WSFS’ Hugo Awards Marketing Committee (“HAMC”) members Cheryl Morgan and chair Dave McCarty have resigned. New chair Linda Deneroff says, “We are currently in a holding pattern. I have taken over leading the HAMC, but I still need to contact the other members of the committee to see if they wish to remain on it.”
The Hugo Awards Marketing Committee (“HAMC”) members listed in its report to the 2023 Chengdu Worldcon were Dave McCarty (Chair), Linda Deneroff, Craig Miller, Cheryl Morgan, Mark Olson, Kevin Standlee, and Jo Van Ekeren.
File 770 learned about the changes after inquiring whether there had been any turnover in the HAMC despite there being no public announcement like the one made by WSFS’ Mark Protection Committee (see “Worldcon Intellectual Property Announces Censure of McCarty, Chen Shi and Yalow; McCarty Resigns; Eastlake Succeeds Standlee as Chair of B.O.D.”.)
Update 02/19/2024: Cheryl Morgan has posted a statement about her resignation from the HAMC:
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
I can see why some would have been grumpy over “CDTL”, completely out of the stylistic choices of title and content. It was media not literature oriented, had a younger female creators, AND it won over a Heinlein bio.
But the one thing that kinda comes close to standing out is that the 2011 Best Novel category was not only won by a women who wasn’t Ursula K LeGuin, but also four out of the five nominees were women. Which could be seen as the starting point where the awards ended being dominated by white men. Maybe
@Jo Van
To a sufficiently corrupt person, any position of any power or responsibility can provide an opportunity to cause more chaos. McCarty showed himself to be a sufficiently corrupt person: he blew past his second chance (and third, and fourth…) a while back. I wouldn’t trust him to water my cactus while I’m away.
Maybe Cheryl’s just sick of the whole mess and wants to wash her hands of it completely? Nobody could blame her for that.
The Heinlein bio wasn’t worthy of a Hugo, or of RAH. I was bored AF by the old guys’ Resnick/Malzberg blah blah, ditto Wolfe, and I think maybe Writing Excuses had already won? But CDTL really held my interest and made me laugh and think. So that’s the one I voted for that year (which I also attended –Reno).
Really just the Usual Suspects of old SWM thinking the young women of today were too uppity to deserve an award, despite the fact the show’s been on the air worldwide for decades and took up 60% of one category the same year. Purest misogyny. OGH was able to see past his baked-in prejudices, but so many aren’t.
@Cam/Rob: I agree. Get a box of hats to Timothy the Talking Cat and let’s go.
@Jo Van: And excellent work it is.
@Rose: I remember remarking (tongue in cheek, natch) at the time that Ian McDonald must have been so happy to be there in the category, and how it looked promising for men.
Looking back on the list, that was a swell year for Hugo-nominated content, IMO.
@Grigory: I wouldn’t trust Vichy Dave Quisling to run anything at this point. If I was his employer, I’d immediately start an audit of all his work for them; has he been screwing up their data too?
As much as I hate what Dave has done to the Hugos, I would not wish him ill in his day job. I only hope he has more respect for his co-workers than he did for Hugo voters and nominees.
Without, I think, revealing any confidential information, I can tell you that the people maintaining the WSFS websites (and associated social media) have been bombarded with hate messages from people who do seem convinced that WSFS is a single Big Corporate Entity whose Hugo Boss (groan) must be punished and that if you maintain the website, you must be the one giving out the awards. You can explain the decentralized nature of WSFS, the fact that each Worldcon is a legally independent entity, etc. until you are blue in the face, but they simply do not believe you.
Furthermore, people keep shouting about lawsuits, and it’s pretty common to name any person in sight in a lawsuit, especially those people who are visible (even if they have nothing to do with the perceived offense). Even if the suit is meritless, it costs money to defend yourself. Look at what happened to SFSFC.
And what Jo Van said about maintaining the WSFS sites. For example, a few days ago, Tim Illingworth unearthed some older sets of WSFS document (including the 1955 Rules for the Hugo Awards), and I spent part of this past weekend updating the WSFS Rules Archive with the older documents. I particularly recommend the minutes of the Worldcon 18 (1960) meeting for their entertainment value and clever Anglo-Saxon wordsmithing by “Oversetter” Poul Anderson under the leadership of “Moot Lawman” L Sprague de Camp.
Cheryl Morgan has posted a statement about her resignation from the HAMC:
https://www.cheryl-morgan.com/?p=29423
I had noticed the nasty messages on the websites lately. Figure those were the tip of the iceberg. I could see wanting to resign from dealing with that. Not to presume that is Cheryl’s reason. But it would certainly be understandable.
@Mike Glyer: whoof. O.o
Reading between the lines, it sounds like Cheryl Morgan has been put through some stuff.
Saw someone yesterday on Bluesky attack Ursula Vernon, of all people, for not being performative enough about the Hugos. Their language was abusive and really beyond the pale.
I can only imagine what a woman on an official committee with the word “Hugo” in its name might be put through, when people don’t care to get their facts straight about who is responsible for what.
Thanks, Mike. Hadn’t seen your comment before posting my last one.
I’m sad she ended up catching so much of the anger for things she had no part in
@rcade: “There are thousands of members around the world, many who won’t see him at a convention”
My comment about taking it up with him when I see him at a convention was because Mark is very easy to find at Worldcons. But that doesn’t mean fans around the world can’t do anything. Fancyclopedia 3 is a wiki. In fact, Mark’s addition to the Hugos page was removed, by another fan who simply went in and did it. Online.
“There needs to be a stronger accountability culture in the WSFS.””
There is accountability for WSFS committee members who don’t follow WSFS rules. Dave McCarty is off the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee.
Mark Olson is not in a position of leadership on the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee. Also, he has not broken the WSFS rules. So this is really about making WSFS committee members accountable for opinions expressed outside their WSFS role.
Suppose we do enforce that stronger accountability? Who is going to compile the dossiers on all the WSFS committee members, for what they post anywhere on the internet? Isn’t that an awful lot like what Dave McCarty did as Hugo Administrator?
If anything, I’m surprised Cheryl Morgan didn’t extricate herself sooner.
That’s a recurring behavior pattern on the part of the attackers. Fortunately, Vernon’s in a better position to resist/mock/ignore than some previous targets.
Just found the addendum to this post…
Anyone have any idea what’s behind
?
Who would be trying to obtain the rights to those works?
Also, I am perplexed by why someone who wanted to distance themselves from the scandal would not announce the separation themselves rather than wait for File770 to publish it. Do we have any idea when the HAMC separations occurred?
ChewyGlacier:
Be perplexed no longer. I saw Cheryl Morgan’s announcement on Bluesky before it was posted here, although OGH was pretty quick to add it to the post and note it in a comment.
@ ChewyGlacier
They wouldn’t. She’s confirming that even if she was pulled into a lawsuit due to her involvement with WSFS those works/contracts would not be in danger of being seized as part of her assets in the event of a legal loss.
ChewyGlacier: Look at Morgan’s point #6:
I believe Morgan is considering a scenario where she would be sued and end up having a liability. Would the contracts from her publishing business be an asset that a creditor could reach? Her legal advisor gave the answer in point #7.
As to when the HAMC resignations occurred, I wasn’t told. I think we can reasonably assume they have happened since January 19 when McCarty released the Hugo nomination statistics. I don’t know when Morgan left the HAMC. As for McCarty, the Mark Protection Committee announced McCarty’s resignation on January 30; he may have left the HAMC at the same time.
That is a leap further than anything Evel Knievel attempted. He did something in public to a Hugo Awards page and it was criticized in public. There’s nothing remotely unfair about this, nor is it like compiling dossiers on people.
Ben Yalow is still a director of the organization that owns the Hugo service marks. I’ll believe there is accountability when that’s no longer the case.
Speaking of accountability, apparently Xiran Jay Zhao has been contacted by the US House Select Committee on Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. And it turns out that China Telecom, who was the primary Chendgu sponsor and who was licensed rights to Hugo IP, is on the US sanctions list.
So god knows where the complications and implications will end
Given that WSFS has no money, and legally has no ability to raise money, what happens if this nonsense suddenly requires a $100k legal bill to navigate?
Ryan H: Please don’t morph into Jay Blanc and start making groundless scary-sounding speculations about litigation no one has genuinely threatened.
Ha! That’s fair. Being prone to what-ifs is half the reason I’m a fan
At the same time I can’t help but feel like WSFS hasn’t shown any signs of being prepared to deal with any of this beyond the level of it being an awkward social spat.
@Ryan H – do you have a source on that that claim about who contacted Xiran Jay Zhao and why?
I think the claim originated from Zhao on Bluesky yesterday.
Pingback: Top 10 Stories for February 2024 - File 770