Yes. The times are changing, but agents and publishers are not enforcer squadrons, nor peacekeepers. It's not their job to tell what freelance writers should do in their freetime (i.e. writing reviews). I understand why they're doing it, but they're approaching it from a very bad perspective (Human nature: whatever is prohibited, wherever someone feel threatened, that one will do the opposite.). In my opinion, this will backfire on agents and editors. Agents and editors don't have the luxury to loose clients, but with this; we'll tell you what you can do, even prior you would contact us... well, they're going to achieve the opposite. And here is a nice example in one of Nathan's articles.charlotte49ers wrote:I think it's just one of those things where you have to do what feels right for you and then cards fall where they fall, you know?
I think times are changing so much with the internet, visability of authors separate from their books, etc. as to why it's becoming an issue now, as opposed to when reviews were usually only seen in print format (newspapers, magazine, etc.). Online presence is uncharted territory in a sense. :-/
http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2009/09 ... agent.html
The first sentence in the article is actually telling everything:
Lots of people have been asking about this lately (Submitting to Editors Without an Agent.).
And the article is from 2009, so it's not a new phenomenon. Well, you don't have to be a genius to realize, why writers are asking this lately. And if the agents are going to play this: "we do know who you're, we're watching all of you" stuff, more writer is going to ask this question, that's a guarantee. They're just alienating the writers.