• Home
  • About
    • diacritical
    • Douglas McLennan
    • Contact
  • Other AJBlogs
  • ArtsJournal

diacritical

Douglas McLennan's blog

The Romance Of A Really Big Audience

April 8, 2009 by Douglas McLennan 2 Comments

While the recession might be hard on some publishers, the romance novel genre is booming, reports the NYT.

Harlequin Enterprises, the queen of the romance world, reported that
fourth-quarter earnings were up 32 percent over the same period a year
earlier, and Donna Hayes, Harlequin’s chief executive, said that sales
in the first quarter of this year remained very strong. While sales of
adult fiction overall were basically flat last year, according to
Nielsen Bookscan, which tracks about 70 percent of retail sales, the
romance category was up 7 percent after holding fairly steady for the
previous four years.

What the story doesn’t say, is that eHarlequin, Harlequin’s website, is one of the best-thought-out commercial social networking sites on the net. It turns out that a significant

harlequinfeature.JPG

number of romance novel readers believe that they too could write a trashy book. Rather than just treating these people just as book buyers, Harlequin built a community around them and turned eHarlequin into the go-to site for romance novels. 

There you can meet Harlequin’s editors and see what they’re looking for. You can meet other readers, have your writing critiqued, learn how to write compelling characters, about plot development, network with fans, meet and chat with your favorite writers. You can’t be interested in this genre and not go to this site.

eHarlequin isn’t just interactive in that its staff responds to readers, it takes the interaction steps further by making it possible for readers to meet and interact with one another. This is where people make friends. This is where talk about things that are of interest to them. Instead of just producing a lot of content for the site, Harlequin relies on the community to

harlequinchat.JPG

create much of it. eHarlequin is less a producer of online content than it is a facilitator of social interaction.

So what? The so what is that Harlequin has turned consumers into community, one that builds and strengthens an audience for the company’s books. Harlequin isn’t just a consumer choice for these people, it’s something they’re a part of and that they have loyalty to. They’re ambassadors for it.

Contrast eHarlequin to the way most arts groups market. Their websites are little more than electronic brochures. They sell tickets in an increasingly crowded marketplace as a commodity rather than a lifestyle choice. They think of audience members as interchangeable; a ticket sold is a ticket sold.

In fact, a ticket sold is not just a ticket sold. Successful web companies today think of themselves less as producers of content than facilitators of community. The definition of success in the new web economy is not in attracting eyes for content, but in getting the people behind those eyes to create something in response. If they do, they’ll surely be back. If they do, they’ll bring other people back with them. If they do, they’ll expand the base that supports the community.

harlequinblogs.JPG

Nothing new here. Amway, Mary Kay, mega-churches, and more recently the Obama campaign have understood the power of building communities around you. Harlequin understands that if it can build and energize a community, it has expanded its market. And (and this is no small thing), by being part of the community itself, Harlequin comes to understand its audience better and gets to see what matter to them. This is market research gold.

Share:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email

Related

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Comments

  1. Leslie says

    April 9, 2009 at 12:45 am

    Great post! It's interesting that a lot of arts organizations are really afraid to try something like user-generated content because they are worried about potential negative commentary. I was in a class in which most of the students (arts administrators) said they would not allow user generated content on their website because they could no longer control their image to the public. What would you recommend as a good application to start these worried organizations with?

    Reply
  2. Douglas McLennan says

    April 9, 2009 at 2:07 pm

    @Leslie: I actually think it’s a mistake to think first about an application. You have to first decide what it is you’re trying to accomplish, then figure out if technology can get you there. As for keeping control of a public image, from my perspective, that’s a backwards way of looking at it. People are thinking what they’re thinking. If it’s bad thoughts, they’re already thinking them. So you have a choice: let them think negative on their own and with their friends (where you have no control of it) or try to bring their negative opinions out in the open where you can deal with them and others can deal with it. I’ve always found that the most loyal customers you get can sometimes be people who first approached with a complaint. They want to be heard. If they are, they’ll likely continue to engage with you. If you never hear that they were unhappy in the first place, how do you ever win them back?

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Douglas McLennan

I’m the founder and editor of ArtsJournal, which was founded in September 1999 and aggregates arts and culture news from all over the internet. The site is also home to some 60 arts bloggers. I’m a … [Read More...]

About diacritical

Our culture is undergoing profound changes. Our expectations for what culture can (or should) do for us are changing. Relationships between those who make and distribute culture and those who consume it are changing. And our definitions of what artists are, how they work, and how we access them and their work are changing. So... [Read more]

Subscribe to Diacritical by Email

Receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 3,851 other subscribers
Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterFollow Us on RSSFollow Us on E-mail

Archives

Recent Comments

  • David E. Myers on How Should we Measure Art?: “A sophisticated approach to “measuring” incorporates all of the above, with clear delineation of how each plays a part if…” Nov 3, 16:20
  • Tom Corddry on How Should we Measure Art?: “Reading this brought to mind John Cage’s delineation of different ways to experience a Beethoven symphony–live in concert, on a…” Nov 3, 01:58
  • Abdul Rehman on A Framework for Thinking about Disruption of the Arts by AI: “This article brilliantly explores how AI is set to revolutionize everything, much like the digital revolution did. AI tools can…” Jun 8, 03:49
  • Richard Voorhaar on Classical Music has Lost a Generation. Blame the Metadata (in part): “I think we’ve lost several generations. My parents generation was the last that really supported, and knre something about classical…” May 15, 12:08
  • Franklin on How Subsidy for Big Tech Wrecked the Arts (and Journalism): “Language, yes; really characterization. Investments and margins don’t become subsidies and taxes whether or not markets “are working” – I’m…” Mar 8, 07:13
  • Douglas McLennan on How Subsidy for Big Tech Wrecked the Arts (and Journalism): “So what you’re arguing is language? – that investments aren’t subsidies and margins aren’t taxes? Sure, when markets are working.…” Mar 7, 21:42
  • Franklin on How Subsidy for Big Tech Wrecked the Arts (and Journalism): “Doug: You can, if you like, buy a jailbroken Android, install GrapheneOS, and sideload apps from the open-source ecosystem at…” Mar 7, 16:17
  • Douglas McLennan on How Subsidy for Big Tech Wrecked the Arts (and Journalism): “Franklin: Thanks for the response, But a few points: My Chinese solar panel example was to make the point that…” Mar 7, 12:46
  • Steven Lavine on How Subsidy for Big Tech Wrecked the Arts (and Journalism): “Terrific essay, with no prospect to a different future” Mar 7, 09:53
  • Franklin on How Subsidy for Big Tech Wrecked the Arts (and Journalism): “The economics of this essay are incoherent. The CCP was creating yuan ex nihilo and flooding it into domestically produced…” Mar 7, 08:49

Top Posts

  • If Dance Can't Pay Its Dancers What Does It Mean To Be A Professional Dancer?
  • Are Orchestras A Ticket Or An Art? Maybe We're Thinking About The (Made Up) Model Wrong
  • Is The Institutionalization Of Our Arts A Dead End?
  • So What Exactly Is A "Quantitative" Measure Of The Arts?
  • "Art Is Good?" Not Much Of An Argument For Art Is It?

Recent Posts

  • Creativity Versus Skills January 12, 2025
  • How Digital AI Twins could Transform how We Make Art January 7, 2025
  • How Should we Measure Art? November 3, 2024
  • Classical Music has Lost a Generation. Blame the Metadata (in part) May 13, 2024
  • When “Vacuum Cleaner for Babies” Beat Taylor Swift: Fixing the Music Streaming Problem May 6, 2024
April 2009
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  
« Mar   May »

An ArtsJournal Blog

Recent Posts

  • Creativity Versus Skills
  • How Digital AI Twins could Transform how We Make Art
  • How Should we Measure Art?
  • Classical Music has Lost a Generation. Blame the Metadata (in part)
  • When “Vacuum Cleaner for Babies” Beat Taylor Swift: Fixing the Music Streaming Problem

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in