World, Writing, Wealth discussion
All Things Writing & Publishing
>
Amazon Review Policy (as of 3 October 2016): review cannot be required for a free copy
I have also heard something similar along these lines that amazon has changed its review policies.
I think the most worrying bit is that we now have to pay for it. Don't they exploit authors already? Sure fleece us some more Amazon.Do you know exactly when this comes into effect?
Denise wrote: "Here's the information regarding reviews: https://www.amazon.com/p/feature/abpt... As the policy states, it does not apply to book reviews.
"The above changes will apply to product cat..."
That's correct. It only applies to other product, not books. Books thrive on reviews.
Denise wrote: "Here's the information regarding reviews: https://www.amazon.com/p/feature/abpt... As the policy states, it does not apply to book reviews.
"The above changes will apply to product cat..."
phew, thank you. crises averted
The Review Initiative group on Goodreads has closed due to this change in Amazon policy https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
it's a secret group Neil, can't check it out
The group admin probably change the settings since they announced this.The issue, and it applies to another review group where I am a moderator, is that Amazon now say that authors can supply books for free but cannot expect or influence a review. Many of the groups on Goodreads operate read to review programmes where groups facilitate putting authors and readers together and require a review as part of the deal. Under the new policy it seems this is not allowed.
oh wowI guess like how Amazon doesn't provide an option to promote books not in it's kindle select program, this is just their back handed way of making authors voluntarily enrol in their vine program. hmmm
Under Amazon guidelines any review groups can no longer make reviews criteria for membership or participation in a review round. Authors are only allowed to distribute ARCs of their books with an expectation of a review, not a guarantee of it. This makes review pools invalid because you are required to post a review or you are dropped from the pool.
ARC is just an umbrella term. It applies to actual ARCs as well as review copies. You don't have to purchase an item through Amazon in order to review it there. You must have made at least $50 worth of purchases at any time to qualify to review any product.
Lilyn G. (Scifi and Scary) wrote: "Tara wrote: "ARC is just an umbrella term. It applies to actual ARCs as well as review copies. You don't have to purchase an item through Amazon in order to review it there. You must have made at l...":)
I wish they changed the payment policy and waived the threshold demand for each market instead....
This is the line that is most confusing and affects us the most:Amazon says: Book authors and publishers may continue to provide free or discounted copies of their books to readers, as long as the author or publisher does not require a review in exchange or attempt to influence the review.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custom...
The "influencing the review" part is not new, but the preceding line is.
Then:
Amazon says: We will continue to allow the age-old practice of providing advance review copies of books.
https://www.amazon.com/p/feature/abpt...
These seem to contradict each other. I'm confused and frustrated.
Also:
Amazon says:
To help illustrate, here are a few examples of reviews that we don't allow:
A product brand posts a review of their own product
A customer posts a review in exchange for cash, a free or discounted product, a gift certificate, or a discount off a future purchase provided by a third party
A customer posts a review in exchange for entry into a contest or sweepstakes or membership in a program
A customer posts a review of a game in exchange for bonus in-game content or credits
A relative, close friend, business associate, or employee of the product creator posts a review to help boost sales
A customer posts a review of the product after being promised a refund in exchange for the review
A seller posts negative reviews about a competitor's product
An author posts a positive review about a peer's book in exchange for receiving a positive review from the peer
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custom...
Marie Silk wrote: "This is the line that affects us most:Amazon says: Book authors and publishers may continue to provide free or discounted copies of their books to readers, as long as the author or publisher does..."
Yes, you highlighted the part that is tricky for so many review groups. That one sentence actually invalidates all review pools.
Segilola wrote: "So confusing"It just means that we, as authors, are free to pursue reviews as before but we can not give away free copies of our books in exchange for a review. We are allowed to ask for a review. In most review pools you are kicked out or not considered for the next round if you don't fulfill your reviews. This is now against Amazon policies because it is telling reviewers that once they get the free copy they have to review. So technically we give out our free copies and request for reviews, not in exchange for them.
Ah okay, makes sense but isn't that defeatist?
Segilola wrote: "Ah okay, makes sense but isn't that defeatist?"Not really. Authors and reviewers won't pay that much attention to the slight change in wordplay and things will go on as usual. But it should impact how review pools operate. Review groups are fine but pooling is in violation of policy now. I also think it could influence the wording used in disclaimers but basically, not a big deal :)
how do you think the wording would change? what do you think would be acceptable to Amazon?don't you think there might be an increase in people who have no intentions of leaving reviews asking for review copies?
It is possible but no more likely than before because authors are far more aware of changes to Amazon policies than readers are. We are atuned to and react to the meaning of each word. As for here om goodreads almost reviewers are also authrors and are genuinely invested in the process.
hmmmmmmm . . . guess we'll just wait and see
Segilola wrote: "hmmmmmmm . . . guess we'll just wait and see"Lol, agree. I'm beginning to feel grateful for how easy it is to get reviews on Amazon compared to Audible so yeah, here's hoping things don't go crazy.
Lilyn G. (Scifi and Scary) wrote: "I changed the wording on all my disclaimers for reviews on Amazon to be on the safe side. I used to put "I received a copy of this book from X in exchange for an honest review." Now they say "I rec..."thanks for the clarification
Nik wrote: "I wish they changed the payment policy and waived the threshold demand for each market instead...."This I find really unacceptable and tyrannical that amazon should do this. However, having said this, there are some countries where wireless or EFT transfers are permitted. Those writers don't ever bother with thresholds. Why can't amazon use paypal I don't understand. They should pay writers regardless of book sell counts.
This is interesting, so you can not flat suggest to a reader to write a review if they feel inclined to do so? At the end of my books, I often post a link to the books Amazon page. Asking the reader to express what they think of the book (good or bad) in a review. Does this mean this kind of thing would not be allowed under this new policy?
The language is ambiguous and that's what is so frustrating. I did not even consider the angle that Eric is mentioning, but I can see how it could be read that way too!
Marie Silk wrote: "The language is ambiguous and that's what is so frustrating. I did not even consider the angle that Eric is mentioning, but I can see how it could be read that way too!"And I still didn't get it.
Eric wrote: "I often post a link to the books Amazon page. Asking the reader to express what they think of the book (good or bad) in a review. Does this mean this kind of thing would not be allowed under this new policy?.."Imo, this should be Ok, for you are not providing a free book in exchange for a review.
Mehreen wrote: "Why can't amazon use paypal I don't understand. They should pay writers regardless of book sell counts. ..."Yeah, I think it might be worth checking whether it's an unlawful enrichment. If they wanted to solve it they could easily provide credits for purchases on Amazon even worth accumulated royalties.
As it is now, I doubt I would ever see royalties from a few books sold in the Netherlands, Germany, Australia even. Amazon will be keeping my royalties from these countries forever...
Nik wrote: "Mehreen wrote: "Why can't amazon use paypal I don't understand. They should pay writers regardless of book sell counts. ..."Yeah, I think it might be worth checking whether it's an unlawful enric..."
I think indie authors deserve better. They should push for change.
Why is that indie authors seem to get crapped on some much? Think about it? Indie filmmakers and musicians get so much more respect from people. Whenever I tell people I'm a self published author they always say "have you not bothered to try to submit your work to an actual publisher?" Lol
Eric wrote: "Why is that indie authors seem to get crapped on some much? Think about it? Indie filmmakers and musicians get so much more respect from people. Whenever I tell people I'm a self published author t..."LOL
I can only imagine it would get better in future
Segilola wrote: "Eric wrote: "Why is that indie authors seem to get crapped on some much? Think about it? Indie filmmakers and musicians get so much more respect from people. Whenever I tell people I'm a self publi..."And it should. Indie by definition means people who value creative freedom which is the fundamental criteria for any kind of creative endeavour. However, selling self-published books is always hard. Publishers have contacts. That helps.
Does Smashwords have a threshold that you have to meet before getting paid?
Never mind, I found it by clicking thru the author's resources spreadsheet (even easy on my phone).$10 total earnings to get paid out thru PayPal; $75 by check.
Is it just me or is it ironic that Amazon has made this change just days before Indie Author Day; something they purport to celebrate?At the end of the day though, I think it's much ado about nothing. Reviews, while nice to have, shouldn't be the goal of any author. We would be better served by acquiring fans that would provide actual sales for us.
Alex G wrote: "Never mind, I found it by clicking thru the author's resources spreadsheet (even easy on my phone).$10 total earnings to get paid out thru PayPal; $75 by check."
And one thing to keep in mind if it matters to you is that SW pays out quarterly instead of monthly. And the retailers they deal with (Apple, B&N, etc.) don't fork over the money right away.
While they'll report the sales within a couple days, the actual financials don't get reported until later. For B&N it seems to be every two weeks. For Apple, they report at the end of the month. Then it takes some time after that before they actually hand over the money to SW.
Not bad in the grand scheme of things, but it's good to go into it understanding it will be different from Amazon.
or we can tell them all to bugger off, develop relationships with our readers and send them to our own websites to buy our books
J.J. wrote: "And one thing to keep in mind if it matters to you is that SW pays out quarterly instead of monthly. And the retailers they deal with (Apple, B&N, etc.) don't fork over the money right away."good to know. thx!
Segilola wrote: "or we can tell them all to bugger off, develop relationships with our readers and send them to our own websites to buy our books"
true, but, just like in retail, the internet has major websites that garner a lot of (finger) traffic. in the US, a successful mall will have at least 1 major store--for example, Barnes & Noble--to anchor all the smaller ones. in the same way, Amazon or smashwords anchors the book-buying traffic (amazon also has its affiliate program which kind of mirrors the smaller satellite stores in a mall).
therefore, i'd argue that just like for a physical retail store, location, location, location is just as important on the internet.
I beg to differ AlexWe authors have to do our own marketing. Simply being in those outlets does not guarantee our books sales. I know for a fact that every promotional activity I do leads to sales. When I slumber, I get no sales.
Just having my books listed on Amazon does not give me sales. I have to send people to my book page.
Since early September when I decided to sell my titles directly from my website, I have actually seen more sales from it compared to Amazon. So my titles will still be on Amazon but I will send people directly to my website. I absolutely love the fact that I get to keep 100% of the selling price $$
True. I definitely wasn't saying that you don't need to do marketing even when you're on Amazon. Another good data point to know that you're selling more from your own website than you were on Amazon. You must be doing a great job of driving traffic to your website. Ganbatte!
I just used facebook ads as it's a new website (after all the hacking problems I thought I resolved). so my author website is just to list my books and for blogging. I set up a publishing website to sell my books from. I think the best advantage is that I can offer multiple currencies, especially for those in countries that do not have access to kindle books.
(I'm bumping this thread to request clarification. I also changed the OP's title to more accurately reflect the content of this thread.)To restate the issue, Amazon states:
"Book authors and publishers may continue to provide free or discounted copies of their books to readers, as long as the author or publisher does not require a review in exchange or attempt to influence the review."(https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custom...)(1) Has anyone had any actual action taken by Amazon yet?
"We will continue to allow the age-old practice of providing advance review copies of books."
(their announcement of the change in https://www.amazon.com/p/feature/abpt...)
(2) This review restriction does not apply to goodreads, correct?
(3) If you're book is in pre-release is it considered to be an Advanced Review Copy? And therefore you are allowed to require a review in exchange for a free Advanced Review Copy?
(4) Regardless, reviewers should no longer put "Free copy was provided in exchange for an honest review" and should instead not put anything in. Correct?
Marie wrote: "This is the line that is most confusing and affects us the most:Amazon says: Book authors and publishers may continue to provide free or discounted copies of their books to readers, as long as th..."
Actually, that sounds fair enough.
:)
No no no no.The new Amazon policy does not apply to books.
The requirement to disclose that you got a free copy is an FTC requirement, as well as Amazon and GR's TOS. If you don't disclose and Amazon finds out, they will remove your review (and possibly all your reviews.) Ditto GR.
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/busin...
http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/ft...
You must also disclose if you have any other relationship with the author or publisher. If you work for the publisher, disclose it. If you are related to the author, disclose it. Neither of those are allowed on Amazon and will be removed, FYI, but they're ok on GR. Amazon is strict on this, and remove reviews for things such as coming from the same IP address with no disclosure.
ETA; Review swaps are not allowed, here or there. In other words "I'll review your book if you review mine" - this also needs disclosure in places it's allowed, according to the FTC, but it's not allowed on GR or Amazon.
Please don't go around telling your readers to stop disclosing review/ARC copies.
Krazykiwi wrote: "No no no no.The new Amazon policy does not apply to books.
The requirement to disclose that you got a free copy is an FTC requirement, as well as Amazon and GR's TOS. If you don't disclose and ..."
Just out of curiosity...why does the FTC care about any of this?
This is basic consumer protection law. Reviews for consideration (including free copies) are on the borders of advertisement/endorsement, so in a lot of jurisdictions, not just the US, consumer protection laws apply. Amazon and GR servers are in the US, so FTC rules are the ones that matter.From the horses mouth:
"Suppose you meet someone who tells you about a great new product. She tells you it performs wonderfully and offers fantastic new features that nobody else has. Would that recommendation factor into your decision to buy the product? Probably.
Now suppose the person works for the company that sells the product – or has been paid by the company to tout the product. Would you want to know that when you’re evaluating the endorser’s glowing recommendation? You bet. That common-sense premise is at the heart of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Endorsement Guides."
I'm actually in the habit of making up my own mind before a purchase. What 1 person says about the product matters nothing to me; be it legitimate or otherwise. A single review will always be just one opinion. I can form my own opinion. The only value in reviews is in the aggregate, at which point the real reviews will outweigh the fake every time.And in the case of a product with few reviews...buyer beware.
anyone heard of this? the blogger didn't post a link to Amazon so not sure if what he wrote about is true or if he's just trying to get traffic to his own website