NetGalley Addicts Support Group discussion
Need Help? [Ask the Group]
>
Another Day - another rejection
date
newest »


The publisher of this particular book suggested this saying Amazon just keep moving the goalposts, so not mentioning ARCs or NetGalley at all is good advice.
It can continue on Goodreads and private. Blog posts

if the publisher is saying that, they are requesting that you circumvent policy which means maybe they have something going on internally that may be triggering additional watchfulness - i wouldn't risk not declaring - publish on GR/B&N etc
do a chat to amazon and ask them why it was rejected - what specifically - typically its a bot that does the posting and asking for clarification can get stuff overturned


while this talks to larger social media footprint its pretty clear that if you get a product for free in the UK you have to disclose it:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publica...
Any form of reward, including money, gifts of services or products, or the loan of a product, is ‘payment’ – whether you originally asked for it or got sent it out of the blue (e.g. ‘freebies’). Influencers receive freebies because of their high public profile and because brands or businesses hope they might post about them in return. If you have not purchased a product or service yourself, but received it free, make this clear.

So are we totally damned if we declare or rather rejected by Amazon or if we don’t then in another kind of trouble?
Bookouture does have a London address for its U.K. publications including this one even if its parent company is USA based.

Amazon is a consumer site not social media so technically not covered by this.
Publishers push for Amazon reviews likely more than blog post from minnows like me. So some kind of compromise needs to be found


I've reviewed your Amazon.com account, and I see you received the Containment: An utterly gripping thriller about a deadly pandemic (A Jake Parker Thriller) for free or at a discount. We couldn’t accept your review(s) because we do not permit reviews that are posted in exchange for compensation of any kind, including free or discounted copies of the product.
Yet:
From Amazon guidelines:
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.

So it’s a Catch-22 situation.
Think the key is to drop terms like eARC, ARC and NetGalley and just indicate in a more subtle way as others have suggested.




They clearly don’t understand the publishing industry. Review copies have been distributed for ages. I was the review editor for a small specialty magazine and we were inundated with review copies and proofs.

Now we all know when we accept an ARC the idea is hopefully we will read it and review, creating interest, etc. As Vivienne shares its worked like this for ages. I post reviews on Amazon because it’s a major platform. Personally when I’m looking at book reviews, recommendations it’s the last place I’m going. I’m looking at Goodreads, talking to my indie bookseller, my librarian, my Bookclub peeps, a few trusted bloggers.
Sorry, let me tell you how I really feel. ;-) It’s so much red tape after we’ve obtained/been sent an ARC, read it, written a review, tried posting, and the big A decides they’re the only ones that can premarket or work with reviewers.
No swears, no ‘exchange for an honest review’ just received an eARC.
I am flummoxed.
I did mention Covid-19 in review as it’s mentioned in the plot. Could this be a new trigger word? Or ‘violent’ used to describe a death in police raid.
It’s clearly something. If anyone wants to look at my review it’s for Containment by Nick Thacker.
I have advised the publisher about the issue and emailed Amazon community help asking for clarification.