melannen: Commander Valentine of Alpha Squad Seven, a red-haired female Nick Fury in space, smoking contemplatively (Default)
melannen ([personal profile] melannen) wrote2019-01-29 12:18 pm

on swindles and fandoms

so [personal profile] cesperanza's post about Multi-Level Marketing and monetizing fandom is still going around, and I keep wanting to put mostly-side-issue long comments on other people's posts, so here they are here instead.

I commented on the original post about how I felt like the correct comparison was not MLMs to fandom patreons (etc), but pyramid schemes to predatory publishers. The people who tell you how your novel will be a best-seller now that they've discovered your genius, and all you have to do is give them thousands of dollars for them to ship you thousands of copies of a badly-edited, badly-bound book for you to sell to your friends and family, they're the ones coercing writers to destroy their own social networks for other people's profit.

And in a lot of ways, the fandom monetizing methods actually inoculate against this - a member of a fan community who know about things like patreon and crowdfunding and kindle originals and legit self-publishing, who is friendly with other pro authors, who knows the histories of other people who've made the transitions and can chat with other people in the process and has things like beta-readers and knows that there's more to getting readers than just writing a thing - that person is way less likely to fall victim to a predatory publisher.

There's a lot of people misunderstanding MLMs in this discussion, too. Multi-Level Marketing has come to be used as a euphemism/synonym for pyramid scheme because calling something a pyramid scheme in the press is technically defamatory in the US unless you can prove it is one by the legal definition. But not all MLMs are pyramid schemes, only most of them (and nearly all of the trendy flash-in-the-pan ones).

An MLM is an organization where people recruit new people into the organization, and they get a percentage of their recruits' revenues in exchange.

In a classic pyramid scheme, this is literally all that happens. Person A says, "If you join and give me a $5 membership fee, you can recruit new people, and they'll give you their $5, and everyone they recruit will give you a percent of their $5, and before you know it you'll have hundreds coming in every day from new recruits far down the line, just like I do!" In that kind of scheme, as soon as new membership fees stop flowing in, the entire thing collapses.

Pyramid schemes are illegal in the US, but it's not the MLM structure that illegal, it's the fact that the main revenue source is the new member fees, rather than any actual value or profit.

There are non-pyramid scheme, reasonably legit MLMs, and the difference is: in a non-pyramid-scheme MLM, there is actually value being provided in exchange for the money that flows up, preferably at all levels. Even if no new sellers were recruited, and people just sold product, everybody would still be making money, and the organization would survive.

Lately, the most obvious way to tell the difference is that the more legit ones like Avon don't require new sellers to go into debt to start up - you sell from a catalog, or you don't have to pay for product unless it's sold, and you don't have to pay large fees for training or membership just to start selling - the training/set-up is free or a nominal cost for materials and travel. Also, in a sustainable MLM, the upper-level sellers are doing pretty intense mentoring/training/monitoring/support of the people under them, and are actually earning a lot of the money that flows up, because they want the people below them to succeed - it's a different structure but the same effect as money flowing up to management in a more standard structure. And nobody makes any money at all if the product doesn't sell, so usually there's incentive for the product to be something people want at a reasonable markup, and sellers can actually sell it.

There's still more risk to sellers and less chance of making a living wage, and often a fair amount of pressure tactics, but it's a reasonably workable business model long-term, and if people aren't making money, they can just quit with no big loss. (Really, it's just a more formalized version of how small home businesses sell by word-of-mouth in expanding social circles.) There was a recent Buzzfeed article about what Avon is up to lately that gives a pretty good view of how a non-scam MLM functions.

In a pyramid scheme, new sellers have to put up money up front, often for expensive training or something and are also often required to buy a very large amount of product on spec, which they can't return if they don't sell it. (This is very similar to the process of being "published" by a predatory publisher, and not essential to the MLM aspect.) This puts sellers under a huge amount of pressure just to make back their initial investment (and the vast majority of them don't), and generally forces people on higher levels to focus more on recruiting new sellers than mentoring existing ones, because nobody makes money on selling no matter how much mentoring is going on, because that's not the point of the thing, and since that's not the point, the product is probably shit and nobody can sell it anyway. (Often it's something like dietary supplements that's a swindle no matter how it's sold.) It's also why it's uniquely damaging to social relationships: you're not just selling to your friends, you're being coerced into actively swindling your friends, and usually before you've been in the thing for very long, you realize that, at some level, but you've invested so much you can't get out. It's poison all around.

MLMs are legal; pyramid schemes aren't. So the pyramid schemes have to have just enough of a 'product' to pretend they're a real MLM long enough to take the money and run, which makes them harder to talk people out of. And the problem isn't so much the MLM structure as that the whole thing's a swindle.

And we certainly have swindles in monetized fandom! Any method of making money can be turned into a swindle, by someone who wants to swindle people. We can probably all name several exciting chapters in the history of online fandom when fan swindlers have succeeded, for a little while at least.

And any method of making money can feel like a swindle if the people involved in it are just really bad at it (which also applies to a lot of v. small publishers who look predatory through sheer incompetence, but aren't actually making any money for themselves either.) We can all name situations like that too, probably.

And any profit-prioritizing corporation under late-stage capitalism is, at some level, built on a swindle, because our entire global economic system is currently built on a series of stacked swindles. So there's some stuff that does make me side-eye things like Patreon and Kofi, and what they try to promise people, even as fandom uses them more and more, but that's really pretty ancillary to the question of MLMs. And even at their worst, they don't require the initial outlay of capital to chain you to the swindle, or pressure you to pressure your friends to put themselves into the same level of debt as you.

So I'm still way more worried about predatory publishers going 'ooh, girls are selling fanfic now! Our fandom market's not limited to boys with no social support and WoW-with-the-numbers-filed-off epics!' or about homegrown swindles and for-pay fanfic sites than I am about people using crowdfunding or commissions to fill out that last couple of hundred dollars of rent. The real, ongoing problem with monetizing that destroys relationships is large corporations recruiting people to swindle other people for them, not individual fans looking for compensation for labor.

(The question of compensation for creative labor in general is an entirely different one.) (as is the question that's silently threaded through this whole discussions about helping needy people via pure charity vs. under a smokescreen of nominal 'earned payment', and whether that choice should be up to the helper or the helped.)(as is the question of to what extent patreon and company are themselves exploiting the fans who use them.)

(one of my cousins over christmas seemed to think I was anticapitalist or something, dunno what gave him that impression.)
recessional: a photo image of feet in sparkly red shoes (Default)

[personal profile] recessional 2019-01-30 07:49 pm (UTC)(link)
....the thing I trip on is the idea that fandom doesn't already participate and isn't totally riddled with "you're not getting paid so this isn't really valuable" dynamics.

Which I STRONGLY, STRONGLY feel it is and that this is expressed constantly in fannish entitlement and how people feel the right to dictate what people should/must/shouldn't write etc.

This is why I hardcore object to this characterization of this particular "gift economy" as so wonderfully sparkling healthy because TO BE FUCKING FRANK fandom does not act like it realizes it gets millions of dollars worth of free custom novels a year. At all.
minim_calibre: (Default)

[personal profile] minim_calibre 2019-01-30 08:53 pm (UTC)(link)
(Scattershot thoughts--I'm on a call and trying to both listen to the call and pay attention to important stuff like this and probably failing at both.)

I think the entitlement is a separate, but related issue, that will only get worse as we go further down the rabbit hole of potentially treating fanfic like a monetizable commodity. (FWIW, my pro writer friends still get that entitlement re: what they should/must/shouldn't write and complain about it all the time. )

Basically, and this is just my experience in fandom and everyone's fandom experience may vary, the bigger and more visible fandom has become, the lower the barriers to entry have become, the more fandom interactions have gone from smaller, more community-based ones to larger, more consumer-based ones (not that small = utopia, but it was different for me), the greater the sense of entitlement from readers.

I've managed to avoid a lot of this over the last few years by just avoiding writing much in megafandoms and sticking to old-school exchanges, most of which have a participant base best described as "old sticks in the mud like me" but I've seen it in the few cases where I've written popular pairings in large fandoms and it makes me tilt my head because it's so different from my pre-Web 2.0 megafandom experiences with popular pairings in large fandoms.

I don't think the gift economy model is all that healthy, either, but I also don't find that it adequately describes how I feel about fanfic as a form of expression largely free from the expectations of wage labor. Of course, even if I weren't on this call, I don't know that I'd be able to properly articulate my feelings on it, because they're tied into a lot of personal issues that are mine and mine alone. (Including how much I've grown to hate anything I love when it becomes paid labor because then it stops being mine on some level.) I think my best effort at articulation would be this: I enjoy having one environment in my life where the creation of something for the sheer love of creation is valued, without the expectation of compensation, even if it isn't valued enough.
recessional: a photo image of feet in sparkly red shoes (Default)

[personal profile] recessional 2019-01-30 09:08 pm (UTC)(link)

I have had, from day one, a very different fandom experience, yes, and one wherein the entitlement has been occasionally worse in smaller fandoms, so that even as a small fandom the Losers one stuck out hardcore as very atypical in its lack of pathology.

And given I know from fannish history that there was stuff like "I will physically block people from going to this chick's hotel room at this con because I hate what she writes" I . . . am sceptical about the universal nature of Less Entitlement Before. And I strongly do not actually see how a correlation can be drawn between some people asking for commissions/tips = more entitlement for written fanworks than it did or has inherently for drawn fanworks. (And all the arguments about "well but if you do fanworks for less than you should you create a pattern where other people are expected to also devalue it" apply as much if not more for doing free fanwork to spec, whether art or fic, and people do that plenty.)

Re pro-writer friends: oh I know. But at least they ALSO get advances and (once the advance is payed through) royalties and the people who actually read the book (ie consume the work given) have put down some form of payment for it.

Whereas when you do it for free you get all the same shit and, very possibly, nothing else. (As the pro-writers also get the same potential positive regard and feedback.)

I think the idea that there being a hat out or commissions purchasable will result into an absolute/immediate and inevitably slide into Everything Being Valued Only By Money is . . . an exaggerated one. And I think this because there is literally no other art-form in which this has happened, from music to theatre to visual art to . . . anything. There are always spaces wherein the creation of something for the love of it is still valued (and indeed some of them where it is the only thing given social value and where accepting filthy lucre would make you less worthy).

Amateur artists and creators are fantastic, amateur love is a perfectly good reason to do something, and in fact I've always found original writing really weird in its obsession with the idea that there's a harsh binary, and I haven't really had much time for it.

I do not think anyone who was going to value what you did period is going to magically stop valuing it because someone else does something similar but asks a commission price; anyone for whom the commission price suddenly makes the work valuable didn't actually value your work in the first place (and probably views all fanfic inherently as crap and is only reading Published Works anyway). hands

minim_calibre: (Default)

[personal profile] minim_calibre 2019-01-30 09:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Mine might have been partially different as I accidentally found myself in the infrastructure sections of fandom at the tail end of mailing lists/beginning of LJ. (A combination of new-to-fandom enthusiasm, an inability to say no, and the sporadic tech employment at the turn of the century meaning I had a lot of unstructured free time.)

("Sure! I have time to approve these submissions to the archive! "Absolutely, I'll join your listmod team!" "Sure, I can mod this community so you can step down! Sure, I can be an admin here so we can have people across time zones!")

Anyhow, all of that meant that the circles I ran in were the circles doing a lot of the grunt work, and it's possible that people doing the grunt work were less inclined to be pushy about shit. In my time in BtVS, where I was active all over the place, I only had two situations I'd classify as entitlement: one was the minor "will you be writing more?" on a completed series where literally everyone died, so that one was mostly funny, and the other was me writing something that had a couple of people beg me to never write anything like that again. But even then, they came back and said, before I could comment, that that was out of line an I should just ignore that comment.

Hell, even Supernatural was pretty mellow in terms of all that. Granted, I was on the gen side of the fence. We did have a lot of long, impassioned discussions about the morality of writing, but they tended to stay a lot more polite than I see these days. (Shared fandom histories for a lot of the players no doubt contributed to that.)

The few megafandom things I've written for public consumption, it's felt like half of the comments are what I should write next, how I could write sequels, and similar crap that I just do not want to engage with at all.

Amateur artists and creators are fantastic, amateur love is a perfectly good reason to do something, and in fact I've always found original writing really weird in its obsession with the idea that there's a harsh binary, and I haven't really had much time for it.

Do you think fan writing will be able to avoid the curse of original writing and the harsh binary? I mean, I hope so. I just don't have any faith in that.
recessional: a photo image of feet in sparkly red shoes (Default)

[personal profile] recessional 2019-01-30 09:38 pm (UTC)(link)
. . . so I was never in SPN because I kinda hate the show and on top of that it was adjacent to the really ugly burn up of a friendship, but I did have plenty of friends who were and any description of it and "mellow" in terms of reader entitlement kinda makes my brain hurt, tbh? What I saw second-hand was the true inheritor of the worst parts of HP fandom in its prime.

So yeah I think significant role here is played by different experiences. XD <3

Re the binary: Oh it's already breaking down even in the case of original writing, much to the dismay of some professional authors (I have been salty about Tobias Buckell sneering about NaNo participants as "tourists" to writing for years now and I will be salty until I die or he issues a specific apology) who really liked being Super Special because they had Printed Copies of their Books.

Because that's what created it, bluntly: the fact that printing technology was huge, difficult to use and super expensive, binding technology only moreso, and so you had a harsh difference with no real gradation between people who could print and widely distribute (those formally published by a publisher) and those who could not.

It didn't exist before that, and it's currently breaking down more and more given epublishing and self-publishing and so on, and a certain kind of author is very upset by that and also can kiss my ass.

So yeah I think it's entirely possible, and I think it's more possible the more people point at the binary and go "this is bullshit." Bluntly.
Edited 2019-01-30 21:40 (UTC)
minim_calibre: (Default)

[personal profile] minim_calibre 2019-01-30 09:47 pm (UTC)(link)
I should clarify that it was mellow compared to what I've seen since Web 2.0/Tumblr fandom! Which, hey. My fandom after that was Sherlock. (Though even Sherlock fandom had a honeymoon phase where people were not flaming assholes to each other all the time.)

So yeah I think significant role here is played by different experiences. XD <3

Yeah, the bulk of my time in SPN was in the early days of it, so pre-AO3, and I really was in the gen corner of it for most of that and only saw a lot of the morality discussions when people who wrote both gen and Wincest were having them. (I watched it until 2013, but realize now that I faded out of the fandom in 2010, which was around when it started to go off the rails in terms of fandom.)
recessional: a photo image of feet in sparkly red shoes (Default)

[personal profile] recessional 2019-01-30 10:06 pm (UTC)(link)
.....yyyyeah the people I was close to were from-the-premier watchers and the first rounds of Hideous Ugly I saw were on LJ. XD I mean total disclosure: often I saw it sort of at one remove, because what I saw was the friend going "oh wow look at that blow-up over there, I am so glad I'm not in the middle of THAT!", as it also had been with HP before it, but.

I definitely think it's always possible to find those self-regulating corners (I even know people who had a happy and non-dramatic time IN SHERLOCK FANDOM!), but . . . yeah.

I mean also: I watched people being hyper-entitled assholes when I was a teenager working in Animorphs and DBZ fandom on the Pit and also on private message boards, in more or less exactly the same way they still are. For me that issue is a super-evident case of "there's nothing new under the sun", you know? It's a thread that has been there in every single fandom space (and original slash writing space to be fair, though SLIGHTLY less there because it being original fic the idea that we were all somehow Aspiring Pros because that's the only kind of writer you could BE did allow some wiggle room) I've ever been in.