The Only Thing I Am Going to Say About Bloggers in 2012

So, some of you might have noticed there is Anger in the Blogosphere lately over author-blogger interactions. If you don't know about this, get a cheese danish, skip this post, enjoy your blissful ignorance. I heartily wish I could join you. If you do know about this, you probably already have firm opinions. Basically what it comes down to is that authors are screaming at bloggers/ Goodreads users for negative "reviews" (more on the quotation marks in a bit), and bloggers are screaming at authors for being unable to take criticism and acting unprofessionally. There are subplots to this rabbit hole, but that's a good start. I wasn't going to say anything about this, but then the Guardian did a fairly ridiculous article about the contentious relationship between the YA blog world and authors. When mainstream media is talking about it, it becomes my business.

OK, I want to talk a bit about reviews. This may seem a bit rudimentary, but stick with me. A review is an unbiased, careful look at a book — basically it is a little academic paper. It involves an itty-bitty thesis on your opinion of the book, surrounded by tiny supporting sentences describing the strengths and weaknesses of said book. Every month, dozens upon dozens of these reviews come out in professional journals. Because they're fair and thorough, they're prized and respected in the publishing world. Authors celebrate positive pro reviews. They sigh and learn from negative pro reviews. Publishing houses bend over backward to send review copies to these journals in time for a timely review, because good reviews can make or break a book's success with libraries and booksellers. 

And these reviews are hard to write. I recently reviewed a novel that I'm not going to tell you about for a journal I'm not going to reveal (it's not out yet) and I have to tell you, it was hard work (unlike my quick and flippant book recommendations I post here on the blog). My opinion was important, yes, but even more important was getting the essence of the book across in a few short paragraphs. The better I define the strengths and weaknesses, the more useful that review is really going to be to a reader. In the end, my opinion is nearly secondary — I should've done my job well enough that the reader can decide for themselves if the book is for them or not. Because a review isn't for me. It's for other people.

So, that is a review. Let's talk about the negative "reviews" that authors have been lashing out at. They often involve animated gifs, swearing, and snark. They're often quite funny. But here's the thing, though. When a blogger writes a biased, hilarious, snarky rundown of a book they despised, he/ she is not writing a review. They are writing a post about a book. I'm not saying that bloggers shouldn't write biased, hilarious, snarky rundowns of books. I'm saying that those rundowns are not reviews. Bloggers who regularly write them cannot expect to garner the same respect and treatment from authors that pro reviewers or non-pro reviewers do. They can't expect authors to read their posts and learn something from them. And they cannot expect authors to not take it personally. They've made it personal. 

How personal? I’ve gotten "reviews" that question my parenting prowess, my sexual frequency, my literacy, my intelligence, my relationship with wolves (take from that what you will, they did), my loveless marriage, my personal appearance, and, my absolute favorite, how I have chosen to write the current book the way I did in order to cash in on trends or because my publisher told me to add in something commercially useful (love triangle, sex, no sex, sequel, no sequel, longer, shorter, faster, slower . . . )

Folks, that's just being a jerk. Doing it to be funny, but still, it's unprofessional and it is not a review. And everyone knows the difference between a negative, but even-handed review and a jerk-fest. Because not only bloggers can be jerks. When a professional outlet puts out an unprofessional review, there's uproar all over the internet, because the difference between a review and a scathing editorial whinge about a book is, when push comes to shove, obvious.

Ultimately, the reason why I find the Guardian article to be incorrect is because YA authors don't have a problem with online book reviewers. There is rarely any drama over the dozens of bloggers who write hundreds of great reviews every month, both positive and negative.

I vote we move away from the kerfuffles and back toward the books in 2012.




ETA: On the other side of this post on bloggers, I should also add: Authors, please don't be jerks to bloggers or authors or puppies. The end.
32 likes ·   •  38 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on January 17, 2012 07:19
Comments Showing 1-38 of 38 (38 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Margaret (new)

Margaret Fritz good point to make and great job saying it maggie!!


Jenny - Book Sojourner Well said!


message 3: by Cassie (new)

Cassie Totally agree.


message 4: by Kat (new)

Kat M Well said. :) I don't know if you've read this, but I think Veronica Roth did a great job expressing the complicated nature of this topic here: http://www.yahighway.com/2012/01/real...
I found it really interesting.

Negative reviews or no, I have found and bought more books through Goodreads than any other method this year. Before the internet I had to get my recommendations from friends (none of whom read as much as I do) or just take a chance on something I find at the store (definitely not the best way in my experience). That said, I don't think authors should dismiss Goodreads the way some have... I've spent more money on books in the past month than I have on groceries in the last six. And it's Goodreads' fault. If nothing else, it's a great place for readers to stumble across their book when they may have never done so otherwise.
P.S. That got long, sorry. :P


message 5: by Grace (new)

Grace Totally! I mean, it would probably be classier (and way less work) if the authors and publishers and people just rolled their eyes at the snark, and biased blogs. Because, honestly, people aren't stupid. I don't listen to "reviews" that are just full of nonsense and hating, and I bet most people don't either.
But no matter how the authors respond, come on! We all know when someone has crossed a line. When you are just being insulting you deserve whatever response you get.


message 6: by Anna (new)

Anna I think everything comes down to the need for people to think critically about the information they take in, and then take the time and energy to filter through the information before digesting or responding to it. Especially in an open format such as Goodreads, and many similar sites where there is likely to be a mix of reviews and "reviews". I think if people had properly working filters when taking in information it would help make up for those who don't have a proper filter when posting.


message 7: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater I've spent more money on books in the past month than I have on groceries in the last six. And it's Goodreads' fault. "

Oh, I love Goodreads -- it's where I get 80% of my recommendations too. And I totally was not trying to get anyone to change their reviewing style. I just wanted to talk about why some reviewers were not getting the respect they felt they deserved, because I felt as if the distinction was quite obvious. There are, however, loads of funny, off the cuff reviews that I think hit a pleasant middle ground and you could argue all day long about whether or not they counted as proper reviews.


message 8: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater Grace wrote: "When you are just being insulting you deserve whatever response you get. "

I skip over the hateful ones too; they aren't useful. But I do have to say . . . I don't think it's an author's place to reply to a review unless their opinion was solicited. It's just bad form!


message 9: by Kat (new)

Kat M "And I totally was not trying to get anyone to change their reviewing style. I just wanted to talk about why some reviewers were not getting the respect they felt they deserved..."

Yes, I definitely agree with you on that point. Personally I take snarky reviews with a grain of salt and hateful ones I ignore entirely. I'd rather read the book and decide for myself... It can never hurt to read more books :)


message 10: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater Anna wrote: "I think everything comes down to the need for people to think critically about the information they take in, and then take the time and energy to filter through the information before digesting or ..."

I sort of deeply love this reply, Anna.


message 11: by Anna (new)

Anna Maggie wrote: "Anna wrote: "I think everything comes down to the need for people to think critically about the information they take in, and then take the time and energy to filter through the information before ..."

Aww shucks...


message 12: by Heather (new)

Heather I'm throwing my 2 cents in: I never ever read a review unless I really want to and that is few and far between. I want to read the book and form my own opinons. I don't want to read about someone trashing my favorite author. If you don't like them fine but don't be hateful to others who do. Also, I don't freely give my own opinon in my "reviews" here on GR. If you want to know why I liked or disliked something, ask me in a message or make a comment and I will happily give you my opinion.. I think Maggie put it best "A review is an unbiased, careful look at a book — basically it is a little academic paper."


message 13: by Mindy (new)

Mindy i want a LOVE button.


message 14: by Ms. Bernards (new)

Ms. Bernards Yet another reason to love Goodreads! Thank you for contributing your thoughts on this topic, Maggie.

The Guardian article seemed overly dramatized to me and you made so many great points in your posting that I am going to be using with students as I get started with a new after school group.

Students will be reading a few of the ARC books that I picked up at AASL and whatever else they are inspired to read with the intent of writing reviews (and hopefully publishing them - blog or otherwise).

Having this topic in the news is setting the stage for a few teachable moments and some timely discussion.


message 15: by Raven (new)

Raven Katherine wrote: "It's time for me to disagree with you. People, hear me out.

You make reviews sound so serious, so. . .

And who in the fuck wants to read a boring review?
. . . Anyone?..."


I'm with you on this one, girl.


message 16: by Dani (new)

Dani Ablack I agree with Maggie. There are ways to state one's opinion but in a respectful and dignified way. A review is not meant to discourage someone or convince them to give up, it's meant to be taken as constructive critism, a form of encouragement with tips to improve.


message 17: by [deleted user] (new)

The Guardian review is extremely unprofessional. I didn't even read the whole thing, I stopped when they said, "It's terrible. Startlingly badly written." I'm astonished that it was published!

Katherine wrote: "It's time for me to disagree with you. People, hear me out.

You make reviews sound so serious, so. . .

And who in the fuck wants to read a boring review?
. . . Anyone?..."


That's a bit uncalled for...


message 18: by Kami (new)

Kami Katherine wrote: "It's time for me to disagree with you. People, hear me out.

You make reviews sound so serious, so. . .

And who in the fuck wants to read a boring review?
. . . Anyone?..."


That, right there... just made me love you!! Amen sista!


message 19: by jv (new)

jv poore As always, Ms. Stiefvater, I find your opinions thought-provoking, fair, and remarkably well-stated, and I appreciate you sharing them. While I am a huge fan of your writing (your #1 Fan in Richmond, VA!); I know that I would adore you, personally.

I'm disheartened to learn that there have been "reviews" questioning (judging) you as a person. Aside from being in poor taste, how could that be relevant in a book review?

I share my thoughts on books here, on Goodreads. I like to think of this as "writing reviews", but I know better. I think I stick with the specific book; never the author. Orally, when I tout your books; my high-school students, people shopping in Fountain Bookstore, or basically anyone who will listen to my rave; I DO talk about you. I love telling my students that you are young and successful, a wife, a mom, musically profound (I don't know anyone else that can play the harp, bagpipes, piano, guitar.....), own a killer car, draw, paint and are basically a Rock Star in my eyes. Maybe I'll add that information when I write my thoughts on Requiem!


message 20: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater Folks, I'm happy to discuss this in comments, but please do read my replies to previous comments (especially at the original blog: http://maggiestiefvater.blogspot.com/... and http://m-stiefvater.livejournal.com/2...) to see if I've already answered your question/ clarified. This applies to most every question about whether this post is about blog reviews being inferior to pro (paid) reviews (it's not), whether it's about me believing negative reviews are bad (it's not), whether it's about me thinking book reviews shouldn't have an opinion in them (it's not), whether it's about me questioning the validity of anything that cannot be called a review in the strictest sense (it's not). I'm not impressed by folks turning this post into me being negative about the blogosphere. Like I said, I'm happy to discuss, but please read the post in the spirit it was intended and then read the comments.

@Katherine . . . You bring up a whole bunch of points that I DIDN'T make in my blog post - I'm happy to discuss with you if you want to talk about what I actually said. If you took away that my post was about humor, gifs, and negative reviews, I'm afraid you missed the point.


message 21: by Mandy (new)

Mandy Very brave of you to mingle yourself in this discussion. I understand you can't watch from the sidelines when it's about to something involving you as an author as well.
I agree that reviews shouldn't be "aimed at" the author personally. It's simply a book which bloggers state their opinion about, NOT the person who wrote it. That's low and lame and has nothing to do with the book.

But, reading this post I gather you're treating all bloggers as the same unprofessional, snark-wrting "reviewers". And while I *do* know they are out there, there was a blogger insulted during these past few weeks, who NEVER EVER writes snarky reviews. She ALWAYS writes well-built "reviews". With well-thought-through arguments and always polite, but never personal! (And though you don't think they count as professional ones: if someones reads and reviews several books a week, they *know* their thing!)

Anyway, I don't think it's fair that those among 'us' who take the time to honestly ventilate our opinion with well-summed up arguments as to why we (dis)like certain things, should be considered 'bad' as well.

I hope you didn't mean it like that. I'm thinking you don't, since you took the time to write your post and answer all the comments, which no doubt are many. And I agree it would be great if we could just have a truce for the rest of our mankind's live. But the internet is a dangerous place, where anyone can spill their opinion and it will stay out there. Things can be interpreted wrong easily, which is a shame.

Because this all happens because we share the same love: the love of reading.

It's almost becoming one of those century-lasting discussions about who's right and who's wrong when it comes to believing in a certain someone, and what His name should be. And this is only about BOOKS!!! :O

Yes, the power of words is once more proven, people... ;)


message 22: by Georgie (new)

Georgie R Maggie, I loved your book 'The Scorpio Races' and as my Blogger/goodreads review stated: "you are subtly converted into an animal lover as the story moves on". I loved your book trailer and the music for the trailer as well!!
Once again this post shows how, not only how you are a great author, but you can think deeper than just 'But I didn't like it!'.
Thanks for the great article! :)


message 23: by Georgie (last edited Jan 18, 2012 12:53PM) (new)

Georgie R Erin wrote: "The Guardian review is extremely unprofessional. I didn't even read the whole thing, I stopped when they said, "It's terrible. Startlingly badly written." I'm astonished that it was published!

That was a bit harsh...


message 24: by Gwennie (last edited Jan 19, 2012 09:01AM) (new)

Gwennie While I agree that those types of a reviews are in poor taste, I think that a review is a review no matter how long it takes them to write it or where it is published/posted.

The way I see it, it's the difference between an Oscar and a People's Choice Award. One is decided on by a commitee the other by the fans, it's all a matter of opinion which should be more respectable.

However, regardless of which points I agreed with or disagreed with in your blog post, I commend you for saying your piece and then coming on here to talk about it with us. I know you usually respond to posts on your blog, so you're bending your own rule and that right there is for your Goodreads fans/reviewers.


message 25: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater Wendy F wrote: "I know you usually respond to posts on your blog, so you're bending your own rule and that right there for your Goodreads fans/reviewers. "

Thank you for noticing this, Wendy. :) It seemed to be in the worst possible taste to talk about Goodreads but not discuss it ON Goodreads, like talking behind someone's back at a cocktail party.

And I should be quick to say that I don't find a reaction sort of post less respectable or useful to ME as a reader (which is why 80% of my recommendations come from Goodreads) -- but to the Publishing Powers That Be, one is distinctly preferable.


message 26: by Lily (last edited Jan 18, 2012 04:41PM) (new)

Lily I vote we move away from the kerfuffles and back toward the books in 2012.


ETA: On the other side of this post on bloggers, I should also add: Authors, please don't be jerks to bloggers or authors or puppies. The end.

Well said Maggie, and I agree lets be respectful of other.


message 27: by jv (new)

jv poore Katherine,

As a huge fan of both Ms. Stiefvater's books, and Maggie as a person, I feel that I would be remiss if I did not respond to your posts.

I genuinely believe that you misunderstand what Maggie is saying. I understand her distinction to simply be this.

There are professional book reviews. The reviewer is asked to write a review of a particular book, that will be published. The deal may include monetary compensation. There is an expectation that these reviews will be well-written and thoughtful. If an author responds to one of these reviews, the author will respond in a professional manner.

Then, there are personal book reviews. There is no general expectation for these reviews---they are personal. A personal review can be written in any manner; but the writer of a personal review should understand which type of review he/she is writing and he/she must be prepared to be addressed in the same manner, should the author respond to the review.

Maggie is not only an amazing author, she is a remarkable person and she shares so much of herself with her fans, and even with people that clearly disagree with her. Can't we extend the courtesy of kindness here?

Judy V. Poore


message 28: by Gwennie (last edited Jan 19, 2012 09:00AM) (new)

Gwennie Maggie wrote: " but to the Publishing Powers That Be, one is distinctly preferable."

I agree 100%. Nobody's using goodreads review quotes on the covers of novels. :)


message 29: by Jess (new)

Jess Katherine;
Maggie said that a real review comments on the good and the bad in a book. Has that sunken in yet? I'm sure it was mentioned a fair bit. I have a friend who does reviews. She says "freaking" a lot and rants about bad things, but ALWAYS makes an effort to display the good things. I don't think Maggie was discriminating against anyone but especially not reviewers like that. And youre right; the standard skeleton for a review is boring. Bloggers who get ahead add something to their reviews, endow them with their personalities. But blatant disregard for the good points of a book, dismissal of the effort involved in writing and publishing, and ESPECIALLY remarks aimed at the authors personal life and motives, which Maggie mentioned in her post, is simply annoying and personal and insulting.

Ps- what do you take publishers for? You think they'll put a negative comment on the front of a book they are hoping to sell? Why even bother mentioning it?


message 30: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater @Katherine, I have to say that it feels like you're deliberating misinterpreting EVERYONE's comments in this thread. We can't all despise you and find your opinions invalid, so possibly you might give us the benefit of the doubt and consider that we're just having a discussion instead of a smack down battle until one man is standing. I'm reluctant to even take your points one by one and respond because so many readers have done so thoughtfully and coherently, and you've disregarded them or completely misconstrued their language.

I'm sorry that you interpreted my post as an attack on your personal worth or as a defense of authors attacking reviewers or some sniffy complaint about Goodreads, but it was none of those things.

Everyone else, thank you for chipping in with both agreement and disagreement!


message 31: by Gwennie (new)

Gwennie Katherine wrote: "Wendy F wrote: "I agree 100%. Nobody's using goodreads review quotes on the covers of novels. :)"

Funny how they always have the nicest things to say on the covers, too. You don't see:
"A book in need of improvement.", do we? But it seems GR is famous for negative reviews these days."


Well yeah, I mean ultimately the publisher wants to sell books. They aren't going to decorate the books with the bad reviews.


message 32: by Camille (new)

Camille It takes a lot of bravery to share something you've created with the world and welcome their feedback. You can't help putting a part of you in what you create and that makes it difficult to not take things personally. I think that's just something you have to deal with in this career. You recieve so many ego-boosting, complimentary reviews and kisses to your bum, as well as scathing, brutally honest ones. You either have to find a way to deal with it or stop reading them all together.


message 33: by Jess (new)

Jess Katherine;

All I'll say is that you can always find one good thing in a book to mention in an unbiased review and that someone's personal life is not for anyone to comment on based on a fictitious book that person read.

As for your point about GR reviews never being on book covers, I reckon with the determination you've displayed in this discussion, that's something you could change :)


message 34: by Dani (new)

Dani Ablack Jess wrote: "Katherine;

All I'll say is that you can always find one good thing in a book to mention in an unbiased review and that someone's personal life is not for anyone to comment on based on a fictitious..."


I agree. Most autors work excessively hard trying to write and publish their books. Even if you did not enjoy their work, you can express your thoughts in a way that might help the person learn something from your review. Using swear words and dragging the author's personnal life into the matter is a simple lack of respect for that person and their work (and if you don't treat someone with respect, they're unlikely to return it).

I'm not saying you are not allowed to think or say what you want, I'm saying there better ways to comunicate it. I totally understand that you won't always enjoy the book you're reading. But before writing a nasty review, keep in mind how you might feel if you were in the other person's shoes.

There's expressing your opinion and then there's crossing the line.


message 35: by Eva (new)

Eva You know, after reading this post and all the responses, I'm not sure this comes down to a "review" versus a "blog."

From some of the nonsense posted above, it comes down to immature, attention-hungry people who want to garner an audience by being mean to people who have worked hard and deserve to get attention for their efforts.

And to the people who say they don't want to read "boring" reviews, you're just as immature for encouraging that online narcissistic bullying.

Put yourselves in an author's shoes. What if someone came to your job and started ranting to your office mates about how you weren't good at your job and then posted LOL cat cartoons in your office? Does that sound like a "review" that you would want?

Grow up.


message 36: by Jen (new)

Jen Halligan Wow, I just read this post and ALL the comments - the thoughtful and utter nonsense ones alike. Thank you for this post Maggie, and sharing so much of yourself with your fans. I'm a huge fan of yours (your writing and the pieces of yourself you share online), and I agree with everything you said.

I'm a book blogger, but cringe at being called a reviewer (I'm most definitely a reader, not a writer). I write "reviews" to share my thoughts with my readers (positive and negative), and love to gush about my favorite books with the book community (bloggers, readers, authors, and publishers). I just want us all to respect each other, and treat each other as we'd like to be treated ourselves... it's quite simple, most of us learned it in kindergarten!

I can't wait to meet you at the CO Teen Lit Conference!


message 37: by atmatos (new)

atmatos Wow, I totally disagree with your opinion. I believe anyone can review a book and I am happy I have options. Call me cynical but I will take the advice from an unpaid reviewer over a paid one any day. I'd rather have someones honest opinion over a possibly persuaded one...paid reviews sometimes feels like bought reviews. If I was going to read it in the first place I will still read it, I like to make up my own mind.
So I will keep reading and writing my own reviews on books to help persuade people to read wonderful books and dissuade people from wasting their time.


message 38: by Maggie (new)

Maggie Stiefvater Liz wrote: "Wow, I totally disagree with your opinion. I believe anyone can review a book and I am happy I have options. Call me cynical but I will take the advice from an unpaid reviewer over a paid one any d..."

Liz, thanks for your comment! I did want to clarify -- a paid review is NOT paid by the publisher. A paid review is paid by a journal looking for content, not for a specific view point; I'm not sure there is such a thing as a review paid for by a publisher in an industry journal.

And I do believe anyone can review a book as well. I just think that not everything written about a book is called a review. I certainly do hope you keep writing and reviewing books.


back to top

Maggie Stiefvater

Maggie Stiefvater
I don't read blog comments here — it's a feed from my site at www.maggiestiefvater.com ...more
Follow Maggie Stiefvater's blog with rss.