Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Bulletin Board
>
Spamming & Rating/Reviewing One's Own Book - Aggressive Promotion or Narcissism
I have seen authors rate their own books and, as you say, they almost always rate them at five stars. I regard the practice as pathetic, and if you look at a sample of their books you'll almost always find that the books are also pathetic.
Jim wrote: "Almost every literary website's discussion groups' rules include a ban on spamming. Whenever spamming does occur, it usually incites numerous posts by members of the group; expressing their displea..."I am a big supporter of indie authors, but I have to say that one particular author "self-promoted" to the extent that it was really annoying. This individual stated that the book had "gone viral" (after 5 reviews) and that "I am not on my way, I have arrived!", which I found to be self-serving, not to mention just embarrassing.
I've seen one say she couldn't stop reading her own book, and she couldn't predict what would happen next. She was posting that on every board as if she had found the best book in the world and when you'd check the book in question, she was the author. Is that narcissism?
I mean it's ok to state what others reviewed but by all mean, explain it's a review. (AND don't post it on 20 discussion boards all at once.)
Angela wrote: "I am not on my way, I have arrived!"Class.
I also like the posts where writers say "I have seven reviews and two are from people I don't even know."
Makes me smile every time.
My preference is to write rather than promote. Unfortunately that means few sales.
Indie authors do have to be all things these days if they want to sell. Some do overstep the mark and I'm sure in hindsight they will cringe and look to delete certain posts.
If only the rest of life came with an eraser.
G.G. wrote: "I've seen one say she couldn't stop reading her own book, and she couldn't predict what would happen next. She was posting that on every board as if she had found the best book in the world and whe..."Living in a real narcissist's world all my life, I kind of cringe at that.
But there's ACTING in a narcissistic manner (which even very nice people who are normally quite aware of others' feelings will do on occasion, especially if they're being pushed to promote or die) and there's BEING a narcissist.
Akin to being told, "you're acting like a (fill in the blank)," or "you are a (fill in the blank)."
Oh, and btw, a true narcissist has no problem telling someone, definitively, that they ARE a (fill in the blank). ;-)
And yeah, the example you're talking about is a little . . . overly enthusiastic. And annoying. Clogs up the feed.
Ah! The realm of faceless interaction via everything spawned by the Internet. You can say anything, be whatever you want to be and blow-off any criticism because there's no responsibility attached to being a faceless entity. Now, having said that, a large percentage of those who use this wonderful technology do come to it with a sense of responsibility to themselves and those they engage with via this venue. But -- the Internet brings everyone in contact with the vast and diverse nature of human behaviors, perhaps even more so than what's encountered within our environment where we meet face to face with each other.
G.G. wrote: "I've seen one say she couldn't stop reading her own book, and she couldn't predict what would happen next. She was posting that on every board as if she had found the best book in the world and whe..."G.G.
In this particular case, I believe the personality trait which you reference is an example of self-delusion rather than narcissism.
William wrote: "Angela wrote: "I am not on my way, I have arrived!"Class.
I also like the posts where writers say "I have seven reviews and two are from people I don't even know."
Makes me smile every time.
M..."
William,
I really liked your suggestion regarding how great it would be to be able to erase something we did or said in real life. I've lost count of the number of times in my life I wished I could have a do-over.
Jim wrote: "G.G. wrote: "I've seen one say she couldn't stop reading her own book, and she couldn't predict what would happen next. She was posting that on every board as if she had found the best book in the ..."I have a question.
How is it any different when someone is exhibiting this exact same behavior when talking about their kids or grandkids?
Why do we call them proud (grand)parents, and smile and indulge them instead of calling them self-delusional?
Renee wrote: "Jim wrote: "G.G. wrote: "I've seen one say she couldn't stop reading her own book, and she couldn't predict what would happen next. She was posting that on every board as if she had found the best ..."Renee,
The term delusional was in reference to G.G. pointing out that the author claimed to have read her own book several times and never being able to predict what would come next.
Being a proud parent or grandparent, is not the same thing. Having fathered five children and now having four grandchildren, I can attest to that; and yes, when it comes to my children and grandchildren, my opinion of them is no doubt a bit biased.
I was only using "delusional" as the example at hand. Plug in self-absorbed, narcissistic, any of the labels we've used for that type of behavior from writers.
Renee,Narcissists constantly think and talk about themselves and their own accomplishments. They love and are more proud of themselves than anyone else.
A proud parent/grandparent loves and talks about their children and grandchildren and their accomplishments, not themselves.
Does that mean if an author talks about the prices the book won, or the reviews the book received and how loved it is, it's not narcissism anymore, it's pride? (Sorry I just couldn't resist.)
Oh, believe me, I KNOW what a narcissist is. I have an NPD mother — and sister. In the malignant spectrum. I wasn't referring to the person DOING the bragging on their (grand)children, but our PERCEPTION and tolerance of it compared to our tolerance levels for someone who has accomplished something they're thrilled about.
It's the attitude with which the bragging is done. I can smile indulgently and encourage someone to continue their endeavors who, although they might not have quite as much reason to be proud as they perceive, as long as they aren't being an asshat about it.
My question was why are we more judgmental toward a person who's written something and can't seem to shut up than we are toward someone who can't shut up about their progeny? A boor is a boor.
Renee wrote: "..My question was why are we more judgmental toward a person who's written something and can't seem to shut up than we are toward someone who can't shut up about their progeny? A boor is a boor. ..."I'm sure one is as boring as the other, but in the grandparents case they aren't asking us to buy their progeny. I think society is more critical when the issue is sales promotion.
Just like any other things, proud grandparents can also become irritating when they start mentioning everything their grand kids did, what they ate, what they said. I don't really see a difference there. If it becomes a one way conversation, then it's narcissist. I don't care what the subject is. A conversation goes both ways.
Christine wrote: "Renee wrote: "..My question was why are we more judgmental toward a person who's written something and can't seem to shut up than we are toward someone who can't shut up about their progeny? A boor..."Great observation, Christine. Your response to Renee's question is much more succinct and clear than mine.
Renee wrote: "How is it any different when someone is exhibiting this exact same behavior when talking about their kids or grandkids? "Because the grandparent is not offering the child for sale and highlighting their accomplishments to generate more sales. Nor are they seeking multiple opinions about the worth of the child.
Can you imagine if grandparents asked the grandchild to do a little dance and then asked people to rate the performance on a scale of 1 to 5? ;)
Renee wrote: "Oh, believe me, I KNOW what a narcissist is. I have an NPD mother — and sister. In the malignant spectrum. I wasn't referring to the person DOING the bragging on their (grand)children, but our PE..."
Though it can be tiring, my annoyance is lessened for the grandparent, than the person trying to sell me something. It also bothers me much less when someone bragging, or talking up someone else too much versus that same person bragging on themselves. Bragging about yourself all the time doesn't make Kanye West look good, so why are authors shocked when people are giving them the side eye for the same behavior?
I'm annoyed by both, but at least the grandparent isn't trying to sell me anything...
Authors are not all trying to sell something either. Most of the time they offer their book free. One might say that at least one gets something out of it and not just a headache. Sorry to repeat myself but any, ANY one way conversation is irritating...Grandchild or book. As I said before, authors may brag about their books and not themselves, so same thing.Don't take me wrong. I'm not condoning what some authors do. I just don't like either. If you want to talk to me about unsolicitated subjects, accept that I might have something to say too. Now, I understand that with family members and friends, it's a different thing. I know them.
G.G. wrote: "Authors are not all trying to sell something either. Most of the time they offer their book free. One might say that at least one gets something out of it and not just a headache. Sorry to repeat m...""Most of the time", is stretching it a little don't you think? A lot of authors might have one or two freebies but most aren't giving every single title away.
Plus whenever someone is comparing a book to a child, they lost me right there. Writing is hard, I get it. I just don't drink the Koolaid that books have more value than any other art form, and above criticism for some odd reason. Another big difference between looking the other way with a friend talking too much about their child, and a writer going on about their book is the relationship to begin with. If someone is a friend, and they have an occasional annoying habit, it is much easier to look over it, and appreciate their other redeeming qualities. The same concept works with a friend who wrote a book they can't stop talking about. Some writer I don't know, sending me messages I didn't ask for, and clogging up my group trying to turn every conversation into an ad related to their book is completely different thing. That is just as annoying as emails shilling male performance enhancers. I also think there is a flaw in the assumption people aren't annoyed by strangers bragging about children, if the we don't agree. We might not say, "That child is not cute, can't sing, not that bright, etc..." out loud, but most of us think it to ourselves.
As an author, I can't imagine writing a review of my own book. Of course I am required to market the product of my work, but even that's not something I relish. Furthermore, I find very few people (even other writers) who want to talk about my book(s), much less read them. Most who do want to converse on the subject are typically just curious about the ROI of a book or how long it took to write. Truth is, I've seen more respect for the "art" of potting plants than for the work of authors.
Rayanne wrote: "As an author, I can't imagine writing a review of my own book. Of course I am required to market the product of my work, but even that's not something I relish. Furthermore, I find very few people ..."That's awful, Rayanne. The writers guild I belong to is full of supportive and interested people who (with a few exceptions), not only listen to each other, but ask each other sincere questions about their work, how things are going, etc. The group, as a whole, is also encouraging to young writers, even publishes an anthology of young writers yearly in addition to their regular anthology. They're welcoming to new writers and those dipping their toes in the waters. I feel very lucky, especially after hearing/seeing other people's experiences with groups.
It's easier to talk about your own work without that forced feeling that too often translates into self-serving jabber when you're around people like that.
Most of the writers I know are fairly introverted, and that doesn't make talking about our work easy or natural.
Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "G.G. wrote: "Authors are not all trying to sell something either. Most of the time they offer their book free. One might say that at least one gets something out of it and not just a headache. Sorr..."I didn't compare a book to a child, I compared the actions of the writer and the (grand)parents
Bragging, yammering interminably about ANYTHING is equally boring for the captive audience that's too polite to tell the yammerer to STFU. Whether they're trying to part us from money or just taking up our time.
Or not giving us a chance to bore them with our bullshit.
G.G. wrote: "Authors are not all trying to sell something either. Most of the time they offer their book free."Authors have a product, they want that product in the hands of readers, therefore they employ various advertising/marketing strategies to achieve that. Free is just one method. I disagree that "most of the time" authors offer their books for free and regardless, free is still a method of promotion and if you study economics you know there's no such thing as a free lunch. Ditto there's no such thing as a free book, the author will expect something in return. Usually reviews.
That aside, there are a small percentage of authors who don't seem to understand that constantly shouting/spamming about their book actually turns potential readers OFF.
The ones that really crawl up my nose are the authors who friend you on FB and within seconds of hitting accept you find that you are:
1. Spammed with PMs to BUY MY BOOK
2. Kidnapped into the author's fan group/street team/Q&A group to gush about/promote a book you've never heard of
3. They post adverts for their book multiple times on your timeline
4. They spam you with invites to like their page and to attend facebook events they have created to further spam their book
Those are the ones who go straight on my "will never read in this lifetime" list. I guess I should be thankful, they remove themselves from the total pool of books, so I have less to browse to find my next read :)
Renee wrote: "I didn't compare a book to a child, I compared the actions of the writer and the (grand)parentsBragging, yammering interminably about ANYTHING is equally boring for the captive audience that's too polite to tell the yammerer to STFU. Whether they're trying to part us from money or just taking up our time.
Or not giving us a chance to bore them with our bullshit.
"
I did say if there is not a pre-established relationship the patience level definitely does not exist to hear you go on and on. Be it books or babies. People in general have patience for people they care about's passion of the moment. My grandmother who is very religious, has a tendency to bring up God, in almost every conversation. I'm not that religious, but because I love her, she gets a pass. Jehovah's Witnesses that knock on my door early weekend mornings, not so much. That same concept work for authors. If you're my friend who happened to write a book, I'm going to expect a little overkill about your new exciting thing in your life. The same way I'd accept it from girlfriend with her first baby. Though I might glaze over if a nice strange lady talks too long about her new baby, my patience level is much lower for spammy authors. One I can at least blame on a possible hormonal imbalance due to the new mother oxytocin overload.
This is an interesting conversation. I believe, like many things, the tolerance of various things, whether it be an author going on and on about their book, an artist showing off their new work, or a parent gushing about their kids, is entirely personal.What irks one person on the 10th time of hearing something might irk another on only the 2nd time. And yes, most people are probably more tolerant of friends and family than they are strangers.
I agree with Theresa that this is an interesting conversation.With the (grand)parents, we all have something in our lives that we're passionate about, be it kids or our car or a hobby or whathaveyou. We like it when people show interst in that passion, and we expect others to reciprocate.
For those over-promoting writers, there are two aspects at play:
1. When you take a look at the quality of the book they're promoting, it tends to be pretty substandard. Since we've all had this experience with a bunch of these kinds of people, we tend to paint them all with the same brush - if they're over-promoting, they probably have no idea how to write.
2. The writers who over promote in this manner are going against social norms. Most of us feel that their behavior displays a certain lack of social awareness and class.
Basically, there's an inherent social contract in any kind of relationship. The (grand)parents are adhering to that contract. The over-promoting writers aren't. Thus, we are free to feel disdain for those writers and not for the (grand)parents without feeling hypocritical.
That's my take, anyway :)
Brian
John Grisham reviewed his new book on Goodreads.Egotistical, yes.
I never did see the point of rating or reviewing one's own books and have not done so for any of mine. Naturally, I'm going to give them all 5 stars! Duh! But, that's hardly an unbiased opinion, is it? All it does is artifically inflate one's ratings, which doesn't mean a damn thing. When readers who are total strangers post honest, unbiased reviews of my books, then it's not just me tooting my own horn. It's someone else doing it for me (well, hopefully, anyway!) and a much truer measure of the worth of my writing than my own opinion.
Cheryl wrote: "I never did see the point of rating or reviewing one's own books and have not done so for any of mine. Naturally, I'm going to give them all 5 stars! Duh! But, that's hardly an unbiased opinion, ..."I think that it could be used as kind of an author's note telling the reader about what you intended for the book. The purpose wouldn't really be a "review" but a personal note to share an anecdote about the writing. In that way, it could, perhaps, help you come across as friendly to your potential audience.
If I feel that an author is friendly and personable, I would be more inclined to buy the book, though the book still has to be interesting and of good quality. The only real benefit would be to make me read the sample if I were on the fence about it before reading the "review."
EDIT: I cannot recall a single instance of me reading an author's review like this or of being influenced in this manner, so, perhaps, Cheryl's question is very valid - What's the point?
I understand the use of the review for anecdotes or to add something about the book, how it came to be, etc., but one doesn't need to rate it to do so. It's the star rating I believe people don't readily accept while the notes are perfectly fine.
G.G. wrote: "I understand the use of the review for anecdotes or to add something about the book, how it came to be, etc., but one doesn't need to rate it to do so. It's the star rating I believe people don't..."
Really? I never really pay much attention at all to a book's overall star rating as it seems to be pretty meaningless to me. (A book that I count in my top 10 of all time, you might rate as 1 star and vice versa.) If ratings are somewhat meaningless, is it really a big deal if an author rates his book 5 stars?
I guess I just can't muster any outrage over an author doing that. I guess, though, if one were to consider the star ratings to have some kind of worth, then it would make sense to say that an author shouldn't artifically inflate that rating.
For the record, I do find star ratings useful for individual reviews, just not the overall star rating. It's helpful to read reviews of people who loved the book, people who hated the book, and people in the middle to get a good understanding of whether I might like it. The star rating is useful in determining from the start how the reviewer felt about the book.
Jim wrote: "Almost every literary website's discussion groups' rules include a ban on spamming. Whenever spamming does occur, it usually incites numerous posts by members of the group; expressing their displea..."This is kind of a difficult issue for me, as I am a reviewer, and I am on friendly terms with a number of authors on Goodreads, or email- but in one genre that I read often, I have known a number of authors to rate their own books.
I have promoted my own self-pubbed title on social media, and I did send a copy to a friend for review (though not repeatedly as spam that I recall), but I have an issue with authors reviewing/rating their own work.
I myself do not 'believe' in it- it seems like cheating, and if I ever do write properly I hope I will be able to refrain.
About a year or so ago, I noticed that the same names seemed to be cropping up over and over again on the reviews of titles by one author, and when the Amazon profiles of the people in question were checked, a number consisted entirely of reviews of that author's work.
I wonder if friends/very dedicated (to the point of fanaticism) fans of an author is considered as much of a social faux pas as self-reviewing?
Brian wrote: "G.G. wrote: "I understand the use of the review for anecdotes or to add something about the book, how it came to be, etc., but one doesn't need to rate it to do so. It's the star rating I believe..."
Just repeating what I've read countless time on GR. When it comes for me to choose a book to read, I go with the blurb and my gut feelings. I couldn't care less about the rating because it's too easy to mess these up with sock puppets, people mad about a review the author wrote for a book etc.
@Anna Friends/Very Dedicated Fans are often out of the control of the author(s). It's hard to blame someone for their zealous admirers when there's nothing they can do about it. However, my view on it might be biased because honestly, sometimes I secretly envy them. :P
G.G. wrote: "Brian wrote: "G.G. wrote: "I understand the use of the review for anecdotes or to add something about the book, how it came to be, etc., but one doesn't need to rate it to do so. It's the star ra..."
Ha ha, I understand that. Though I have a suspicion that one of the reviewers was a relative of the author, or an 'insider' who by her own admission had read the author's books before they were published (not through Netgalley etc that I know of). In such cases I can't help thinking there are issues of objectivity......
When it comes specifically to authors rating their own books, I don't really feel any way about it. At this point, it's become par for the course, and it doesn't bother me when done under their own name. Now it's completely different, if they created a whole bunch of sock accounts, just to give their book a lot of glowing reviews. I was charmed a little by a writer that gave her book a 4. When asked, she honestly felt her work was solid, and enjoyable but couldn't rank it with her own favorite books. It got me to read her book, and it got a 4 from me too, for the same reasons.
To me, both the following reviews are absolutely worthless:A. This book RULZ!!! 5 Stars!!!!!
B. This book SUX!!! 1 Star!
I disregard them and move to the next review. Isn't the point of a review to help a potential customer make a decision on a purchase? The best way to do that, imo, is to list, as clearly as possible, both what you liked about the book and what you didn't like.
I seriously doubt there exists in the world a single person that shares my exact taste in books. That being the case, anyone telling me, "Hey, read this book because I liked it" does me no good. Telling me, "Hey, the plot had some holes and there were typos, but I liked the characters and the action kept me turning the pages" helps me make a decision.
Brian wrote: "To me, both the following reviews are absolutely worthless:A. This book RULZ!!! 5 Stars!!!!!
B. This book SUX!!! 1 Star!
I disregard them and move to the next review. Isn't the point of a revi..."
Brian,
Very good observation.
There are obviously some who post book reviews who have no idea of the actual meaning of the word or its purpose.
The formal definition is: To write a critical examination of (~ a novel). The key word being examination, which in turn is defined: To inspect closely; not, as you point out in your post, to merely issue a one-word positive or negative exclamation.
Brian wrote: "To me, both the following reviews are absolutely worthless:A. This book RULZ!!! 5 Stars!!!!!
B. This book SUX!!! 1 Star!
I disregard them and move to the next review. Isn't the point of a revi..."
This is like how gymnastics used to be judged. Throw out the highest and lowest scrores and average the rest. (Maybe they still are, I don't know.)
I've seen authors rate and review their own books. They also list them in their list of books they've read. We'll, yeah, they read them, or I hope they did. I don't do that, but I won't fault someone else who does. I pay no attention to them, however, when judging the book.
To spam or not to spam, that is the question. Self-promotion is like anything else. There are extremes. Do none or do WAY too much. Getting the right balance comes with experience.
Unfortunately, authors learn to spam due to marketing strategies in other industries. They send out gazillions of emails and letters with the hope of picking up 1-5% of the distributed spam. That may work for funeral insurance sales, but it doesn't work in every industry, and publishing is one where it doesn't work.
That needs to be part of an author's education, but being a new author can be sort of like becoming a new parent. There is no one definitive user's manual. There's a lot of trial and error, usually with a lot more error than success.
Oh, and give us proud parents and grandparents a break. Now, take my daughter for example...
Roger wrote: "I've seen authors rate and review their own books. They also list them in their list of books they've read. We'll, yeah, they read them, or I hope they did. I don't do that, but I won't fault someone else who does. I pay no attention to them, however, when judging the book...."
I am guilty of listing my books among those I read. Well, to honest, I DID read them.
I am guilty of listing my books among those I read. Well, to honest, I DID read them.
I am guilty too. I listed my books among those I read because I've read them and on top of it all, they are also the only ones I've read more than once. :p
Roger wrote: "Brian wrote: "To me, both the following reviews are absolutely worthless:A. This book RULZ!!! 5 Stars!!!!!
B. This book SUX!!! 1 Star!
I disregard them and move to the next review. Isn't the p..."
Roger,
Regarding your post (#43); a wonderful example of blending factual observation and sound advice with just the right touch of humor.
Renee wrote: "This is how you write a review of your own book, lol!https://www.goodreads.com/review/show..."
That's a good piece of marketing there. It shows off his likable personality and writing style. I'm compelled to take a look at his books.
I think I'll friend him and pick his brain about marketing...
Renee wrote: "This is how you write a review of your own book, lol!https://www.goodreads.com/review/show..."
Very clever and original. A blend of humor, self-deprecation, and savvy marketing technique. Well done!
All of Rothfuss' reviews are worth reading, especially the one of the children's book, Eloise. His blog is one of the few I read, and if actions toward one's fellow man are any indication, he's a profoundly decent human being.
An author's response to negative reactions to aggressive self-promotional efforts usually include exclamations of shock for being accused of spamming or expressions of self-righteous dismay upon having their well-intended effort to promote their book unfairly attacked.
The exact meaning of just what spamming entails, as interpreted by the accused party and his/her accusers, often differs.
The Merriam-Webster English Dictionary defines spamming as: "The use of electronic messaging systems (SPAM) especially advertising indiscriminately or sending messages repeatedly on the same site."
In my humble opinion, the formal definition is self-explanatory. If someone repeatedly and often posts advertisements for the same book on a thread designated for self-promotion or self-promotes on threads clearly not intended for self-promotion, such activity constitutes spamming.
Spammers in general have a habit of indulging in the "I" syndrome - the over-utilization of the personal pronouns: I, me, my, and mine - when promoting their work. Please note the use of the term over-utilization, not utilization. There is a distinct difference. The "I" syndrome is a clear symptom of narcissism.
The Merriam-Webster English Dictionary defines narcissism as: "Undue dwelling on one's own self or attainments."
Some authors choose to post a rating and review of their own work. With extremely few exceptions, they rate their book five-stars and proclaim it to be exceptionally entertaining and well-written. There is nothing wrong with such high self-esteem; however, it is often, if not always, looked upon with skepticism. An author's opinion of their own book is akin to a proud new parent's opinion of their new baby. The chances of either opinion being unbiased or dependable are slim to none.
I am certain that there will be some who disagree with the above statements. That is their prerogative. However, there is a popular business adage which I believe applies: "Your work speaks for itself. Don't interrupt!"