On Jane of Dear Author Writing as Jen Frederick

Posted March 26, 2015 by Holly in Discussions, News | 38 Comments

In 2013 I discovered new adult author Jen Frederick. Her first book was problematic for me, but I absolutely loved her second. Over the last two years I’ve read most of her other works. I also followed her on Twitter and exchanged a few reviewer/author emails with her. Based on her familiarity with authors online, and the community as a whole, I suspected she was an author or blogger writing under a pseudonym. Yesterday, Jane Litte of Dear Author confirmed my suspicions when she came out as best-selling author Jen Frederick.

The response from the DA readership has mostly been positive. The comments on the article are all along the lines of “Awesome! Go you!” or they were up until about 175, which is when I stopped reading them). There was some anger and confusion on Twitter, but it wasn’t until an anonymous author posted at The Passive Voice that any real dissent was brought out into the open. The majority of comments on that article have been overwhelmingly negative toward Jane/Jen. I’ve seen claims elsewhere that the angry commentors at TPV are just the “Pro-EC crowd” attacking Jane and being jealous because she’s selling better than they are. I don’t really agree with that.

The fact is, Jane deceived a lot of people. They have the right to be angry about that.

Jane emailed me a few days before her confession went live to tell me she was Jen Frederick. Prior to that, as I said above, I suspected Frederick was a blogger or author, but I did not suspect Jane. To be honest, that Jen and Jane are the same person has no bearing on my enjoyment of her books. While I found some of them problematic, the fact is I absolutely loved Unspoken. I still love it, even knowing that Jen is Jane (and vice verse).

As Jane said in her post, she wanted to be judged on her own merits as an author, not as Jane Litte writing a book. I can understand and even support that. For years authors, bloggers and readers have criticized Jane for her reviews and commentary; often saying she has no knowledge of what it is to be an author, so she can’t/shouldn’t comment. There are many who don’t agree with the politics at DA, and I can see why Jane wouldn’t want her position as a prominent blogger to influence sales of her books one way or the other.

That Jane chose to publish her novels under a pseudonym, and keep that pseudonym a secret, doesn’t bother me at all. Authors often write under pens names – sometimes multiple pen names – and no one bats an eye. I know many bloggers who are also writers (aspiring and published). I know many authors (aspiring and published) who are also bloggers. I don’t see that it matters one way or another.

But I think Jane made two huge mistakes.

First she kept her secret for far too long. Once she’d published a book or two, and did well enough to know whether it was something she could continue, she should have come forward at Dear Author. That she decided to publish her books isn’t a big deal to me. That she chose to publish many, which ended up as bestsellers, including co-writing books with another best-selling author, which were picked up by a traditional publisher and optioned for movie rights, is harder to swallow.

Her second mistake – and this is the big one , in my opinion- was in creating a full, separate identity for Jen Frederick. A website? Sure. A Twitter or Facebook profile where she could announce information about her books? Absolutely. But Jane took it a step farther. She befriended many authors, bloggers and readers. She joined private author loops. She commiserated  over reviews, and the writing process, and publishing, and any other number of things, all while she was also what many refer to as the Watchdog of the romance community.

I don’t see anything wrong with Jane and Jen being the same person. I do find it harder to swallow that she deceived – whether deliberately or not – the entire romance community. Would authors have been as open and honest with her if they’d known? Should they have been open and honest with her, considering her position at Dear Author?

I do not think Jane set out to purposely deceive anyone. I also don’t think – as some have speculated – she created this author persona as a way to glean information for the purpose of reporting at Dear Author. Nor do I think she used the information she was privy to as an author to hurt any fellow authors in her role as a blogger. But now everything she and Dear Author stood for is suspect.

I also think, had it been another blogger who did exactly what Jane did, Dear Author would have jumped all over them. The community feels deceived and I understand why. More importantly, Jane’s credibility as a forthright blogger and as an author, is being questioned. Considering the amount of works she’s done for the good of the community as a whole, I’m really sad about that. I’m also a little disappointed that she did something I know she would have questioned someone else for. It’s especially frustrating considering her stance on things like this in the past. For example, the disclosure she included when another author reviewed Slave to Sensation by Nalini Singh at Dear Author.

DA Reviewer Disclosure

Of course, I haven’t even touched on the ethical questions this situation raises. Like the fact there were several mentions of Jen Frederick books at Dear Author, including Kati’s “Best of 2014” post, along with a mention in a Daily Deals post and an “If You Like” post, wherein Unspoken was recommended to those who like military roms. None of those are really Jane herself promoting her own work, but naturally it makes her claim that she kept the two separate a lie. A small one? Sure. But a lie nonetheless.

There’s also the fact that she was contracted with Berkley while still reviewing Berkley books. Did she positively review books from her publisher because they were her publisher? Probably not. But again, had she disclosed the relationship it wouldn’t be a question now.

For my part, I don’t plan to stop reading Jen Frederick’s books. But I do think she (as Jane and Jen), and Dear Author both, are a little tarnished now. In the end it comes down to trust. Jane broke ours. It’s as simple as that.

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

38 responses to “On Jane of Dear Author Writing as Jen Frederick

  1. Jen

    I feel bad about the whole situation. I can imagine she got stuck in this lie that she created and then the longer it went on the harder it was to tell the truth. But it’s problematic still. I don’t know, I still trust her and her site to review with integrity. I don’t read her books and I probably still won’t because they’re not my cuppa, but I don’t know that my opinion would change if I did. I can see why others wouldn’t though.

    • I’m sure it is a matter of not knowing how to tell after going so long without.

      I think my biggest frustration with the entire situation is how the hurt and mistrust so many are feeling is being brushed aside by Jane/DA supporters. Do I think Jane is a malicious bitch who intended to screw everyone over? No. I really don’t.

      But the transparency issue is a real one. And people are entitled to feel betrayed and frustrated, whether on a personal or professional level.

      • Jen

        I don’t know Jane personally, but I’m guessing this is an issue of her trying to have it all. She likes her blog and wanted to keep that going, and then she found she really liked being an author and wanted to be able to participate in everything that comes along with that. The problem is those two things are, not in opposition, but have points of conflict. She really couldn’t have it all, at least not anonymously, and still treat everyone on all sides of the transaction honestly and respectfully. So naturally, it’s led to a loss of trust from all corners.

      • Yes, yes, yes, this!!!

        Kat @BookThingo says something about how she still trusts Jane because a decade interactions is not erased for her by this one thing–and I get that point too, because I myself trust Jane implicitly on the Ellora’s Cave matter–but to say that no wrong was done? Well.

  2. This is REALLY well written. I was one of the people, as a reader and former blogger, who was like “WHOA! Awesome!!!” I didn’t really think any further than that. I had no idea about the author loops, any of that, and I feel you capture exactly WHY people are upset. I appreciate that.

  3. I quit visiting DA much around about 2012 or 2013, oddly enough, when their primary focus seemed to shift from all sorts of romance genres to NA and motorcycle romance. I rarely noticed reviews of books I wanted to read anymore, since those genres aren’t my bag. Now that shift in focus seems…suspect, I guess.

    • To be honest, I don’t visit DA on a regular basis. I subscribe to them in my feed reader, but mostly I just skim. I discovered many, many years ago that my tastes are pretty much the polar opposite of everyone else at DA.

      I haven’t really noticed a shift in what they review or promote, but I don’t pay enough attention for it to have registered. That’s a complaint I’ve heard from many, though.

    • Jen

      I actually don’t read DA daily either. It’s in my feed reader and I skim it to see if any titles jump out at me, but honestly there’s only one reviewer whose tastes sometimes intersect my own. I do also find the news posts valuable because they link to some really interesting stuff, and I like the somewhat academic discussions that happen because I’m a nerd and love that stuff. But one big reason I actually pulled back from DA a little a few years ago is the interactions with the author/reviewer AJH that are referenced above. That whole situation felt icky to me because it felt like the community turned on him (I say “he” because I’m pretty sure that’s how he referred to himself) quickly and it was off putting and exclusionary to me. I was left either feeling like DA was jerky for letting this guy come on board and then turning on him, or else like there was something going on behind the scenes that I didn’t understand. Either way it left a bad taste in my mouth.

      So while I’m not as up in arms about this situation, I guess DA was already a little tarnished for me in the past.

  4. animegirl31

    For me the big thing is the second mistake you mentioned. I’m perfectly okay with her being a published authors, I’ve been blogging for enough time that I saw the early boom of Bloggers-turned-authors from a few years back and that’s really not problematic at all,

    The fact she didn’t came out sooner, that she created this whole other persona and interacted with authors and bloggers and industry people as this other person for a few years? that is kinda crazy.

    Also, you are absolutely right, Dear Author would have been all over this taking the stance of the offended reader/blogger because thats kind of the position they take (which is their right, and I’m not saying the ALWAYS take that position, but they often do).

    But that’s as far as I’ll go, I have never read her books because they just don’t appeal to me. And it will be sad to see her reputation as both author and blogger called into question now, but she can of made her own bed there.

  5. JenM

    Excellent post and I totally agree. I like DA and read it pretty much every day. This won’t stop me from continuing to visit there, but I have to say that I’m surprised that Jane, of all people, didn’t see the inherent conflict in participating in those author loops without letting everyone know who she was. I imagine a lot of romance authors are feeling really betrayed right now.

  6. erinf1

    I’ve been following this “situation” and I guess, I can’t see what all the brouhaha is about. It seems like every one is “hurt and angry” b/c Jane didn’t disclose every detail of her life to the internet world at large? The few examples that people are touting as the “smoking guns”… the berkley book, the mentions of her books by other people and not herself and who didn’t know it was her… all on a *free* reader blog, it’s a stretch. This isn’t a business, there wasn’t any “insider trading”, it’s a free service to an online community about books. As someone completely outside the blogging and writing world, I’m feeling… so what? She is known to the blog world under a pseudonym, she wrote a book under another. She kept them completely separate. To me, all of the finger pointing and accusations are petty. in fact, it’s like people are gleefully finding reasons to finally say all of the spiteful things they were saying behind her back. Very high school dramatics to me. And full “disclosure”, I have absolutely no connection, loyalty, second cousin or interest in this drama. Just an outsider observing and thinking that absolutely none of you are safe from the online dramatics. Just make sure that none of you do anything questionable since the self right soap boxes are so handy nowadays.

    • erinf1

      rereading this, it’s much harsher than I intended. I guess I’m just tired of seeing these “gasp and pearl clutching” posts. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts, feelings and actions. And I do mean *everyone*.

    • It is a business. She makes money off the blog. So no there in no reason for her give her info. ‘Jane’ isn’t her real name. The issue comes from creating ‘jane’ (which I would assume is the real her but who knows) and then creating ‘jen’ to sell books (without Jane’s baggage).

      It is as shady as the author with low sells creating another name and not owing up to being lowsellsally. Maybe you hate her books and you wouldn’t have purchased the ‘debut’ author if you had known they were the same person. So you the reader get screwd.

      Not to mention the authors she spoke with on loops who never ever would have conversed, helped or been friends with Jane the blogger but embraced Jen thd newbie author. If she was going to continue to honestly review, she owed it to her readers (of book & blog) to disclose her Jane personality was the same human as Jen.

      The blog and person, who always said they were honest, called for transparency on her blog and endorsed the idea authors needed to understand readers had a right to their opinion. Only when it came to her dealing with reviews, she hid, buried the ‘mean girl’ badge she wore with pride and created gentle Jen. So very hypocritical and taints the rep of her blog

    • @Erinf1 You’re right, Dear Author is a free reader blog, in the sense that we don’t have to pay a fee to read it. But Sybil is right that it’s a business. When they started accepting ads, using affiliate links and hosting sponsors, they moved from the realm of “passionate book bloggers” to “professional reader blog.” Perhaps that isn’t as big a jump for you as it is to the rest of us in the community, but the fact is, Dear Author makes money. How much is not my business and has no bearing on this conversation or the situation as a whole, but it’s a fact nonetheless.

      You say it doesn’t matter that she mentioned her book in a daily deals spot, but Berkley is the publisher of that book (they bought the rights) and also a sponsor of the Dear Author site and the Smart Bitches site (podcasts, sidebar ads, etc). That’s a clear conflict of interest. Not only that, but Jane makes a small referral fee from Amazon and Barnes and Noble when readers click through and buy books from her site.

      By listing her book on her site as a daily deal, she brought it to the attention of the readership of Dear Author, which numbers in the thousands. If each of those readers (and let’s be real, that isn’t going to be the case, but bear with me for the sake of keeping the math simple) clicked through and bought the book, that put money in Jane’s pocket in two ways: 1 as the author and 2 as the owner of the blog with a referral fee.

      Plus it got her name (and that of her writing partner) into the hands (eyes? brains? heh) of readers that may not have heard of her otherwise. People love a good deal. Readers in particular. Especially romance readers who are involved in the community and read a crapton of books. I’m always looking for new authors, but as I read 15-25 books per month, I can’t afford to buy every book I see. Trying a new author at a discounted price is always a bonus.

      We, as a community and readership, know we can go to DA for daily book deals with a personal note attached to help us decide if we want to spend our money on them (discounted price tag or not). When Jane listed her own book as a Daily Deal and didn’t disclose her relationship to her co-author (as friends) or herself (as the author), she mucked up the waters.

      She makes no disclaimer, and therefore isn’t transparent in her dealings as a blogger or author. Is it the end of the world? No. Should she be tarred and feathered for it? No. But she should be held accountable. Someone should say to her, as she has said to others, “That was not right. You had an obligation to your readers as both a blogger and author to disclose your relationships.”

      This is not an unreasonable expectation. I don’t expect Jane to lay bare her life for the sake of the internet. I do not expect to see pictures of her children, or copies of her bank statements, or, hell, anything she doesn’t wish to share. But I do want to know my dealings with her – as Jen Frederick and Jane Litte – are transparent. I want to be give the choice to decide for myself whether I want to read the book, or buy the book, or talk about the book, based on all the facts. I want to go to her blog and know that she’s contracted with a publisher and that may cause conflict of interest when she talks about certain books. A lie by omission and all that.

      And frankly, I don’t think that’s an unreasonable expectation. Not especially considering Jane and Sarah’s stance on this situation if it weren’t Jane and Sarah standing in the spotlight.

      (I’m being a rebel and not proofreading. Forgive any glaring mistakes.)

      • Two other quick points:

        1) I don’t think this is a “pearl-clutch and gasp” post. The fact is, readers, bloggers and authors feel betrayed by the lie Jane perpetuated. That’s their right, whether you agree with it or not. I have seen some of the more ridiculous conspiracy theories to come out of this, and they don’t even bear considering. I think the average (read: involved) romance reader knows the difference.

        2) Something I think many are ignoring is the fact that Jane is our friend. We “know” her. She and I, to use a specific example, have operated in the same circles for near on ten years. We’ve exchanged emails, talked families, made jokes on Twitter with one another, gotten into heated debates, even had spent time together at RT a few years ago. We don’t speak regularly (and haven’t for some number of years), but there is no ill will between us and I’ve always thought we were, if not close friends, at least close acquaintances.

        Jen and I are also friendly. We didn’t share a bunch of personal details, but we interacted on Twitter, exchanged emails and, in general, had, what I thought, was a friendly professional relationship (with a personal slant).

        To find out that these two people are one and the same, after years of interacting separately, is disappointing. I feel, on a personal level, betrayed by my friend. Do I think she betrayed me on purpose? No. But emotions aren’t logical.

        Bree’s comment at SB highlights this perfectly: http://smartbitchestrashybooks.com/2015/03/answering-questions-jane-littejen-frederick/comment-page-3/#comment-255529

        This, in particular, speaks to me:

        Today, I don’t like myself very much. I’m hurt. Stupidly, uncompromisingly hurt. Hurt that my choices are to play out my awkward humiliation in public or to watch people brush this aside as if this issue was jealous haters mad over pennames. Hurt that I don’t know if I’m supposed to reach out to her in private to preserve a friendship that, in retrospect, doesn’t seem to have existed to anyone but me.

        I don’t personally feel as let down as Bree, but I know many, many others do. And that’s their right. To downplay that by saying they’re “pearl-clutch and gasp” reactions is insulting and diminishing.

        • I’ve never been panned by Dear Author. I don’t think they’re mean girls. I think readers have the right to 1-star whatever they want and writers have the right not to engage with them. Which is where all of this breaks down. Maybe it’s childish not to want to associate with someone who said your book is worse than sweaty donkey balls and that they wanted to die while reading it. Maybe it is. But it’s still a writer’s right to avoid that person.

          J/J took away that right not to engage by pretending to be someone else for two years. No matter what, I just keep coming back to that. HOLY SHIT TWO YEARS.

      • LNS

        Having your author site linked to from a place that gets as many hits as DA helps your ranking in Google, too. The people who run sites like DA and SBTB are very aware of search engine optimization techniques. Just being mentioned and linked to benefited Jane/Jen, whether people clicked on the link or not.

  7. […] Reviews written by authors on the Dear Author site are usually labelled with a disclaimer stating that the person writing the review is an author. Now, clearly I have no problem reviewing the works of other authors. Look around the blog you’re reading right now. I don’t believe that the moment you become an author, you lose all right to criticize and become obligated to unquestioningly support other authors. But a situation like this falls into an ethical sore spot. This wasn’t an author reviewing books, this was an author pretending to not be an author while reviewing those books. There might not seem like much of a difference, but there is, and people are right to question it, especially in the wake of allegations that Litte didn’t just keep mum about her author identity, but actively represented herself to the… […]

  8. Audra

    I have no pony in this race, but I have followed The Passive Voice blog off and on for a few years. And I have to say that everyone who is attempting to write off that audience as the “pro-EC” crowd — you couldn’t be more wrong. Like, lol, that statement is so bogus it’s hilarious. The majority of TPV readers are authors, and many of them have been personally victimized by Regina George — I mean, Ellora’s Cave. The only pro- TPV is is pro-author.

  9. jane_e

    This. Raising my hand cuz I was one of the readers with a “You go girl!” then I read the post on PG and realized how much deeper this actually went. No, I don’t care that she’s a blogger AND successful author. No, I don’t want to see her bank statement. But to know that she interacted with other authors without telling them who she was was a little icky.

    • Jen

      Ugh, what a mess. To be honest what bothers me the most is all the other people who are tarnished too or now possibly even at legal risk because of Jane/Jen. I have to believe that was all unintentional but I’d really like to see her step up and acknowledge that part of this at least. I honestly can’t see how she can avoid a hiatus from DA too while this is sorted. If she wants to salvage anything I feel like she has to step away and earn back some trust.

  10. In hindsight, I am guilty of a knee jerk reaction too… in the opposite direction. After all of the debating over the last day or so about this on numerous blogs about the implications and ramifications, I do now see your (and the others) point. Not being so involved in the community or with Jane/JF, made this seem to me like less of a personal betrayal and more of a slippery slope of good intentions but bad decisions. I read a lot of blogs and keep up with what’s going on but I really don’t interact much. That’s why I felt compelled to throw my ragged two cents in.

    “I don’t personally feel as let down as Bree, but I know many, many others do. And that’s their right. To downplay that by saying they’re “pearl-clutch and gasp” reactions is insulting and diminishing.” But to act as if my opinion is wrong too, b/c it’s opposite of yours is diminishing as well, and I have the right to have my feelings as well. But… my choice of wording was a bit harsh and I brought that on myself. So I undermined my own point and I realize that now.

    And you’re right, I didn’t remember that the “business” side of these blogs do earn income and with DA’s popularity, that’s under a lot more scrutiny. It was hard for me to learn about the valid and reasonable concerns that people had when these “discussions” brought out a lot of unsubstantiated and hearsay accusations. And a lot of vitriolic, personal attacks on and from both “sides”. But, yes, it’s not as black and white as I originally thought it was.

    I do apologize for not using more sensitive wording. I’ve been accused of being… stuff… for wanting to know “reasons” and not “emotions”, and not communicating it well. But that’s my deal and it’s hard to communicate in writing without sounding like a jerk. Thanks for the very thoughtful responses. It’s definitely put things in a bit more perspective for me. And I leave it to agree to disagree along with a forehead thunk by me for being as loud-mouth and socially awkward on the blogs as I am in real life : )

    • erinf1

      “And you’re right, I didn’t remember that the “business” side of these blogs do earn income and with DA’s popularity, that’s under a lot more scrutiny. It was hard for me to learn about the valid and reasonable concerns that people had when these “discussions” brought out a lot of unsubstantiated and hearsay accusations. And a lot of vitriolic, personal attacks on and from both “sides”. But, yes, it’s not as black and white as I originally thought it was.”

      I thought I should make it clear, that that was not here. I was projecting a lot of what I was reading on other blogs in my original comment here. Bonehead move on my part, I know.

      • Thanks for coming back after you’d rethought things. It takes a big person to admit they’ve had a change of opinion, and an even bigger one to admit they didn’t act as they feel they should have. it’s appreciated.

        I certainly didn’t mean to diminish your feelings on the matter, only to share where I was coming from. I think seeing things from more than one perspective is what allows us (as a society, as individuals, etc) to grow, learn and change (or not, as the case may be).

        As I said elsewhere, my initial reaction to the news was “Wow, good for you!” It wasn’t until I thought about it a little deeper than my feelings changed.

  11. It takes a big person to admit they’ve had a change of opinion, and an even bigger one to admit they didn’t act as they feel they should have. it’s appreciated.

    That may have sounded condescending when I didn’t mean for it to. I hope you didn’t take offense, as none was meant.

    • erinf1

      nope, not at all 🙂 My initial reaction was “what’s the big deal” and now it’s “well, lesson learned”. I don’t agree with all of the bullet points but I understand now what the problematic areas are. I’m hoping that this will be taken as a learning experience for all and that there won’t be too drastic of fall out. Hopefully, relationships/trust/community can be salvaged as each side wants.

  12. Kim

    This has been one of the better blog posts on the Jane Litte/JF dilemma. I’m not an author and I’m not personally offended by what has transpired. However, I do feel sorry for the people hurt in the fallout and their feelings being somewhat marginalized.

    While I think it’s nice that Jane has achieved success as a writer, I’m still uncomfortable about her lapse in judgment: namely, her entry into the author’s loops. Jane says she doesn’t keep track of the people who block her on Twitter or FB, but she’s aware that her relationship with writers has been contentious over the years. It just doesn’t sit well with me that writers who wanted nothing to do with Jane Litte unknowingly interacted with her without the requisite facts. Commenters at DA have said that there is no privacy on the internet, but that’s not the point. The point is that Jane took away someone else’s choice of whether to befriend her or not, because she never told them she was also Jane of DA. She was allowed entry as a newbie writer named Jen, while many of these same authors had interacted with Jane and let her know she was “unfriended.” Jane also has more publishing knowledge than many other newbie writers have, so did she really need to do this?

    Holly -You mentioned many of the potential conflicts of interest, but I read something on another blog that hasn’t been widely reported. Meljean Brooks designed the covers for several of Jen Frederick’s books. Her name is in the book credits for Undeclared. After doing the cover art for Undeclared, Miss Brooks was then a book club pick on DA. Let me be clear, I do not think there was a quid pro quo of any kind, but is there an appearance problem? Should Jane have mentioned this when she reviewed Meljean’s books and picked her for the DA book club? As you noted above, once Jen’s identity began to interfere at DA, that was the time for some sort of disclosure. I don’t even think that Jane had to give her pen name. She just had to mention that she was now writing romance and there may be some conflicts.

    • The issue of Meljean Brook become even more sticky when you read Jane’s note at the beginning of Brie’s review of The Kraken King at Dear Author (http://dearauthor.com/book-reviews/overall-b-reviews/b-plus-reviews/review-the-kraken-king-part-i-iv-by-meljean-brook/):

      Jane’s Note: I asked Brie from Romance Around the Corner if she would be interested in reviewing Meljean Brook’s Kraken King books because I felt like a) I’ve reviewed too many of Brook’s books and b) I kind of consider her a friend. So for transparency purposes it made sense to get someone else to do it.

      And the disclaimer on this interview and giveaway post: http://dearauthor.com/features/interviews/interview-giveaway-meljean-brook/

      Though, for my part, as someone who has a massive fangirl crush on Meljean and has been friendly with her for years online, I doubt there was any quid pro quo either. But you’re right that there is the appearance of a problem.

      • Deljah

        Those prefacing “full disclosures” are almost hilarious. They weren’t full at all, and to even mention that was misleading. They left out that Meljean Brook designed covers for JL/JF books. And then, mentioning that she asked Brie to do the reviews as if an effort to remain ethical. Brie, who beta-read the Jen Frederick books that Meljean designed covers for? How tangled.

  13. I haven’t put mu $0.02 here in a long time, but it’s time to come out of hiding.

    I’ve never been a regular reader of Dear Author, so I don’t feel devastated or betrayed. I certainly feel like she hurt a lot of people in the romance community. The post by Courtney Milan on SBTB was extremely interesting too. I though I read somewhere that Jane is a lawyer.

    The only thing I can really say I believe is that no matter how much she says it, Jane will not be able to keep her writing career separate from her blog now that the secret is out. Sure she’s done it for years, but she’s drawn a line in the sand (not of her own making – or perhaps it was). Dear Author is on one side and Jen Fredrick is on the other side. She can lie to herself all she wants but she’s going to have to give up part of Dear Author so it can still be a credible site. The people that are furious and betrayed may never go back to DA. But there are people out there that are just hurt, but will never trust Jane again.

    There it is, my pearl of wisdom. 🙂

  14. SamP

    This is an excellent post and I agree with nearly everything you stated.

    I think one of the things that bothers me the most is that if this were literally ANYONE else, DA would be all over them. If this were another blogger, it may not bug me as much, but DA makes a point of singling out people in the romance industry who do things like this. I think Jane comes across looking like a huge hypocrite and I am really disappointed.

Leave a Reply