More on Zoo Press Flap

I’ve only just now noticed the Missouri Review‘s Scott Kaukonen’s comments on Zoo Press’ cancellation of its award. He addresses a point that hasn’t yet been commented on by others, namely publisher Neil Azevedo’s statement that “the experiment did not unfold the way we had hoped, as, I guess is the nature of experiments.” Says Kaukonen:

I did not give my money and my manuscript to Zoo Press so that it could be used in an experiment. I assumed, as I believe any writer who enters such a contest, especially from a reputable source, has the right to assume, that the contest will adhere to the guidelines that it has set forth, advertised, and published. I also assume that the people running the contest have ensured that they will be able to fulfill their obligations, that, in this situation, they’ll be able to absorb whatever costs the contest may incur. If money is lost in that first year or if expectations are not met, then there would be no Second Annual Zoo Press Short Fiction Contest. But to abandon the First Annual Zoo Press Short Fiction Contest after accepting entry fees and manuscripts and then announcing that those fees will not be refunded is, quite frankly, unethical.

The contest entrants and the rest of the lit blogosphere are still awaiting reaction from Azevedo.
(Thanks to Katrina for the link. )

Share

Comments are closed.

  • Twitter

  • Category Archives

  • Monthly Archives