I started self-publishing while I was a Creative Writing major in college back in 2010 (I was 22…

Goodreads & Book Roasting: The Most Abusive Author Platform

I started self-publishing while I was a Creative Writing major in college back in 2010 (I was 22 years old). Back then, Goodreads was a cool environment. A bunch of readers from my fanfiction days started using Goodreads to rate and review books, and they invited me to the platform. That’s what launched me into the world of self-publishing.

In the early days, Goodreads.com offered a wonderful way to connect with readers, network with other authors and make friends. Sure, some critical reviews were posted, but I always felt like those reviewers had read the book, understood it, and were trying to give a well-rounded review. Topics addressed would cover character arcs, setting, themes, pacing and other basic ideas we learn about in English class. Obviously no book is perfect. I’ve been self-publishing for 15 years now and I’m used to a bad review here and there, as all seasoned writers are. That’s just part of being a writer, a business, an artist, an Uber driver, a hairstylist, an internet service provider . . . well . . . you see what I mean. Anyone attempting to engage the public online has to deal with negative reviews. And that’s okay. Sometimes they are warranted, sometimes they are not. You can’t please everyone, nor should you concern yourself with pleasing everyone, especially as a creative artist. Creativity, first and foremost, should bring you joy. And I believe that’s why most fiction authors begin writing, and what keeps them writing: the joy of storytelling.

Before the internet, writers could indulge themselves in all sorts of storytelling, without concern for who might react to their personal daydreams-turned-fiction. The freedom to express, explore and play with different forms of writing, in genres both light and dark, with ideas both taboo and intuitive, was unfettered. And if the doorway to publication opened, a writer published alongside a team of engaged professionals who believed in promoting their work. And if a magazine like Times or Publishers Weekly reviewed their book, those magazines had a production staff and an Editor in Chief ensuring the quality of the review. Even if a book was panned, the review wasn’t posted in a public forum for the writers’ someday grandchildren to read in 80 years. The writer could weep and move on.

Now, those days are over. Online popularity has superseded editorial reviews from established authorities. “What’s trending on TikTok” is all that matters, and a bad review from 10 years ago will remain until the internet implodes.

To compound this issue, writers face a harsher and more grueling landscape than any generation before: the immense cruelty of anonymous, online, public reviews. And they never go away.

Talk about being punished for your creativity.

My concern is that, considering the harshness of these online reviews, young writers’ enthusiasm will be squashed under the intense negativity of online communities, the worst of which has become Goodreads.com (in my humble opinion.) Young people starting out in any creative profession need encouragement. Mastering a craft takes decades of time. All artists and creatives struggle with insecurity. I can’t imagine the immense pressure put on young writers because of websites like Goodreads. I’m sure many writers are completely discouraged from ever publishing, due to fear of being bullied. And their fear is justified.

What happens when young writers are squashed? They never develop into mature writers.

What happens when we lose a generation of mature fiction writers who have struggled, excelled and mastered their craft?

We lose good storytelling.

Goodreads: From Good to Garbage

Despite being a great platform back in 2010 when I first joined Goodreads.com, I don’t go on the website anymore. If I could take my books down, I would. (The website won’t let you take your books down as an author, because they’re a “book database.” Sure. But let’s be realistic: they’re not just a database. Goodreads’ primary use and popularity is due to it being a Social Media community platform like Facebook, complete with User Profiles, Avatars, Groups, Discussions, DM’s and Friends. And so it should be considered a social media platform with a book cataloging feature.) The main issue to be had with Goodreads is not the database aspect, though it is clunky, messy, and leaves a lot to be desired. The quality of the community has changed drastically over the last 15 years since I first joined. I think this shift started around 2018 but got really bad around 2020 or 2021. Now when I cruise Goodreads looking at books, I read terrible reviews that are simply cruel.

Here’s just a handful of quotes from HOOKED by E. MCCINTIRE:

“RIP to my last few brain cells that died after I read this.”“Even the gay Peter Pan fanfic I read was infinitely better than this”“When people told me I’d roast the fck out of this book, I figured it would at least be humorous, or maybe give me tons of things to make fun of, but no… It didn’t give me a single thing. I am almost sad I wasted an entire day on this.”

(Don’t even get me started on the reference above to “gay fanfiction.”)

“Book roasting” on Goodreads is a toxic online trend that I’m pretty sure started on TikTok. My primary concern is for young people who simply love writing, and who want to become novelists. Any young person who publishes an early work — as we all should, to get some experience under our belts — does not deserve to be subjected to the kind of trolling that happens on Goodreads.com.

Here are some examples of reviews for the popular, traditionally published book, OUTLANDER by D. Gabaldon:

I gave up on this book because I was sustaining permanent damage from reading it and I was afraid I’d start hitting back.This is one of the books that started off shallow and directionless but entertaining and ended puke-worthy and ready to be trashed and forgotten.

My heart goes out to young writers, or first-time authors, who will likely abandon their dreams under the immense psychological weight of “book roasting” on a platform that does not allow authors to remove their books or protect themselves.

No Protection for Authors Forced onto Goodreads.com

This community isn’t interested in supporting and connecting with authors like they were back in 2010. “Book roasting” is their new sport. It’s a place people go to get attention for posting the best “Roast.” The bottom line is that Goodreads has forced authors to participate in their “book database” (aka. social media platform,) then abandoned authors without any protection and allowed this abuse to happen. This is not a community of informed or compassionate readers. This is a community of meanspirited people looking to punish, humiliate and bully authors.

So, if a young writer is reading this and just starting out, please listen to me: you can’t take the negativity you read on Goodreads seriously. I know someone, somewhere has told you to “learn” from negative reviews. I will now contradict that advice: in my experience, it’s not worth reading through all the meanspirited reviews on Goodreads to get to a good few critical reviews that might help your writing. If you really want feedback on your writing, join a critique group or circle of other writers where you’re getting informed feedback. Or hire on a few beta readers at your discretion. Find people who will respect your feelings and treat your work with insight and compassion.

It doesn’t matter if your book has flaws or doesn’t “resonate” with everyone. These reviews are dehumanizing, cruel, unmoderated and abusive. If authors try to complain to the Goodreads service or to Amazon, which acquired the platform in 2013, our complaints are responded to with, “You’re being too sensitive.” Classic abuser line.

Dear author, you’re not being too sensitive. Your books are being defamed by internet trolls, and your professional reputation is being damaged without recourse. To spare yourself the psychological struggle, and continue finding joy in your craft, please abandon this website.

[image error]