Petra X > Status Update

I assume writers of huge, successful books couldn't possibly care less what I have to say; and those of early career status or smaller reputation will just need to suck it up if they don't care for what I say.
YOU wrote the thing, not ME, so...deal.
That said, I don't go out of my way to bring ~meh~ and lower reviews to their attention. No need to be a dick about it.

When I review stuff I've been asked to I assume the author's gonna read because they usually do, but I'd rather they didn't! Usually don't like being surprised by an author reading a review of mine, even though I don't generally say anything mean, I just know I didn't write it ever thinking the author would read it... So it's not pleasant, I don't do it for them. I do it for readers, who also often get mad at me for my hot takes :P

Honestly, I just assume authors to be way above anything little old me has to say, I don’t think about them at all and assume they aren’t reading. Many of the authors I read are dead, or write in a language other than English, or are too popular to care about every little review, and most of the books I read aren’t brand new anyway. I don’t read self published books at all.

If authors did read my reviews I assume they wouldn’t get much out of them since they’re intended for other readers. I’ve done beta reading/constructive feedback for a friend and it’s a totally different animal from commenting on the merits of a finished product.

No, not in terms of shoulder-looking, mainly because I very rarely read books by authors I'm friends with or who follow me.

But if I dislike a book, I am slightly more inclined to err on the side of generosity for a new, unknown, or struggling author than for one famous, rich, or dead.

I appreciate the difficulty of writing and I can only imagine how vulnerable it makes an author feel to send their "children" out into a cruel and generally uncaring world. Mega successful writers will care little what I think but when reviewing the work of newer, less established authors, I try to be constructive and kind within the bounds of honesty.

I want fair, honest reviews. Your opinion. Attacking personally an author? That I don’t like.

I don't.

If an author can't take criticism_ not my problem.

Ha, I now remembered Lauren H who went on Twitter rant about mean nerds on GR because someone gave her book 4*(!!!!) and glowing review 😬

I'm addicted to these questions :) The answer is no: I write them for potential readers and myself; incidentally, they may draw the attention of the author but that's fortuitous and that's, at best an extra source of information on the book, at worst, a rant to be ignored :)


So far, only a couple of authors reacted to reviews I wrote on their works :)

Le crépuscule de l'occident - Chronique de la décadence, a book lent to me by a coworker in Lorient Sailing Museum

and

Ougarit, whose author talked me into reading in the first place :)

Richard wrote: "I assume writers of huge, successful books couldn't possibly care less what I have to say; ..."

I seem to remember Anne Rice getting on bad on Amazon after some crappy reviews.

Leo wrote: "I don't do it for them. I do it for readers, who also often get mad at me for my hot takes..."

I can't stand those people who don't like my reviews because they hold a different opinion. But I do like reasonable people who hold different opinions to mine, give us something to discuss and points out things I might have missed.

No, almost never. However I mostly read books that are already successful, and I don't imagine they will be impacted by my review. If I do want to review a book from an emerging or struggling author, I'm much more hesitant to fire away.

Emma Deplores Goodreads Censorship wrote: "Many of the authors I read are dead, or write in a language other than English.."

Dead authors are the best for not caring about negative reviews :-)

Cecily wrote: " if I dislike a book, I am slightly more inclined to err on the side of generosity for a new, unknown, or struggling author that for one famous, rich, or dead...."

That is nice of you. I should take a leaf out of your book and do that, but I never think of the authors, only the book.

Stephen wrote: "when reviewing the work of newer, less established authors, I try to be constructive and kind within the bounds of honesty ..."

If you and Cecily aren't friends, you should be :-)

K.J. wrote: "I want fair, honest reviews. Your opinion. Attacking personally an author? That I don’t like."

I've been discussing a review with a friend where the review is essentially an attack on the author but can also be read as a review. It's kind of a bandwagon, everyone is jumping on it with their reviews praising or denigrating the author. I'm glad it's one I'm not involved in!

Anna wrote: "... If an author can't take criticism_ not my problem..."

That should be the case, but just occasionally the author makes it the reviewer's problem. I've seen one author say they're going to report a reviewer to the reviewer's employer (they both work in the same profession, and the book was about the writer's experience). There was also the case of an author who travelled the length of the UK to assault a negative reviewer with a bottle:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...

Cecily wrote: "Anna wrote: "... If an author can't take criticism_ not my problem..."

That should be the case, but just occasionally the author makes it the reviewer's problem. I've seen one author say they're g..."

Authors who can't take criticism should stay away from GR after publication date so that they only read the gushing freebie reviews and never any from people who actually paid for the book.

I don't consider the author. I don't care that writing a book is a lot of work; that's irrelevant. If it's sold to the public, it's a product--a personal product in this case, but a product nonetheless. My thinking is, if you put out a product you have to be prepared for criticism of that product. If you don't think you can handle that, it's best not to publish. Admittedly, if I see that someone rates with the author in mind, I take their reviews less seriously because I can't trust that they're telling me their true feelings about what they read!

I also have preemptively blocked authors whose books I will be reviewing unfavorably. I don't do this a lot, but I have a few times, especially if the author is green.

Caroline wrote: "if I see that someone rates with the author in mind, I take their reviews less seriously because I can't trust that they're telling me their true feelings about what they read..."

Me too. When looking at books just released or not yet released, I like to sort for 3 stars/since very few people getting freebies from the author will rate that or less, but still a 3 star review usually tells me more than a 4 or 5 star fangirl gush.

I agree with Caroline: the buyer owes the seller nothing except for money. While I understand that authors are personally invested, too many forget that even art is a business when it's monetized.

JD wrote: "I agree with Caroline: the buyer owes the seller nothing except for money. While I understand that authors are personally invested, too many forget that even art is a business when it's monetized."

It's when money isn't involved, freebies, and it is 'in exchange for an honest review' and expectation is that it will be a good one. There are many honest ARC reviewers (in my friends list for instance) but the overwhelming majority just gush. I sort all new books by text/newest to try to find ones from people who did pay (or borrow) the book.

It’s when money isn't involved, freebies, and it is 'in exchange for an honest review' and expectation is that it will be a good one. There are many honest ARC reviewers (in my friends list for instance) but the overwhelming majority just gush. I sort all new books by text/newest to try to find ones from people who did pay (or borrow) the book.."

If that’s what reviewers are doing (giving me a good review because I ask for an honest review), then I as an author am also disappointed. I do not seek out reviews from review sites with expectation of five stars. But it can be hard for a no-name author to get traction with zero reviews. So we really do try hard to ask for reviews from a variety of places, such as NetGalley, so a new reader at least has something to go on. What is suggestion from readers? How do I help you trust my book is worth reading? Is it better to not put out any ARCs and just release my book? I really would like to know. Thanks.

K.J. wrote: " What is suggestion from readers? How do I help you trust my book is worth reading? Is it better to not put out any ARCs and just release my book? I really would like to know. Thanks..."

KJ I think ARCs can be helpful for authors when done right. If you have ARC readers who are your target audience, they'll likely have friends who will like the book too. It helps get the word out.

I'm on a few indie authors' ARC teams. For one author, when I signed up for the ARC team she sent me a form to fill out. In the form it detailed she wanted a honest review, no matter the rating. She said she would never remove a person from their ARC team based on the rating of the review. I've never seen this author publicly bash a negative review to her fans (venting in private is understable for anyone). Or confront a negative reviewer. That sets the tone to her fans to know they won't be penalized (even simply complained about, indirectly) if they leave a negative or critical review.

Some ARC reviewers are so used to kissing ass, and very sensitive about hurting authors' feelings, they'll likely inflate the rating for your book no matter what. That's out of your control for the most part. Other authors encourage this behavior from their readers.

K.J. wrote: "I want fair, honest reviews. Your opinion. Attacking personally an author? That I don’t like."

See msg 25 (and subsequent perhaps) here by a reviewer than aims never to disappoint, and has rated three-quarters of all the books she reads at 5 star, and over 20% at 4 star. Still I suppose it ensures her a steady stream of free books from 'her' authors.

K.J. wrote: "So we really do try hard to ask for reviews from a variety of places, such as NetGalley, so a new reader at least has something to go on...."

I think you have the right idea with NetGalley rather than Facebook groups which if nothing else are going to guilt friends who get freebies into being generous at the least with their assessments.

I had the opposite problem. I'm also an author, but I tried hard to discourage reviews since I knew they were fake. My book only sold on the island so it was no good people pretending they'd read it, which was weird really. I don't use my author's profile at all.

I felt less pressure when I got ARCs from Netgalley because there was more distance between the author & I. Often it was the publisher handling it. Booksprout is another good one, because the author just puts their free copies on the website. Anyone can sign up for an ARC, and Booksprout doesn't penalize negative reviews. They require disclosures--they actually tell reviewers to copy & paste a disclosure that they received a free book into the review.

Petra, I'm not on Facebook, but I have friends in author fb groups. Authors whine and whine and whine about negative reviews. Cry about their feelings being hurt, Goodreads being cruel and full of "trolls." Many of the fans will openly say they won't rate a book less than 4 stars even if they didn't like it, because they think it will either 1) Hurt the author's feelings or 2) Harm the author's business. Many of the authors openly agree & encourage this sentiment. They truly seem to think of negative reviews as bullying & harassment to the author. It's Stop the Goodreads Bullies Campaign all over again. I'm sorry, but a negative review comes no where near bullying.

I never take it into consideration....I always write my review, and I tell them why or I'm sorry in the author's only portion if I'm leaving a rough review. Only twice have I DNF'd and didn't post a review, I just cancelled the ARC. But I've had author's leave me messages on bad reviews saying thanks for the honest criticism and I've had authors leave me snarky messages, which I snark right back lol. I started doing ARCs and have always kept in mind that I would be honest because I hate when I read a book that's a 3 star at best and there's all these phenomenal 5 star reviews, I get mad. I also try to explain in my reviews why I liked it so people can see where I'm coming from. I review through Booksprout and I've never felt pressure to rate a certain way.

I don't take an author into consideration because I NEVER disrespect or discuss their persona. I comment strictly on the content/writing of a book they wrote and are selling If someone is against people discussing their books and not gushing, that's not my problem😇

Nope. Why would I care what the author thinks? H/ever, I try NEVER to be disrespectful to an author even if I don't like the book. After all, they have written a book and got it published, something I could not do. Although it shocks me that some books get published at all.

Petra X needs new friends after pruning the FrList wrote: "There are many honest ARC reviewers (in my friends list for instance) but the overwhelming majority just gush."

With the gushing, it's hard to tell whether reviewers are genuine or only gushing to make sure they can win ARCs in the future. :/ Better to be honest if the reviewing system here is to have any integrity. I'm honest; that possibly has hurt my chances of winning books here on GR, but recently I won two, so I don't know. I know it hasn't hurt my chances of winning elsewhere. I did, however, stop getting offers directly from Simon & Schuster a few years ago after one too many unfavorable reviews. That's a bummer, but I don't regret writing the unfavorable reviews. It's not like the ARC is our one and only chance to ever read that book.

Meredith wrote: They truly seem to think of negative reviews as bullying & harassment to the author. , ..."

How about this Goodreads author on 1 and 2 star reviews. The last comment: "I guess the safest way of using NetGallery would be to buy a plan from them directly since this lets you check and prevent poor reviewers from getting access to your book. Sadly, the only such package available on NetGallery to direct buyers costs $400 for 6 months. Not many can afford that"

Niki wrote: " I've had author's leave me messages on bad reviews saying thanks for the honest criticism ..."

This is sensible. What authors who only want 4/5 star gushing ARC reviews don't realise, is that they are trying to influence future sales (and massage their snowflake egos) but they don't know really how their product is going to be received. Absolutely 100% honest reviews are necessary for them to know that, and possibly change the product if it is not well received and the reviews are pointing out why.

With product (not books) market research companies do focus groups in the projected demographics to find out about the product and it's packaging. I've been part of those groups from the field end and from the commissioning (inc. analysis) end. Sensible authors will use honest reviews like that.

Meredith wrote: "Cry about their feelings being hurt, Goodreads being cruel and full of "trolls.""

Anyone this fragile should not be publishing. I've seen similar--authors get pissed off and then trash the site as a whole and the reviewers. It's all sour grapes. The stuff they say about us reviewers is beyond infuriating.

Meredith wrote: "Many of the fans will openly say they won't rate a book less than 4 stars even if they didn't like it . . . "

A favorite author of mine has stated that she only rates books here that she awards five stars. All others she never logs. O_o

Meredith wrote: "the author just puts their free copies on the website. Anyone can sign up for an ARC, and Booksprout doesn't penalize negative reviews..."

I've been reading more of the above author (link in msg 31) thinks about books as product: "When books are seen as products no different from bottles of soda in a supermarket store, that’s a sure sign the society is in deep trouble."

"These so-called reviewers are not in it for a debate or to broaden their horizons. They are in it solely to enforce their personal taste and slam you if you fail to cater to it. Like the communist censors, these are not true book lovers who’d actually care to invest in buying books. They use book review services such as Booksprout to get books for free only to trash them at will."

The whole of this author's viewpoint is worth reading because it represents such a completely different one than most of us see here.

Petra X needs new friends after pruning the FrList wrote: "Meredith wrote: They truly seem to think of negative reviews as bullying & harassment to the author. , ..."

How about this Goodreads author on 1 and 2 star reviews. The last comment: "I guess the ..."

I disagree with the author's take in that article.

I was going to say Booksprout is better than Netgalley, because authors can't approve or disapprove a reader getting the ARC on Booksprout. On Netgalley, publishers/authors do have the option to view how a reader rates/reviews books before they grant the ARC request (I didn't realize it cost that much money, though). Booksprout does not give the option for authors to do that. Once the copies are up, anyone can request a copy, even if they've previously rated that author's book 1 star. The request will be granted if copies are still available (Booksprout limits how many copies go out--it's first come first serve basis)

That the author claims reddit is a haven for trolls makes me roll my eyes. Reddit is huge, the problematic subreddits make up less than 1% of the website. I was active on reddit for years, and yes there are trolls. Reddit is known for censorship & shutting down many right wing, extremist subreddits. They shut down subreddits all the time. Any mod of a subreddit has the ability to censor & ban a troll (I know, because I was a mod on a subreddit).

While there are certainly Goodreaders who only leave authors 1 stars (sometimes not even a review) I've seen no evidence that hurts their business or career. And we all know Goodreads now has a policy where reviews can be easily hidden or deleted if the author or fan makes enough fuss for not liking it. The Goodreader I was talking about earlier who sent the private messages out about me? I've seen her confront 'trolls' on Goodreads who leave authors 1 stars without reviews. It only made the troll more determined to leave more 1 stars. I think it comes down to a question--how much should Goodreads be willing to censor vs. allowing readers to freely express themselves? When it comes to free expression, there will always be those who take advantage & might just leave authors 1 stars because they can. Should Goodreads stop those users? Is it worth going down the path of more censorship?

Petra X needs new friends after pruning the FrList wrote: ""When books are seen as products no different from bottles of soda in a supermarket store, that’s a sure sign the society is in deep trouble."

"These so-called reviewers are not in it for a debate or to broaden their horizons. They are in it solely to enforce their personal taste and slam you if you fail to cater to it. Like the communist censors, these are not true book lovers who’d actually care to invest in buying books. They use book review services such as Booksprout to get books for free only to trash them at will.""

This is nutty, to put it kindly. I opened the article but couldn't make it past the headline; it alone is infuriating enough.

Meredith wrote: " I've seen no evidence that hurts their business or career."

Yeah, and they shouldn't get so worked up; active GR users (aka the people most likely to see the unfavorable reviews) make up a mere fraction of the readers in this world. I know that none of the readers I know IRL use GR. Some have never even heard of it.

lol I just read the second article Petra linked. Goodreads users/Goodreads reviews aren't censors. No review has caused a book to be unpublished on Amazon. With self-publishing there are no gatekeepers. The censorship comes from Amazon itself, and when they decide to ban a book.

That's true, the majority of readers just consume books - they're not active on Facebook or Goodreads.

I just read the article and it's a straw(wo)man's argument for three reasons:

1) The absurdity of comparing Goodreads, a subsidiary of the one of the most massive capitalistic enterprises of all time (Amazon), to Communism.

2) Equating everyone who leaves low ratings to trolls because...I don't know, it's impossible for a book to be bad? There's a lot of bad "art" out there.

3) The idea that art isn't labor is A) Not true; and B) An extraordinarily classist argument.

4) The idea that art isn't a product: well, honey, if that's what you believe, then don't sell it! You don't get to claim that your book isn't a product and then charge money for it. You see, that's called "hypocrisy."

That said, I don't support bullying. I've been the target of a fan's targeted hate campaign because I dared to leave one star for his bestie's book. Certainly, no one should have attacked her. But, that's a separate issue from her real complaint. GR advises authors not to read their reviews; she should have taken their advice.

And I agree with Meredith: a negative review of a book on GR isn't censorship or even "cancel culture" because the book is still being sold.

Last comment (sorry -- I don't mean to leave so many): this author clearly has an agenda since she's written at least two posts on the subject.

And anyone who claims that books aren't "products" while simultaneously promoting on their website their books on self-publishing and marketing possesses little self-awareness: https://www.matejaklaric.com/. Take a look at the one about getting book reviews.

JD wrote: "I just read the article and it's a straw(wo)man's argument for three reasons:

1) The absurdity of comparing Goodreads, a subsidiary of the one of the most massive capitalistic enterprises of all t..."

JD, I agree with your points!! I've read the article and I've been laughing at 1)the hypocrisy of this author 2) the equation between communism and trolls' activity. I just cannot w the absurdity of it all 😂🤡 so she denounces communism w the censorship and srly tells us that the books were products back then and I'm just looking at her statement w wonder cuz PLEASE you want to censor trolls but speak about the freedom of speech??? And how do you know the person didn't actually read the book? Yes I agree that people who didn't read the book shouldn't make asses of themselves but in 98% of cases you cannot be sure. Her talking abt communism and then dishing out all the hypocrisy pissed me TF off. Read Russian literature from the said period and find out how much of real art you'll find. Somehow I'm sure the author's books are not worthy because her attitude is a AbSuRd

It is ironic how she's marketing her own books so heavily, giving authors advice on how to get reviews so they can sell more books, yet expects readers to treat her books like art & not a product they purchased. "I’m pretty sure books were seen as nothing but products in those dark times of Russian totalitarianism too." Yikes. I can't believe she actually said that.

You know, I do agree with the comment above from Cecily that when I leave a review for a newer author, I watch the tone of my review more. If I have complaints about the book I still air them, but I do have empathy that an unseasoned author may not have developed thick skin yet. I lose a lot of compassion for authors who show entitlement with the attitude that they should only get good reviews on Goodreads & anything less is trolling.

The only case of trolling I've seen on Goodreads that was truly terrible, and Goodreads should have taken action sooner was what happened to Patrick Tomlinson: https://www.patreon.com/posts/32921860 This was a case of an organized troll group from Twitter using Goodreads to harass an author. They impersonated people like his dead family members & even Otis from GR. There's another article this author links to, where I doubt the claims there were actually trolls attacking the author: https://readthebloodybook.com/2015/06... I have never heard of Goodreads deleting other GR users accounts based on the word of a single GR librarian. Whoever authored that article seems like a rumor mill. This is the kind of OTT talk from authors about GR trolls that lacks credibility imo. Some authors use the word troll so much, the word has lost all meaning.

Meredith wrote: "On Netgalley, publishers/authors do have the option to view how a reader rates/reviews books before they grant the ARC request..."

Absolutely no wonder that some reviewers gush, they want to ensure that their supply of free books. Sick.

JD wrote: "Last comment (sorry -- I don't mean to leave so many)" ..."

Please contineu to do so, this is an interesting discussion we are having.

btw I hope everyone has blocked that author.

Meredith wrote: "IThe only case of trolling I've seen on Goodreads that was truly terrible, and Goodreads should have taken action sooner was what happened to Patrick Tomlinson..."

What was that about?

Caroline wrote: "I know that none of the readers I know IRL use GR. Some have never even heard of it..."

GR is run by the Kindle division of Amazon. I think people who buy print all know of Amazon, and GR is direct and probably effective marketing for books on Kindle.

Meredith wrote: "There's another article this author links to, where I doubt the claims there were actually trolls attacking the author: https://readthebloodybook.com/2015/06... ..."

That article was full of shit. I don't believe for one moment that people who loved her book are writing to tell her they are frightened to leave a positive review in case they get their accounts deleted. What genre does she write in? Dystopian fantasy?