The Extra Cool Group! (of people Michael is experimenting on) discussion
This topic is about
The Selection
New Topics!
>
Nastiness in the reviewing world
date
newest »
newest »
This is proof that there are all kinds of loonies out there, if you needed more. Negative press of this sort means I'll never read their stuff. Other than that, I think it's best just to ignore them.
Wouldn't it make you hesitant to write a negative review? You never know how an author will respond to one of your negative book review.
No, I'll still write a negative review if I feel it is warranted. I rarely get too nasty, though. It's just a book, after all. It's my opinion on one of many, many books. I usually write down why I didn't like it & if I get a stupid comment in one of my reviews, I ignore it. I might have deleted or reported a particularly idiotic one or two.I also don't tend to give new authors a negative public review. Most of those I read give me their books & if I can't give them 4 or 5 stars, I give them a private review, never even listing that I read their book. I do that with a dozen or two books a year.
That means I'm normally giving any public negative reviews to established, fairly well known authors. While there have been cases of flame wars starting over them, I find most of the really ridiculous examples are from new &/or self-published authors who don't know any better. I believe the case you pointed out here is one such.
It seems to me that the YA genre is particularly fraught with danger for such behavior, probably because a lot of those supporting the authors are hormone driven, idealistic teens. It's their nature to be combative & they are prone excessive zeal, but I don't read many of those books. Usually the protagonists are of the same sort & I went through hormone hell with my kids too recently.
;-)
Historically, I'm lenient towards emerging authors. I feel sympathy towards authors trying to make it in the writing world. However, I do not like pushy authors or the ones who reacted badly to a poor review. This Melissa Douthit had 27 sockpuppet accounts meant to stalk and harass reviewers. Here is some details on that:http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
On a positive note, here is a blog that puts the whole thing in perspective:
http://www.staciakane.net/2012/06/01/...
Mod
I tend to write reviews that point out flaws, even if I give a book 3 stars or more. That said, Events like this don't change how I would review in the least. If some author turns out to be an asshole who can't take honest reviews, that's not my problem. I'm here to share my opinions on books I've read, and that is pretty clearly what the book reviews on this site are supposed to do. I'm not here to be free publicity and to only say nice things, although if a book impresses me enough, that IS what I want to do.
So, this sucks, and it will ironically only be bad publicity for the idiot authors who get caught up in it. Meanwhile, it shouldn't impact anyone's book reviews, other than to perhaps reveal that we ought to keep in mind authors are on the internet, too.
This in the long run will hurt indie authors if the relationship between indie authors and reviewers turn combative instead of supportive. You're taking your time reading a book by an unknown author. If it's too risky reading an unknown with a chance of being harassed, why would you want to waste your time on an unknown?
Mod
Gosh a lot happens in absentia.When I bowed out a year ago, an author had just about managed to have someone in the industry fired for simply adding in a neutral comment in a negative review thread. And this was not the behaviour of an indie author, but rather a mainstream traditionally published one.
Egos aside, encouraging reviewers to write negative reviews is probably seen as ultimately threatening profits. Hence the round of stamping on reviewers who write negative reviews.
What would be nice to see disappear are personal attacks on either reviewers or authors. But no, seems this is still the status quo.
http://melissadouthit.com/2012/05/29/...