THE Group for Authors! discussion
Publishing and Promoting
>
Anonymous Reviews on Amazon
Tony wrote, "For heavens sake, if I post a review about a restaurant, hotel or airline, I am obliged to reveal who I am."Actually, you aren't, at least in the case of the sites I visit. Unless people actually give their children names like "Traveler007" (to choose a purely random example), reviews on TripAdvisor are largely anonymous. And if I had paid more attention to such reviews the previous summer, I would have avoided staying in a real fleabag of a hotel (as my family has reminded me on several occasions).
There are numerous legitimate and innocent reasons an Amazon reviewer might choose to post anonymously. Some people might not want to reveal their interest in certain genres, such as erotica or self-help books about deeply personal subjects such as substance addiction or overcoming the effects of childhood sexual abuse. Others simply choose to conduct all of their business online under pseudonyms to avoid identity theft or out of a strong desire for privacy. There are more effective ways to combat genuine bullying and vandalism than by forcing many reviewers to pay the price for the actions of a few.
Why should people have to reveal their true identities? There are a number of authors who like to pursue, bully and harass people who leave reviews that upset their delicate feelings. For those authors having a person's true identity will just make their harassment campaigns easier.
I'm not sure how I feel about this whole argument, but, just recently an author friend, received two bad reviews by someone who clearly didn't read the whole book. They mentioned questions in the book, which were left unanswered, except, had they read the entire book, their questions would have been answered. Their reviews were hateful, off-point and unnecessary. How about the Author's delicate feelings? Just pointing out that if you are going to be necessarily hateful, at least give the author the opportunity to know who you are and possibly, point out errors in the review. Such as, "...on page ___ the answer to your question on ____ was revealed." Just sayin'. If you are anonymous, it seems to make it easier for haters to hate. When you have to leave your name, people think a little more before commenting.
Linda wrote: "Dear Authors:If you can't handle reading a negative review, if your feelings are just so delicate that you cant' stand the thought of someone not liking your book, then for the love of all that's..."
Can I have a like button? For Susan's comment too.
Wow! I think we hit a button. I was merely trying to play devils advocate. There are many, many great authors out there and there are many, many loyal and subjective readers. The purpose of this conversation, was merely to ask opinions about anyone else's concerns regarding this topic (I believe, as I didn't start it). I would hope you would also understand, that there are people out there that do love to be mean. I also don't see where anyone was demanding anything, simply asking how others felt about anonymous reviewers.
P.J. wrote: "Wow! I think we hit a button. I was merely trying to play devils advocate. There are many, many great authors out there and there are many, many loyal and subjective readers. The purpose of thi..."But there are anonymous reviewers on Amazon who give nothing but four and five stars, and I don't see anyone up in arms about them.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-r...
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-r...
I do wonder if either of those indiebrag peeps even read the books.
There are reviewers on Amazon using their *real names* that it is common knowledge that they shill for the publishing or a large pulp mill review house. See Wiki page for the most notorious one.
But those are OK, since they only give out positive ratings & reviews. Have I got that right?
/sarcasm
P.J. wrote: "Wow! I think we hit a button. I was merely trying to play devils advocate. There are many, many great authors out there and there are many, many loyal and subjective readers. The purpose of thi..."Oh, knock it off. Linda gave her opinion regarding this topic. Exactly what you claim was the purpose. What's the problem? Let's not pretend this is a black and white topic that starts and ends with the OP and nothing else.
I'm sorry, but I'm an author, and I'm totally against banning anonymous reviews. People have a right to say what they like about a book, good or bad, and why should I care if their name is BooBoo57 or John Smith? Not to mention that some people might not WANT their name on reviews of some books that may be of an erotic nature, religious, political . . . the list goes on. There are going to be silly reviews, both good and bad. Ignore them and move on. That's what most readers do anyway.
Lets remember, reviews are NOT for the authors, but for readers. Lets also give readers credit that many of them know a troll review when they read one...
Nick wrote: "Lets remember, reviews are NOT for the authors, but for readers. Lets also give readers credit that many of them know a troll review when they read one..."This.
Frankly, some "bad reviews" have sold me on books: either what's complained about is stuff I like, or the book sounds so ridiculous I have to see it for myself.
Or, to put it another way, if someone says, I will take down my reviews, which are all five-star or four-star, because Amazon.com will no longer allow me to post under my initials but insists on a complete name and address, would you still want that petition to succeed?
The petition will solve nothing, and will hurt more authors than it will help. There are people who post reviews anonymously for, as has been suggested already, very good reasons. If they are no longer allowed to post anonymously, more than likely, they're not going to take the time to write reviews at all, bad or good. On the other hand, yes, people are mean and vindictive, and these people, the real trolls and bullies, will not be deterred just because they can't go by the username "IHATEBOOKS" anymore. They will find ways around the rules, because that's what they do. Whether they will create profiles under someone else's information, or just make up completely fake people to sign up as, they will continue doing what they do. The only way to stop them would be to somehow verify their name, phone number, address, bank account, and SS# when they sign up, and even that is no promise with current rates of identity theft.
Somebody said "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither and will lose both." That is exactly what that petition will do.
It's been tried before and went no where...
It seems like the only difference in knowing who the reviewer was and not knowing who the reviewer was is the reaction of the author. I'm sure you wouldn't go after a known reviewer who gave you a negative review so why is it important that you know who any of them are? Besides that, anonymous reviewers give great reviews as well and we definitely don't want them to disappear.
Linda wrote: "So, okay, let's hear from those who are willing to give up the good anonymous reviews in order to get rid of the negative ones!:crickets:"
What? No responses?
Tony wrote: "I'm wondering if anyone else has a concern regarding Amazon's policy of publishing reviews from reviewers who do not provide any information about themselves - at least not to the author on the rec..."Such a policy would be ineffective and stifling. At the very least it would lead to very few reviews being written and published. As other posters have pointed out, there are myriad reasons why genuine reviewers may with to remain anonymous. An insistence that reviewers should post only as themselves panders to that small minority of writers who behave inappropriately in the face of negative reviews.
If you truly believe a review is malicious, that's a matter for Amazon. Flag it. Any other action is childish and unprofessional. And negative does not usually equate to malicious. Reader reactions vary enormously, and readers should enjoy absolute freedom to say what they think. Book reviews are not like some other kinds of net discourse where negativity is not appropriate and can be interpreted as hostile. They are part of an ongoing lively and intellectually rigorous tradition.
Linda wrote: "Bridgett wrote: "It seems like the only difference in knowing who the reviewer was and not knowing who the reviewer was is the reaction of the author. I'm sure you wouldn't go after a known reviewe..."+100
If a review is bad or good, take it on board at least you got a review, and while they are bagging you they are leaving someone else alone, you will get over it I am sure and life will go on, and after all it is not live threatening, would you change places with them poor sod lost on that plane lost somewhere.
Terrence wrote: "If a review is bad or good, take it on board at least you got a review, and while they are bagging you they are leaving someone else alone, you will get over it I am sure and life will go on, and after all it is not live threatening, would you change places with them poor sod lost on that plane lost somewhere."I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused by your post, Terrance. Are you talking about reviewers being 'them poor sod lost on that plane lost somewhere [sic]'?
And I'm not sure what you mean by a reader reviewing your book they're 'leaving someone else alone'. Do you mean they're not buying and reading another authors books? Because that seems like what an author would want readers to do. Ya know, read their books.
I thought it was a reference to that plane that was lost in Malaysia.
I think he was asking, "Would you rather have your book get a bad review, or would you rather be on that lost plane?"
Yeah, I'm not sure it's either of those things. Reading it again now (even though it's not any more coherent) I'm pretty sure he's just shitting on reviewers.
Good reviews or bad reviews its all about how you market your book and what the book is about at the end of the day. My novel murder along burley creek and the sample have gotten nothing but four to five stars and ive never gotten a negative review , so it should sale right? Nope...It doesn't sale very well while other books that people constantly rip and complain about out sale mine all day long. If bad reviews don't slow down their sales it shouldn't hurt yours. Hopefully the anonymous people actually did read your book, but even if they didn't the book will still sale if people thinks it is interesting.
R.E. wrote: "Good reviews or bad reviews its all about how you market your book and what the book is about at the end of the day. My novel murder along burley creek and the sample have gotten nothing but four ..."Because five-star reviews don't sell books. Go look at any best-selling title in any genre and tell me what you see in the reviews. Variety. Nobody is going to love everything. A wide range of ratings and reviews will sell a book better than nothing but five-stars. In fact, a lot of readers are put off or distrustful of a book with nothing but glowing praise.
There are a lot of factors in what makes a book successful. Timing, content, marketing, word of mouth, quality, visibility, mixed reviews, etc. etc. etc.
Reviews are not the end all and be all of any book and they never will be.
Well said, Linda. Of course I'd love for everyone who reads my book to love it. But it's not going to happen. That's why we need thick skins. Writing is not for the timid.
Rion wrote: "Konrath's post pretty much sums it up for me. http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/03..."Good post. Thanks. The last two demands cracked me up. :)
"7. Murder is a very serious topic. It is, quite literally, killing people. Amazon needs to take a stand and stop all murder. Worldwide. Forever. Because murder is bad.
8. I want a pony, but they're expensive and I don't have enough room on my property for one. Amazon needs to buy me a pony, and a farm where I can keep the pony. Also, lots of hay."
Rion wrote: "Konrath's post pretty much sums it up for me. http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/03..."Thanks for that link. I signed the petition. Who doesn't want a free pony?
I'm holding out for a free unicorn.
Tony wrote: "I'm wondering if anyone else has a concern regarding Amazon's policy of publishing reviews from reviewers who do not provide any information about themselves - at least not to the author on the rec..."While I agree with your stance on this, I don't think the major e-outlets would want to 'take on' their own customers by actually doing something to curb this disturbing practice. (B&N online has some of the worst offenders in this regard. :-/)
Jessa wrote: "Tony wrote: "I'm wondering if anyone else has a concern regarding Amazon's policy of publishing reviews from reviewers who do not provide any information about themselves - at least not to the auth..."Forget e-outlets, no-one with an investment in free expression should be behind such a policy. While this in no way excuses abuses, see my post above.
D.C. wrote: "Jessa wrote: "Tony wrote: "I'm wondering if anyone else has a concern regarding Amazon's policy of publishing reviews from reviewers who do not provide any information about themselves - at least n..."I understand your point and your indirect defense of freedom of speech. Perhaps I should be more clear in what I'm saying - and know that I speak from a genre where the quality of one's story is easily bypassed for the sake of a moral judgment by way of review. There is a tendency for people to use their anonymity as a weapon. For them to deride or derogate a piece of work in a manner that does not constitute an actual critique nor does not it speak to the work itself; that is to give gratuitously nasty and caustic feedback merely because, again, they're anonymous and can offer their input without any accountability. A genuine and/or constructively critical star-rating or review is one thing, and any author should IMHO be welcoming of a critique that might help them improve in their craft. Yet IMO, as the original poster suggested, I do feel something should be done to deter rogue reviewers only offering their trenchant feedback because they have the 'anonymous power' to be unpleasant.
Can anyone point me to this petition? I'd like to take a look at which authors are behind it.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Here it is, Jen."Thank you, TinaNicole.
Forgive my stupidity, but is there a way to read the signatures on this petition?
Jen wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Here it is, Jen."Thank you, TinaNicole.
Forgive my stupidity, but is there a way to read the signatures on this petition?"
I haven't a clue. I've made a point to ignore it along with any commentary lest the stupid rub off on me. ;)
Note: I know with Change.org you have the option to make your signature private and I wouldn't doubt a large number of authors have done that.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "I know with Change.org you have the option to make your signature private and I wouldn't doubt a large number of authors have done that."Isn't that just hilarious? People attempting to prohibit the privacy of others deserve none for themselves.
Jessa wrote: "D.C. wrote: "Jessa wrote: "Tony wrote: "I'm wondering if anyone else has a concern regarding Amazon's policy of publishing reviews from reviewers who do not provide any information about themselves..."A user review of a commercial product, unlike a professional critical review, does not have to be constructive. Some critical reviews aren't all that constructive, honestly. I've seen some rather brusque reviews in print, notably in the NY Times. There is a point that they should not cross, such as hate speech, or personal attacks, and pretty much all sites have a group of guidelines that they expect reviewers to abide by. It's not a critique, it's not feedback, it's a review from one user for the benefit of other users. It's also protected speech.
I would, frankly, prefer that reviewers not be caustic about my work, but to paraphrase Voltaire, I will defend to the death their right to do so. There is a point of abuse, and Amazon will remove reviews that they think have crossed that line. The only time I ever flagged a review was for homophobic content, and while the statement in question should be protected under U.S. Law, it is not under Amazon's TOS and they removed it.
Hate speech, personal attacks, inappropriate language? Flag them and let the site administrators earn their paychecks. Plain old rudeness? Count it as the price of free discourse and ignore it.
D.C. wrote: "Jessa wrote: "D.C. wrote: "Jessa wrote: "Tony wrote: "I'm wondering if anyone else has a concern regarding Amazon's policy of publishing reviews from reviewers who do not provide any information ab..."Reviews that cross the line should be flagged and removed. Always. Hate speech is never acceptable, nor are personal attacks and inappropriate language. But to require reviewers to reveal their identities is appalling to me. Would the author I left an unflattering review for also like my SS# and home address?
Loss of privacy goes both ways. If I can't use a pen name, no author should have the right to do so, either.
Jen wrote: "TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "I know with Change.org you have the option to make your signature private and I wouldn't doubt a large number of authors have done that."Isn't that just hila..."
Just like all their other complaints, the hypocrisy knows no bounds. smh
Jessa wrote: "know that I speak from a genre where the quality of one's story is easily bypassed for the sake of a moral judgment by way of review"If you write in that kind of genre, you should be well aware that oftentimes people's anonymity is one of the main reasons their comfortable, not only buying your books, but leaving positive reviews.
Which do you think people would be more wary of being public knowledge:
Their moral judgment review where they express their superiority and objections with the content?
Or the review that says how much they love that possibly morally objectionable (to some) content?
Really, people. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. The only losers in this will be authors. But, hey, if ya'll wanna shoot yourselves in the ass? By all means, don't let reason or logic stop you.
Smdh
It's already getting as difficult to find a reviewer as it used to be to find an agent/publisher. A petition like this will just scare off the legitimate reviewers.If reviewers aren't allowed to be anonymous, then you can argue that writers ought not to be allowed to use pseudonyms.
TinaNicole ☠ Le Book Nikita ☠ wrote: "Jessa wrote: "know that I speak from a genre where the quality of one's story is easily bypassed for the sake of a moral judgment by way of review"If you write in that kind of genre, you should b..."
My contribution to this thread was to give my thoughts on the issue and broach my own concerns as a writer/author seeking true reviews of my work in lieu of acerbic jabs and aspersions that have nothing to do with the book and more with the subject matter etc. (These are the same issues that sites like the Huffington Post have sought to address as well by making their posters slightly less anonymous, and I can say that, as a poster, I am not fully enthusiastic with their approach either.) People can purchase books online in anonymity and no one's challenging that right. I do think if it were a little more difficult to leave a review, only those who feel strongly enough about the read to do so would be more compelled to post one; that it might serve as a deterrent to those just seeking berate for the sake of berating. That doesn't mean I'm going to be working to bar ppl's rights to post reviews.
Jan wrote: "It's already getting as difficult to find a reviewer as it used to be to find an agent/publisher. A petition like this will just scare off the legitimate reviewers.If reviewers aren't allowed to ..."
I agree, it can be difficult getting reviewers and a petition like this would scare ppl away, for good and for bad. However I wouldn't go so far as to automatically equate an author's choice to use a pseudonym to a poster's choice to be anonymous in order to post purposefully derisive and unconstructive star-ratings and reviews. Just my 2 cents.
There is, at present, a petition being circulated that hopefully will persuade Amazon to disallow reviews that are sent anonymously or where the reviewers identity is concealed.
I attach my response to Amazon's reply to my email regarding the ability of some book reviewers to remain anonymous while posting reviews.
Dear Amazon,
I believe that Amazon's practice of allowing reviewers to conceal their identity from the world leaves open the door to bullies and vandals who can say what they like behind the screen of anonymity.
For heavens sake, if I post a review about a restaurant, hotel or airline, I am obliged to reveal who I am. Surely this is a courtesy that should be extended to Amazon authors without whose efforts, Amazon would be the poorer!
Many thanks for reading my rant!