Guest Blogger Charles Tan blogs at Bibliophile Stalker, The World SF News Blog, and SF Signal.

Last week’s controversy revolves around Harlequin’s new imprint (previously known as Harlequin Horizons), which utilizes a vanity-publishing model. As someone who compiles links for both my blog and SF Signal, here are some links on the subject matter:

• Statements from Romance Writers of America, Mystery Writers of America, and Science Fiction Writers of America.
• Dear Author on Harlequin Horizons: Shortsighted or Farseeing?
• Jackie Kessler on Harlequin Horizons versus RWA.
• Marie Brennan on Since people appear to be confused…
• Jennifer Jackson has some quick definitions.
• Nick Kauffman on Well, That Was Quick.
• Small Beer Press on Small Beer Press… Horizons!
• Victoria Strauss on Harlequin Horizons: Another Major Publisher Adds A Self-Publishing Division.
• MWA Weighs In On Harlequin Horizons.
• SFWA Statement on Harlequin’s vanity press imprint.
• Sarah Zettel on Harlequin Horizons, or All Is Vanity.
• Follow the Reader on Publishers: As Harlequin is Finding Out – Sometimes You Can’t Win For Losing.
• Editorial Anonymous on Definitions for the Perplexed: Self Publishing.
• Janet Reid on C’mon Harlequin, don’t try to blow smoke up our asterisk.
• Juno Books on Harlequin’s Ethical Ick.
• Rachelle Gardner on Self-Publishing: A Rant and a Q4U and My Final Comments on Self-Pub.
• John Scalzi on Writers’ Organizations to Harlequin: If You’re Not Going to Act Like a Real Publisher, We’re Not Going to Treat You Like One.