act between being penny wise and pound foolish. Hopefully, they’ll nail the balancing act next year.

%d bloggers like this: