# Rant: Why Must Promotion Sites Require 4 Stars?



## J. W. Rolfe (Oct 21, 2012)

Okay, I just received a good/mediocre review (3 stars) and feel somewhat perplexed, asking myself why do 3 star reviews bother me? It didn't take long to realize the answer. It's because of all of those sites that will absolutely refuse to promote your book unless it has a solid 4.0 rating or higher. I know, I know. They do it to help filter out all of the requests for promotions they receive. The problem is that it's a terrible method of judging the merits of an author's work. Do they not realize that anyone can write a review. It could be a high school dropout with a 3rd grade reading level or a Ph.D from Harvard who's doing the critique. There's no way of knowing. Heck, people don't even have to buy the book to write one. 

As for the 3 star review, I'm actually not all that irked by it. For the most part it was positive and the writer said they would read other works that I write. They just that weren't enthused by my ending. The only thing that really bugs me is how too many 3 star ratings can make you ineligible for promotions.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

For our KB promotions, we do have a 4-star requirement, and - you're right - we do it to limit the number of submissions that we receive. 

I agree, though, it can be unfair, and we sometimes make exceptions for it. I would recommend submitting anyway if your book is just under the 4-star rating, and we can communicate from there.


----------



## timskorn (Nov 7, 2012)

I wonder if there should be a secondary filter along with the 4 star rating, such as the total number of reviews?  If you're under 4 stars but also under 10 reviews, should you still be excluded?  The star system is arbitrary anyway and wholly dependent on the individual, but it exists nonetheless.  Some people give 5 stars to anything they remotely enjoy, others only give 5 stars to what *they* consider stunning literary achievements.  In that person's scale, then, a 3 star rating would be a good thing.  And, even though Amazon considers 3 stars "critical", I think any review that gives 3 stars or higher is great (in the context of the overall arbitrariness of it all).


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

J. W. Rolfe said:


> The problem is that it's a terrible method of judging the merits of an author's work.


Do you have a better system for judging the merits of an author's work?


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Yep, it's kind of silly. Some of the best modern writers working today are averaging 3 stars or 3 1/2 stars on Amazon with some of their best books. Look at Zadie Smith or Ian McEwan.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

timskorn said:


> I wonder if there should be a secondary filter along with the 4 star rating, such as the total number of reviews? If you're under 4 stars but also under 10 reviews, should you still be excluded? The star system is arbitrary anyway and wholly dependent on the individual, but it exists nonetheless. Some people give 5 stars to anything they remotely enjoy, others only give 5 stars to what *they* consider stunning literary achievements. In that person's scale, then, a 3 star rating would be a good thing. And, even though Amazon considers 3 stars "critical", I think any review that gives 3 stars or higher is great (in the context of the overall arbitrariness of it all).


Most sites require a minimum number of reviews (usually around 10 or 12 I think, and a 4+ overall rating which would be the average. If you only have a few reviews and a 5 star rating or only a few reviews and a 1 star rating it's not really a good judge of the book. If you have 50 reviews and a 2 star rating then it's likely that the book is worthy of its rating.


----------



## lynnfromthesouth (Jun 21, 2012)

A lot of people game that system to get up to 4 stars, though, and their reviews don't really reflect how good their book is either.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

The issue that I'm currently having is that the first book in my series has 45 reviews and a 4+ overall rating (it's perma-free) but the omnibus version of the 3 books only has 1 review. I'd like to get the omnibus reviewed more so that I can start submitting that to the bargain sites.


----------



## J. W. Rolfe (Oct 21, 2012)

The whole 4+ stars thing seems a lot like how Rotten Tomatoes does its system of determining whether or not something is "rotten" or "fresh." The big difference is that the people doing the reviews are known and have some credibility to go along with their opinions. It's also usually the same reviewers each time. 

As for a better system, how about actually reading some of the reviews to get an idea as to why the book is good/mediocre/bad?

The 4+ stars rule has also caused people to game the system with either paid reviews, review swaps, or just pushing every last friend and family member to write "Wow (insert title) was amazing!" 5 stars.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> If you have 50 reviews and a 2 star rating then it's likely that the book is worthy of its rating.


Have to completely disagree with you.

A high star rating is often more likely to indicate good marketing to a targeted audience. That's why genre fiction always gets higher ratings than literary fiction.

I just don't want people on here thinking they wrote a bad book because they have a lower star rating than Debbie Does Dallas.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Just as I reached 10 reviews (a much more fair threshold) on Rune Breaker #1, someone gave me a 3-star review that dropped me to 3.9. The review was also much, much more glowing than most of my 5-stars.

Amazon also takes pleasure in using a quote from my ONLY 1-star review in the quotations section, right below a positive quote that contradicts it.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Cappy said:


> Have to completely disagree with you.
> 
> A high star rating is often more likely to indicate good marketing to a targeted audience.


Isn't this something that the bargain sites would be interested in? That the submitted book has a cover, blurb and other marketing indicators that point it towards a specific, targeted audience that likes the books? That's what the bargain book sites do. They put the book up with the materials (cover, blurb) that have already been created by the author/publisher and hope that the people attracted to that cover/blurb get exactly what they hoped for, in other words: good marketing to a target audience.

If an author isn't capable of finding their target audience (an audience that will review the book well), putting it up on a bargain site isn't going to help. You could end up with thousands of people who thought the book was one thing, when it is actually something else. That would make the bargain book site look bad because their "recommendation" (that's what many people think they are getting when they subscribe to a bargain book site) would be bad.


----------



## Alain Gomez (Nov 12, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> If you have 50 reviews and a 2 star rating then it's likely that the book is worthy of its rating.


Keep in mind that some people rate books poorly just because it took too long to download on their kindles.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Alain Gomez said:


> Keep in mind that some people rate books poorly just because it took too long to download on their kindles.


true, but the rare poor rating on a book with 50 reviews isn't going to drop its rating by much. If everybody is rating it poorly because it's taking too long to download then there might be a problem with it, as reflected in the reviews.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

J. W. Rolfe said:


> As for a better system, how about actually reading some of the reviews to get an idea as to why the book is good/mediocre/bad?


If the books are being reviewed by "high school dropouts with a 3rd grade reading level" what good would that do other than to waste the time of the bargain book site runner. I'm sure they receive so many submissions that this would be nearly impossible.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> Isn't this something that the bargain sites would be interested in? That the submitted book has a cover, blurb and other marketing indicators that point it towards a specific, targeted audience that likes the books?


True. But it also adds to the mountain of 'marketing-led' books. What if I don't want to read about Zombies or Vampires constantly? What if I just want a good story? A story that I might not have thought of reading before? Ian McEwan's latest book for instance, Sweet Tooth -- part spy story, part historical fiction, part social commentary, and, at times, an infuriating read. Only rated 3 1/2 stars on Amazon. But I'm so glad I read it.

At least Amazon promotes books that are good on their own merit as well as targeted books.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

They're running businesses where they have determined their readers are more likely to want to download only books that are "higher rated". I get it. Makes sense, no?

We don't discriminate on reviews at all. We list everything (well, 99.5%). That's just our business decision. That being said, there are often some books we have to remove that don't make the cut for whatever reason as we deem fit.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Cappy said:


> True. But it also adds to the mountain of 'marketing-led' books. What if I don't want to read about Zombies or Vampires constantly? What if I just want a good story? A story that I might not have thought of reading before? Ian McEwan's latest book for instance, Sweet Tooth -- part spy story, part historical fiction, part social commentary, and, at times, an infuriating read. Only rated 3 1/2 stars on Amazon. But I'm so glad I read it.
> 
> At least Amazon promotes books that are good on their own merit as well as targeted books.


No doubt there are plenty of good books out there that deserve higher user-reviews than they have (The Raw Shark Texts comes to mind) but I don't necessarily equate highly rated reviews with genre or marketing capacity. There are plenty of zombie and vampire books with low ratings. Alternatively, a non-genre title doesn't _have_ to have a low rating just because it's not zombies or vampires (for example: The Dog Stars, A Prayer for the Dying, or The Fault in Our Stars)


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

These review sites get so many book requests that they have to put in some sort of vetting process first. The star rating is the simplest way to do that, even though it's not the best. Some of the popular sites require even more than that (editorial reviews and a lot of reviews that average to four stars).

And those are the sites that are gold because they're picky so when they promote a book to their subscribers, they sell a boatload.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

NathanWrann said:


> The issue that I'm currently having is that the first book in my series has 45 reviews and a 4+ overall rating (it's perma-free) but the omnibus version of the 3 books only has 1 review. I'd like to get the omnibus reviewed more so that I can start submitting that to the bargain sites.


Check some sites--you may still be able to get them to advertise for you. I submitted my Omnibus to Bookbub a few weeks ago. It had only one review, but I'm assuming they looked at the reviews of the books that make it up and saw almost 300 total. They approved my listing--although, ultimately I decided against using that book because I can't sell it for what they wanted me to sell it for. Maybe when I have more books out I can. Instead, I submitted a book with two volumes from my series. It's been out for almost two years, but only had 5 reviews. (still does, in fact) but they still took it.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> Check some sites--you may still be able to get them to advertise for you. I submitted my Omnibus to Bookbub a few weeks ago. It had only one review, but I'm assuming they looked at the reviews of the books that make it up and saw almost 300 total. They approved my listing--although, ultimately I decided against using that book because I can't sell it for what they wanted me to sell it for. Maybe when I have more books out I can. Instead, I submitted a book with two volumes from my series. It's been out for almost two years, but only had 5 reviews. (still does, in fact) but they still took it.


Thanks for the info. I put my perma-free up on BookBub and did really well (even pulled in a ton of good reviews in the weeks following the promotion). I'll submit it and see what happens.


----------



## Guest (Mar 24, 2013)

I think it is ridiculous for an advertiser to refuse my money based on an arbitrary rating or number of reviews. The rating requirement is one of the reasons the ratings no longer mean anything, because 

1. Authors inflate the reviews they leave for other authors, because they don't want to "hurt" a fellow author's star rating
2. People create sock puppet reviews to counter the effects of lower stars
3. People pay for reviews in order to meet arbitrary requirements
4. People start "down voting" honest reviews and actively summon up virtual lynch mobs to get honest reviews removed simply because the stars pulled down the rating

All the sites that require the mandatory star rating and/or number of reviews are complicit in encouraging the very activities that make reviews worthless.


----------



## heavycat (Feb 14, 2011)

It's a good question.  I would add the following question:  

Why is it the moment someone has the slightest success their first impulse is to pull up the ladder?


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

I'm not even trying anymore.

I have a few books that have enough reviews and an over 4 star average, but they contain explicit scenes. They're not porn. They're not even erotica. They just contain explicit scenes of all kinds like explicit waging of war, explicit eating and drinking, explicit killing and, of yes, explicit sex. Of the gay kind.

Well, at least it's one thing less to worry about.


----------



## Jay Allan (Aug 20, 2012)

I understand the need for a quality filter for advertising sites, though I do feel the 4-star requirement contributes enormously to the fake review problem.  Beyond fake reviews, I one author has an email list then he or she can probably harangue their most receptive audience to write reviews.  Not that there is anything wrong with that, but it really doesn't give a true look at book quality.

The review scale means different things for different readers.  Some, probably myself included, reserve 5 stars for something they truly consider a classic.  I have tons of 4 star reviews (and some three star ones too) that are very favorable, mentioning how they've bought every book in the series, etc.  Obviously, lots of 5 star reviews are legit, but since almost all fake ones are 5 stars, you have to wonder what percentage are bogus.  When an author gets an undeserved 1 star review from someone who simply didn't read the description, they need 3-5 star reviews to balance it out to a 4 star average.  And that is just 4 stars, hanging on by fingernails to the acceptable range.

How many times does a bad review get left because a reader didn't read the description or doesn't like the genre?  The review system is too loose, too subject to manipulation and fraud, and too poorly defined to be a good filter of anything.

I understand the situation the advertising sites are in.  They need an easy quality filter, but I'm just not sure this is a good one.  At the least, I think the threshold should go down a bit as the number of reviews goes up.  A book with a 3.8 rating and 100 reviews is probably a far better bet than one with a 4.2 and 10 reviews.  The Sun Also Rises is a 3.9 on Amazon.  I'm amused that Hemingway would have trouble advertising his books even though half the school kids in the US are forced to read them.

It's not an easy problem to solve.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

jayallan said:


> The Sun Also Rises is a 3.9 on Amazon. I'm amused that Hemingway would have trouble advertising his books even though half the school kids in the US are forced to read them.


Not sure Hemingway would take well to being turned down either


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> " It could be a high school dropout with a 3rd grade reading level or a Ph.D from Harvard who's doing the critique. There's no way of knowing. "


The objective isn't to identify books independent authors like. I doubt they care anything about a Harvard Phd. Why should they? It's to make money for the site. That can come from several sources. Money can come from affiliate links, ad revenue, etc. It depends on the structure of the site and the owners chosen business strategy.

And I welcome the HS dropout as a customer. His money is as good as a dollar from Harvard.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think it is ridiculous for an advertiser to refuse my money based on an arbitrary rating or number of reviews. The rating requirement is one of the reasons the ratings no longer mean anything, because
> 
> 1. Authors inflate the reviews they leave for other authors, because they don't want to "hurt" a fellow author's star rating
> 2. People create sock puppet reviews to counter the effects of lower stars
> ...


Maybe the "bargain e-book" sites should only accept reviews from Amazon Top Reviewers?


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

Yeah, I have a problem with this too.  Bland, formulaic books with five stars can pass through, while some good books with a smattering of one and two star 'spite' reviews are shut out.  Then there are the stories of the 'review' clubs' trading for reviews, the bought and paid for reviews.  It's not fair, but such is life.  The whole Amazon review system is badly in need of some kind of overhaul.  Kind of makes me long for the old system.  You might get a few clingers, but at least the reviewers were respectful and serious people.


----------



## matthewturner (Aug 1, 2012)

Yep, this annoys me too. In my opinion a 3-star review is pretty solid. It tells me the reader liked it, but, for whatever reason, didn't love it. I rarely leave a 5 star review (I need to adore a book) and if I really like it I leave a 4-star one. If I offer a 3 star review it shows that I liked the book but didn't love it. In such a subjective world like books, good is pretty darn...well, good.

I understand why these sites require a 4-star rating but it is annoying. My average is 3.6 at the minute and I'm proud of it because it's full of honest reviews.


----------



## Avarian (Oct 11, 2012)

To me it seems like the star rating (or any rating system) is just a product of our generally short attention span, and our general love of "shinny". No one can judge a book from its rating, because it is constructed of X amount of personal opinion. It does however give us an excuse to buy a book without taking the time to actually read the reviews.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

I'd rather have the three star reviews than the ability to promote on a site that sets the threshold at a four star average.

In fact, if I can be said to have a promotional tactic - it's to try and encourage people to leave reviews when they feel that one of my books is a three star book.  I want the word of mouth & I trust readers to make their own minds up about my work once they know it exists!


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Paul Clayton said:


> Yeah, I have a problem with this too. Bland, formulaic books with five stars can pass through, while some good books with a smattering of one and two star 'spite' reviews are shut out.


They don't even have to be 'spite' reviews.

The general truth is that if you write a romance book, for instance, in which the hero isn't square-jawed and alpha-male you're not going to get a lot of 5-star reviews. It's what that audience expects. You might have written a fantastic book with three-dimensional characters, an original story not told before, but you'll get reviews like "I didn't fancy the hero - 3 stars".

Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. People like what they like. That's absolutely fine. But, please, let's put the star review system into context. It's a measure of popularity.

And, yes, promotional sites are businesses. They have to make money. But I suppose what's happening is that the 4-star cutoff is being perceived as a "quality threshold". And that can only lead to a lot more romance novels in which the hero is "totally ripped".

I will now take a deep breath


----------



## RM Prioleau (Mar 18, 2011)

It's especially frustrating for me because I don't have many ratings on my books to meet the minimum # of ratings requirements for some sites, nor are my books either long enough or high enough in rating. I'm very grateful for Harvey for working things out for me, though. 

I think the strict criteria is not just to keep the submissions low, but the 'quality' of books higher. Of course, the average customer might be more inclined to buy a 4-star book than a 2-star, but honestly, I have odd reading tastes, so there have been plenty of times where I enjoyed a 2-star book way more than a 4-star. It often frustrates me how some typo-heavy, poorly formatted, nearly unreadable books end up being 4+ stars and above and are advertised on places like POI and ENT just because of their rating, but no one has bothered to look at the content beforehand....


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2013)

NathanWrann said:


> Maybe the "bargain e-book" sites should only accept reviews from Amazon Top Reviewers?


I don't think that would resolve the problem, either. First, a lot of the Amazon Top Reviewers don't even review books. A lot of them review electronics and things like that. Second, many of the Amazon Top reviewers don't regularly review indie books and/or actively avoid them. Third, many of the top reviewers don't consider unsolicited books for review. So limiting it to only Amazon Top Reviewers just replaces one arbitrary set of requirements with another.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Cappy said:


> They don't even have to be 'spite' reviews.
> 
> The general truth is that if you write a romance book, for instance, in which the hero isn't square-jawed and alpha-male you're not going to get a lot of 5-star reviews. It's what that audience expects. You might have written a fantastic book with three-dimensional characters, an original story not told before, but you'll get reviews like "I didn't fancy the hero - 3 stars".


I get that you are not a fan of romance, but this is just not true at all. I am really baffled where these opinions come from sometimes as they do not reflect the reality. And if someone didn't fancy the hero or the heroine for that matter, maybe its because they were written in such a way to not be likable or just not interesting.

Star ratings of course are a sign of popularity and opinions of readers. What else would they be. I am not a fan as a reader of these requirements as I have seen a big upswing in unrealistic ratings. When great books, loved for years and years have a 3.8 rating, that is a very high rating. Now you look around and everyone suddenly has 4+ stars and then there is complaining about getting a 3 star to get to a "measly" 3.9 rating.  

It is hard for me to take the ratings seriously in those cases, especially if its a new book and a new author. Suddenly everyone just loves loves it.

Of course there is the other side that if the sites do not make some decisions, their offerings are not useful to the reader. I have stopped subscribing to basically all of the bargain sites but Bookbub for obvious reasons.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2013)

northwooder said:


> I just received a 1 star review on my book from a reader who didn't care for the science fiction element. Even though the book is not science fiction, the blurb on the cover, _He Crossed A Universe To Find The One He Loved_, should have been a giveaway that something out of the ordinary might occur.


No. There is nothing on the cover that would indicate this is a sci-fi book or has sci-fi themes. Your book cover is a scene of a calm lake at nightfall. I read sci-fi, but your blurb in context reads symbolically, not literally, to me. Further, there is nothing in your blurb that indicates a sci-fi element. In fact, you have it categorized as Contemporary fiction. It is NOT the reviewer's fault that you got a 1 star review.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I don't think that would resolve the problem, either. First, a lot of the Amazon Top Reviewers don't even review books. A lot of them review electronics and things like that. Second, many of the Amazon Top reviewers don't regularly review indie books and/or actively avoid them. Third, many of the top reviewers don't consider unsolicited books for review. So limiting it to only Amazon Top Reviewers just replaces one arbitrary set of requirements with another.


Julie, how to tell if a reviewer doesn't take unsolicited books for review?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I've just read this whole thread through from start to finish for the first time, and after a legitimate discussion over whether the 4-star cutoff for review sites (including KBoards) is fair/legitimate/approriate, the second thing that struck me is the disdain for reviewers that I have seen in several posts. Really? And you wonder why people don't leave reviews?

Take this comment by J. W. Rolfe, part of a longer post which makes some good points:


J. W. Rolfe said:


> The whole 4+ stars thing seems a lot like how Rotten Tomatoes does its system of determining whether or not something is "rotten" or "fresh." *The big difference is that the people doing the reviews are known and have some credibility to go along with their opinions.* It's also usually the same reviewers each time.


So, because I'm not "known" on Amazon, my review lacks credibility? *shrug*

How about this one, also from JWR, part of a longer post:


J. W. Rolfe said:


> The problem is that it's a terrible method of judging the merits of an author's work. Do they not realize that anyone can write a review. It could be a high school dropout with a 3rd grade reading level or a Ph.D from Harvard who's doing the critique.


So, I merely have a BS degree from a state university. Where do I rate in the meritocracy of reviewers? My mother, who was only a high school graduate (have I mentioned she was from Hibbing?*) but was extremely widely read and could discuss almost anything well--where would she rate?



Alain Gomez said:


> Keep in mind that some people rate books poorly just because it took too long to download on their kindles.





northwooder said:


> Consideration should be given for the quality of the review (and possibly quantity) whether you fall beneath the 4.0 bar or not.


Who should rate the quality of the review? The author who disagrees with it?



Cappy said:


> The general truth is that if you write a romance book, for instance, in which the hero isn't square-jawed and alpha-male you're not going to get a lot of 5-star reviews. It's what that audience expects. You might have written a fantastic book with three-dimensional characters, an original story not told before, but you'll get reviews like "I didn't fancy the hero - 3 stars".
> 
> Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that.


Well, yeah, you are....and, as Atunah points out, that isn't the general truth for romance readers. It might be the truth for some, and, yes, it does seem that SOME readers rate books down for what to me are poor reasons. But let's be careful not to generalize too much.

and another part:


> the 4-star cutoff is being perceived as a "quality threshold". And that can only lead to a lot more romance novels in which the hero is "totally ripped".


Yes, that's the sole criteria by which I judge ALL books with male characters. 

Reading authors' posts about reviewers here on KBoards over time, I've learned that my reviews will be dismissed because I'm an unknown; because I write short reviews, because perhaps I read the book from the library and liked it enough to want to give an author a review but I'm not a "Verified Purchase", because I'm only a lowly BS holder from a state school....because I don't give four and five star reviews out as if they were free candy....

I guess I'm just saying, I understand the frustration over the four star rule to be included in a promotion; just don't let this thread become yet another thread dismissing reviewers. A plea from me as a reader and as a sometime-reviewer.

Betsy

_*Hibbing, MN: Home of Bob Dylan, Roger Maris, the Greyhound Bus, and various other famous and semi-famous people. I am contractually obligated by my late mother to work Hibbing into as many conversations as possible._


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2013)

jimkukral said:


> *****, how to tell if a reviewer doesn't take unsolicited books for review?


You have to manually check their sites. In general, people who want to get review requests will have some sort of form or instructions for prospective authors to fill out. Or actually read a few blog posts on their sites. Some of them will say point blank that they don't want review requests. Others will openly complain about requests but not explicitly say "no." (Because it's their blog and they are just venting.)

And while I don't pretend to speak for all reviewers, I talk to enough reviewers that I can safely say the bigger problem is not so much the unsolicited request, but the tone of some of the requests. There is often an enormous sense of entitlement that comes across in the request and a strong implication that they don't want an "honest" review but expect a "good" review. For lack of more diplomatic language, some reviewers would be much more open to review requests if they could be sure the person requesting the review wasn't crazy. 

Maybe it's time for ***** to put together a review request primer as there are a lot of threads about reviews again.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I get that you are not a fan of romance, but this is just not true at all.


I didn't mean to pick on romance. It's no worse than any other genre. But cliches do sell.

Here's an extract from a blurb I picked at random from the top 10 romance books:

"xxxxx xxxxx is six feet and three inches of swoon-worthy hotness, complete with a pair of striking blue eyes"


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Cappy said:


> Here's an extract from a blurb I picked at random from the top 10 romance books:


Really? At random? You closed your eyes and pointed and that's what came up?  

*needs a smiley with a finger poke here.*

Betsy


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Cappy said:


> I didn't mean to pick on romance. It's no worse than any other genre. But cliches do sell.
> 
> Here's an extract from a blurb I picked at random from the top 10 romance books:
> 
> "xxxxx xxxxx is six feet and three inches of swoon-worthy hotness, complete with a pair of striking blue eyes"


But you did pick on romance. You didn't do a random blurb pick from a thriller book, or a mystery. I am curious though how you know the cliches of romance. By basing it on one blurb of the current top 10 at amazon? . Although I see nothing about any ripped abs or square jaw in that blurb you quoted. I am still trying to get a visual of a square jaw. Somehow it doesn't really form a pleasant image in my head. 

I need a rolling on the floor smiley. Our grinning one does not cut it for me in some instances.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Why is everybody so surprised?

The rating system only reflects what is in fashion with a segment of the readership. That's all. It doesn't say anything about the quality of a book. Nothing. It's a popularity contest, not a quality test.

If you're writing for money or to please a large crowd you can take your cues from which books get high ratings. It makes perfect sense for websites that want to make money to do the same.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I am still trying to get a visual of a square jaw. Somehow it doesn't really form a pleasant image in my head.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Betsy,

I hope I wasn't showing any disdain for reviewers. There are lots of excellent reviewers out there who take the time to put serious thought into their reviews, and they're much valued.

Furthermore, some of the greatest minds in the world never went to university. I would never discount anybody's views because of his/her background. That would just be ignorant.

I was just pointing out, along with others, that a lot of 5-star reviews is not necessarily a reflection of quality; that there are other reasons a book can receive a lot of 5-star reviews. If there aren't other reasons, and star ratings are a fair reflection of quality, then I guess I have to accept that 'Fifty Shades Darker' (4 1/2 stars) is a better book than The Great Gatsby (4 stars).


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Really? At random? You closed your eyes and pointed and that's what came up?
> 
> *needs a smiley with a finger poke here.*
> 
> Betsy


Yeah, it was. I was really surprised


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

vrabinec said:


>


That is quite worrying


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Atunah said:


> But you did pick on romance. You didn't do a random blurb pick from a thriller book, or a mystery. I am curious though how you know the cliches of romance. By basing it on one blurb of the current top 10 at amazon? . Although I see nothing about any ripped abs or square jaw in that blurb you quoted. I am still trying to get a visual of a square jaw. Somehow it doesn't really form a pleasant image in my head.
> 
> I need a rolling on the floor smiley. Our grinning one does not cut it for me in some instances.


Oh no, does that mean I have to go through every genre? Please don't make me do it.  I have nothing against romance. I really don't. Wish I'd chosen YA now.

And apparently a square jaw is very desirable. There's a 15-year-old on Yahoo Answers asking people how he can get a square jaw.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110501102410AAQY2AG


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

vrabinec    

And I think sometimes there is a disconnect in what readers review. Most of us don't review on quality. Most of us are not writers. Now I will mention if something is very obvious and it takes a lot for me. I am talking lack of proofreading so it takes me out of the story. I cannot rate on the quality of any writing if it goes into technical stuff, I am not qualified to do that. So every single review I make is based on how I liked the book, the characters, setting, story. How did I feel reading the book. Its all very much an emotional thing with most readers. Which is why its perfectly normal for a book to have ratings from 1 through 5. 

I think the mistake here is that somehow readers are suppose to be mini book critics, like the ones hired by established and respected newspapers. Regular readers are somehow suppose to be professors of English. That is how it comes across a lot of times with the belittling of reader/reviewers around here. Like us regular peons aren't good enough. We aren't praising the genius of a writer enough. We aren't giving the right stars, in the right order. We aren't writing the right words in the review, in the right order. We aren't "getting" it. We are reading in the wrong genre. We are free loaders. 

Most of us are just regular people trying to express what we felt about a book. Its as simple as that.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

What I am getting from this thread is that some of you assume that a book with over a 4.0 rating has A. gamed the system (ie, fake reviews), B. has reviewers who don't have 'credentials', or C. Formulaic. 

My books all have over a 4 star rating, so yeah, I guess I feel a little defensive when I read this. I have not gamed any system. My reviews are all legit--not a single family member has reviewed them on any site. (most have Nooks, but none reviewed my books.   ) One real life friend reviewed my books--over a year after the first was published and I didn't know she had reviewed it. I certainly didn't ask her or even need the review as I had over 70 on the book at that time. She had a right to review it though, and I guess she wanted to.

B--this is the one that really gets me. I mean, really? Are we going to start requiring a certain level of education before we allow people to review our books? I don't think I would qualify to review many books let alone write any. I have about the equivalent of an associate's degree, plus a few extra classes. Guess what? Not a single one had anything to do with literature, writing, reading--nothing! They were science, health and computer classes. I don't care if my readers never picked up a book before in their life until they read mine. In fact, if that is the case, and they then loved it and went on to search for other books because they found that reading wasn't boring after all, I would be thrilled to pieces!

As far as Amazon Top reviewers, my book No Good Deed has a few top 1000, a top 500 and a top 10 reviewer. I don't know if those helped all that much. The top 10 reviewer's did help, but mostly because when the book was free one time, he mentioned it on his very active blog. Of course I was very happy about that, I won't deny it, but it hasn't shot my book into the stratosphere or anything. Another top 500 reviewer has a review blog--however at the time he reviewed my book, he didn't have the blog so it never appeared on there. All found the book on their own. I never submitted my book to any of them for review.

C. By formulaic, I mean that it seems many assume that if a book is outside the conventions of a particular genre, it will get hammered. I disagree. My books are thrillers, but they don't follow the usual thriller conventions. Nobody will ever confuse Mark Taylor with Jack Reacher, for example.   Another example, the middle of the No Good Deed slows down a bit. That was by design. Some readers don't care for that because thrillers are supposed to be non-stop action, which is fine, but other readers who reviewed didn't seem to notice--or rather, it had the desired response in that they 'felt' the hopelessness that the character felt. Who knows why they accepted the break in convention? All I know is that readers accepted that it was different. 

I'm not saying that the frustration felt by those in this thread is unjustified. I *get* it. It is frustrating! My second book has had its share of bad to mediocre reviews and just climbed into the 4.2 range in the last couple of months when Amazon started sending all the review reminders. Of course I wanted to blame the reviewers--but in the back of my mind, I know that the second book is so different from the first that some readers of the first wouldn't like it. While I personally like the book, I'd prefer if any readers I know in real life just skip it. 

One more thing that may make people feel a little better. Reviews seem to come in bunches. For instance, if my last five reviews were 5 stars, I know that the 6th won't be. And bad reviews come in bunches. It's like the reader sees that latest review as negative and if they didn't love the book, seeing the other bad review makes it okay in their minds to leave a bad review too--they aren't the only one. They might not have left a review at all, but seeing that last one spurred them to add their opinion. It works the other way too. A reader might have left a three but saw most reviews were 4 & 5 stars and maybe they feel like it's their fault they didn't like it better and give the benefit of the doubt. They don't want to go against the majority. We all say we like to stand out, but popular fads say that in reality, most of us like to go with the crowd and be part of the 'in' thing.

Gosh, this is a really long post for me! I'll shut up now.  

Edited because my cursor jumped while writing this, and I just noticed I had lost a few words.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

If you really want to promote your book without worrying about guidelines from those sites, you could always start your own. You could get rid of all the star requirements, size limits, everything. If you don't want to do that and want to use another site, you have to play by their rules. Heck, they could even make one that unless your cover has a duck on it, they won't let you advertise. It's their discretion.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Danielle Kazemi said:


> Heck, they could even make one that unless your cover has a duck on it, they won't let you advertise. It's their discretion.


Great idea. I'm now writing a book specifically for that site. It's called *"Completely Quackers - how a fear of Hoi Sin sauce drove me insane."*


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

Cappy said:


> Great idea. I'm now writing a book specifically for that site. It's called *"Completely Quackers - how a fear of Hoi Sin sauce drove me insane."*


I better get a shout out in there somewhere.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Cappy said:


> Great idea. I'm now writing a book specifically for that site. It's called *"Completely Quackers - how a fear of Hoi Sin sauce drove me insane."*


It's a romance featuring a square-jawed, totally ripped duck, called 'Drake', who...

I will shut up now.


----------



## Katja (Jun 4, 2011)

Cappy said:


> I hope I wasn't showing any disdain for reviewers. There are lots of excellent reviewers out there who take the time to put serious thought into their reviews, and they're much valued.


You're doing it again though and you don't even realize it. In the same paragraph where you say you don't want to do it. You're implying, that only reviews that have been written with some serious tought are the valid ones. Sigh.


----------



## Amanda Brice (Feb 16, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> The issue that I'm currently having is that the first book in my series has 45 reviews and a 4+ overall rating (it's perma-free) but the omnibus version of the 3 books only has 1 review. I'd like to get the omnibus reviewed more so that I can start submitting that to the bargain sites.


Most of the bargain sites have a miscellaneous statements section of their submission form. I use that to point out that while my boxed set only has a small number of reviews, the individual books in the collection has X number of reviews, etc. I've never had a site turn me down for that reason. They're generally more than happy for you to point that out.


----------



## EmilyG (Jan 31, 2010)

Atunah said:


> ...
> Star ratings of course are a sign of popularity and opinions of readers. What else would they be. I am not a fan as a reader of these requirements as I have seen a big upswing in unrealistic ratings. When great books, loved for years and years have a 3.8 rating, that is a very high rating. Now you look around and everyone suddenly has 4+ stars and then there is complaining about getting a 3 star to get to a "measly" 3.9 rating.
> 
> It is hard for me to take the ratings seriously in those cases, especially if its a new book and a new author. Suddenly everyone just loves loves it.
> ...


A high star rating is an indicator of the author hitting their target market. Which is why new books tend to skew toward higher ratings since somebody who enjoys romance is more likely to try and enjoy a new romance book.

Once the book moves beyond its target audience, the reviews will move down as people will rate it lower just because they don't enjoy romance as much as, say, science fiction.

Whether the audience expands via free download, word-of-mouth, or because the book is a classic, very few books will be able to keep a 4+ rating.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Katja said:


> You're doing it again though and you don't even realize it. In the same paragraph where you say you don't want to do it. You're implying, that only reviews that have been written with some serious tought are the valid ones. Sigh.


I was praising a particular group of people who put a lot of thought into their reviews. I wasn't dismissing everybody else's. If I gave that impression, I apologise.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "But, please, let's put the star review system into context. It's a measure of popularity."


Ok. Agree. What's the problem?



> "Most of us don't review on quality. Most of us are not writers."


You don't have to be a writer to judge quality. And there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with a writer about quality.


----------



## MT Berlyn (Mar 27, 2012)

MaryMcDonald said:


> What I am getting from this thread is that some of you assume that a book with over a 4.0 rating has A. gamed the system (ie, fake reviews), B. has reviewers who don't have 'credentials', or C. Formulaic.


This is disconcerting to me as well. My book has an average 4+ rating on Amazon, UK and Goodreads. A few are crossovers from Goodreads to Amazon. Only two reviewers (Amazon/UK) have no prior review history and who knows why those readers decided to leave a review. I never even thought about it until reading about faux reviews. If an author belongs to any social network site, and I do, it is very possible a one time review could come from that source. Again, who knows. Because my reviews are scattered between Amazon and Goodreads, they do not add up to some promotional site requirements for at least 10 being on Amazon, but so it goes. The number of over-all reviews was acceptable on one particular site, but the book is not selling and that was concern enough to be rejected. It is what it is.



EmilyG said:


> A high star rating is an indicator of the author hitting their target market. Which is why new books tend to skew toward higher ratings since somebody who enjoys romance is more likely to try and enjoy a new romance book.
> 
> Once the book moves beyond its target audience, the reviews will move down as people will rate it lower just because they don't enjoy romance as much as, say, science fiction.
> 
> Whether the audience expands via free download, word-of-mouth, or because the book is a classic, very few books will be able to keep a 4+ rating.


^^
This is a very realistic reminder.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

EmilyG said:


> A high star rating is an indicator of the author hitting their target market. Which is why new books tend to skew toward higher ratings since somebody who enjoys romance is more likely to try and enjoy a new romance book.
> 
> Once the book moves beyond its target audience, the reviews will move down as people will rate it lower just because they don't enjoy romance as much as, say, science fiction.


I don't agree with the assumption that people are rating something lower because they don't enjoy the genre. I can love a genre very much and still rate a book lower in that genre if I didn't like it.

I read this a lot here that low ratings are usually because someone was not the authors target audience. I don't think that is true at all. It probably sounds nice telling oneself when one gets a lower star, but in many cases its just not a book I like. Even if I was fully in the target audience. 
That is like saying I am going to like every romance book I read, just because I like romance. 
Heck no


----------



## Jonathan C. Gillespie (Aug 9, 2012)

Hey, all you folks looking for further proof why you shouldn't respond to reviews? Bookmark this thread.

Herein, we've had fascinating examples of the kind of angst stirred up when authors (all of whom in this thread seem to be good folks) begin discussing reviews. And note that said authors aren't even responding directly to reviews; they're just discussing reviews in general. Even so, the readers present feel so strongly about their points of view they've jumped in to defend fellow reviewers who they _will likely never even meet_.

Food for thought.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I read this a lot here that low ratings are usually because someone was not the authors target audience.


Well, it certainly can't be the quality of the writing. 

SOMETIMES, it's the wrong target audience. That's why blurbs, covers, and samples should convey the soul of the book, to make sure you attract the people who will LIKE the whole book. I've seen covers that represent action, when the book isn't action. I've seen blurbs that promise the sort of thing that's popular at the time, but misrepresent the book. I've seen first chapters that look nothing like the rest of the book. That draws people who are expecting one thing, and when they get something else, they give the book low marks. And sometimes, alas, it's the writing.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2013)

Atunah said:


> I think the mistake here is that somehow readers are suppose to be mini book critics, like the ones hired by established and respected newspapers. Regular readers are somehow suppose to be professors of English. That is how it comes across a lot of times with the belittling of reader/reviewers around here.


+100

Customer reviews and professional reviews/book critics serve two completely different purposes, neither of which is "help indies sell books" or "serve as a free proofreader/content editor."

The professional reviews are really written "for the industry." They are used by librarians, book stores, educational institutions, and media outlets to determine the comparative value of one book to another. A librarian or educator cares very much about the technical aspects of a book, after all. These are people making decisions that can impact the reading choices for thousands of people. A good review can be used in marketing material for a media kit or quoted on the cover or used in an ad campaign.

But customer reviews are written for other customers. Jane Doe book reviewer doesn't expect a librarian or school administrator to make a purchasing decision based on her review. She just wants to express her general opinion of the book to other readers. Customers don't owe us detailed notes of every problem they see in a book or a book report. All I really have a right to ask of a customer is to acquire a legal copy. If you bought the book or otherwise got it legal, that is all I can ask. If you want to leave a one line review or a ten paragraph review, that is your choice and I won't say a thing about it.

Which does circle back around to the sites that require four stars or more. I think it just puts enormous pressure of authors to behave badly. We get MAD at our customers for leaving three star reviews not because the review isn't sincere, but because it drags down our total rating and now we can't promote on XYZ site. And we act like customers should somehow KNOW that they are "hurting" us, when in reality the customer has no clue. And even if she did, why would I expect her to pad her review or lie just so I can have my way?


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> All the sites that require the mandatory star rating and/or number of reviews are complicit in encouraging the very activities that make reviews worthless.


^^^this^^^

When I submitted a book and was told it needed more 5 star reviews my reaction was a snort of derision. I could easily have asked friends and relatives to give me reviews, but it's not something I would do.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

What gets me is when authors run around social media complaining about their reviews. And all the author's friends immediately rush over and "vote down" the review, maybe even commenting and criticising the reviewer. 

If I see a review on a book that's been massively down-voted, you can be sure I'll never leave my own review as the author clearly has way too many "helpful" friends and I'd be too scared of the backlash if I was honest.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2013)

Ten bucks says this thread gets locked before six pages. 

Seriously, the system is pretty obviously broken. I'm kind of annoyed at the 4.0 mark too, but reviews are for readers, not writers (or at least that's the way it should be). I guess I'll just have to find other venues to promote my stuff.

Or just keep writing, since 90% of promotion is a waste of time anyway.

<ducks>


----------



## Carradee (Aug 21, 2010)

I frankly don't mind the limitation-but my attitude is that the review blogs are well within their rights to demand specific things that they want in the books they advertise. Their similarity in what they require is a bit annoying, but&#8230;

If you don't make the requirements, oh, well. Find somewhere else to market.

(And I say this as someone who generally doesn't qualify, because I don't have enough reviews and/or I don't hit the right length requirements. They don't _owe_ me the right to give my titles a fair chance. *shrug*)


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Regardless of the actual quality and value Amazon-style review systems have, the practice the thread is about really boils down to a lazy method of reducing the glut in the blogger's inbox while contributing to a rather toxic atmosphere for writers.

Ideally, we should not be paying attention to Amazon reviews because they aren't there for us. But we're forced to because of the limiting practice and it makes us generally worse both emotionally and in terms of interacting with our readers.

And I think bloggers really should take heed of this because they're poisoning an industry they're part of with a poor practice.


----------



## Jonathan C. Gillespie (Aug 9, 2012)

DebBennett said:


> What gets me is when authors run around social media complaining about their reviews. And all the author's friends immediately rush over and "vote down" the review, maybe even commenting and criticising the reviewer.


There is a major author out there who is a bit of an innovator in genre fiction circles, and they actually _encouraged_ their readers to go and vote-down negative reviews.

That kind of thing can put a ceiling on your career way more effectively than a bad review ever could.


----------



## MT Berlyn (Mar 27, 2012)

Carradee said:


> I frankly don't mind the limitation-but my attitude is that the review blogs are well within their rights to demand specific things that they want in the books they advertise.


^^
I think this is a fair point.

With regard to genre reviews, I think a lot depends on the temperament of the reviewer. Some truly want a specific formula and others are willing to go out on a limb. I do believe it is a testament to the writer who can intrigue a reader to enjoy a book outside of expectations, so the quality factor _is_ imperative.

I've looked at several books on Amazon, some from this forum, that have good ratings, skillful writing and low sale numbers, which would obviously not qualify the books for some sites. It may be bad luck, not enough marketing, niche or any number of issues. Writers write, so one must keep writing and improve their skills at each turn.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Vaalingrade said:


> Regardless of the actual quality and value Amazon-style review systems have, the practice the thread is about really boils down to a lazy method of reducing the glut in the blogger's inbox while contributing to a rather toxic atmosphere for writers.


I don't think I would call it lazy so much as necessary. They have to have some way of choosing the books. They aren't going to have time to read every book that comes their way and if they take on a first come first served basis, and get a bunch of stinkers in a row, their followers/readers/customers will start dismissing their recommendations and then the sites will be worthless for everyone. They could charge a lot of money and only the really well off authors could afford to pay--that would be one way to cut down on the number of submissions. I hope it doesn't come to that. 

I'm just trying to figure out how these sites are supposed to select books to advertise. I haven't come up with a better way than what most are doing already. If someone has a better system that will separate the wheat from the chaff, not cost an arm and a leg, and most important, satisfy the readers, I'm all ears--and I'd start up an advertising blog doing it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Ten bucks says this thread gets locked before six pages.


I'll take that bet.


Betsy


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

I think that the promo sites rely on ratings and reviews as their quality filter because it is the best _external_ tool they have at their disposal. As others have said, what else would they use? They don't have the resources to review every book we submit to see if it fits some _internal_ quality criteria of their own making.

I agree with Julie that the promo sites do encourage the corruption of the rating/review system. However, I'm also confident that any system they used instead would experience that same pressure. I doubt the current review system is any better or worse than any other quality system we might put in place. There will always be pressure for authors to behave badly. Some will succumb to that pressure and some will not. Changing the quality measurement will not change the players.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> I'm just trying to figure out how these sites are supposed to select books to advertise. I haven't come up with a better way than what most are doing already. If someone has a better system that will separate the wheat from the chaff, not cost an arm and a leg, and most important, satisfy the readers, I'm all ears--and I'd start up an advertising blog doing it.


What about a query system, like for querying an agent? (The small press I work for culls a large number of subs from the slush pile based on the quality of the query letter alone.) If the query is good then the person dealing with subs could read the first couple of pages and see if the writing was decent quality. Not the best way, I guess, but better than a system that's so easy to game.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Shayne said:


> What about a query system, like for querying an agent? (The small press I work for culls a large number of subs from the slush pile based on the quality of the query letter alone.) If the query is good then the person dealing with subs could read the first couple of pages and see if the writing was decent quality. Not the best way, I guess, but better than a system that's so easy to game.


Except that it is gamed. You can hire someone to write your query letter for you. Next best thing to paying for a review.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Shayne said:


> What about a query system, like for querying an agent? (The small press I work for culls a large number of subs from the slush pile based on the quality of the query letter alone.) If the query is good then the person dealing with subs could read the first couple of pages and see if the writing was decent quality. Not the best way, I guess, but better than a system that's so easy to game.


I used to hang out at other writing forums and people complained all the time about how their books were good but they sucked at writing queries and how it wasn't fair that their whole book was judged based on their one paragraph query. Sure, it could work, but people are still going to complain that it isn't fair.


----------



## A. S. Warwick (Jan 14, 2011)

I've often pondered over the same questions as have been raised here.

In the current system, if you are willing to game the system then you will get rewarded straight away.  If not, then, as long as you are a good enough writer, it will take longer to get there.

I have never once asked friends or families for reviews - in fact I've banned my family from doing any reviews.  I've not paid for reviews, nor left myself fake reviews.  I consider it unethical to do so.  What that does mean is that the reviews I have got have been genuine and I treasure them.  The good news is that generally I hit the 4 star rating.  The bad news is I don't yet have enough of them to merit consideration.

And therein lies the problem.  Without the reviews to get listed on these sites, it is harder to find reader, but without the readers it is hard to get enough review to get listed on the sites.  All rather Catch-22 (which would make a good idea for a book )

How do you fix this problem?  Honestly, I don't know.  I'm not sure anyone knows.  We may just have to accept that it is the way it is.

Will I get there in the end?  I hope so, but it may take a while longer than I had first thought, but I am not willing to take short cuts to get there.  Plenty of others have gotten there along the long, slow road without resorting to gaming the system, and if they can do it, so can I.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

A. S. Warwick said:


> All rather Catch-22 (which would make a good idea for a book )


Please tell me you're kidding!


----------



## A. S. Warwick (Jan 14, 2011)

It was a joke, yes.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

DRMarvello said:


> Except that it is gamed. You can hire someone to write your query letter for you. Next best thing to paying for a review.


That's why I said also read the first five pages. Or it could be five random pages from the middle. Or five from wherever the person reading the slush chooses to read from. At least then the person who is deciding is doing so based on personal experience of the writing quality, rather than relying on reviews that could be all fakes.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Shayne said:


> That's why I said also read the first five pages. Or it could be five random pages from the middle. Or five from wherever the person reading the slush chooses to read from. At least then the person who is deciding is doing so based on personal experience of the writing quality, rather than relying on reviews that could be all fakes.


Define "writing quality".



A. S. Warwick said:


> In the current system, if you are willing to game the system then you will get rewarded straight away.


Ok, so an author with a terrible book "games the system" by posting 10 fake 5 star reviews (either, paying for it, sock puppetry or family/friends) and they get picked up by one of the top Bargain e-book promotion sites. That results in 10,000 downloads of the book. That's a lot of people that are going to be pissed off enough to nail that book with a bunch of bad reviews, and the author with a bad reputation. What's the reward?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Jonathan C. Gillespie said:


> Hey, all you folks looking for further proof why you shouldn't respond to reviews? Bookmark this thread.
> 
> Herein, we've had fascinating examples of the kind of angst stirred up when authors (all of whom in this thread seem to be good folks) begin discussing reviews. And note that said authors aren't even responding directly to reviews; they're just discussing reviews in general. Even so, the readers present feel so strongly about their points of view they've jumped in to defend fellow reviewers who they _will likely never even meet_.
> 
> Food for thought.


I doubt it proves anything. Looks like readers are challenging some stuff writers wrote.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> Define "writing quality".


At minimum, proper grammar and spelling, narrative cohesion, and realistic dialogue.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Shayne said:


> At minimum, proper grammar and spelling, narrative cohesion, and realistic dialogue.


Well you just eliminated The Dog Stars, one of the best books of last year, from your choices. There's no quotation marks in the book and the whole thing is written in poetic fragments. Looking at 5 pages of it would make you think it was written by a fool.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

EmilyG said:


> A high star rating is an indicator of the author hitting their target market. Which is why new books tend to skew toward higher ratings since somebody who enjoys romance is more likely to try and enjoy a new romance book.
> 
> Once the book moves beyond its target audience, the reviews will move down as people will rate it lower just because they don't enjoy romance as much as, say, science fiction.
> 
> Whether the audience expands via free download, word-of-mouth, or because the book is a classic, very few books will be able to keep a 4+ rating.


Totally, and very well put.

One corollary of this is that sequels often wind up with absurd ratings because (for the most part) the only people who went on to books two and three were people who read and liked book one, which is about as targeted as an audience can get. Actually, that's supporting evidence for your basic premise--the target audience of a sequel is the people who liked the first book. Sequels are buffered from people who are less likely to like them, meaning their ratings are higher.

Initially, book one might be buffered somewhat by the fact it's more likely to be found by people who are searching for that specific sort of book, but as it grows in popularity, and gets pushed to a more diverse readership, more of those readers are going to declare it's garbage. Or at least that it's not their cup of tea.

And that's how _Fifty Shades Darker_ winds up with a better rating than _The Great Gatsby_. If Fitzgerald had been smart enough to write _The Greater Gatsby_, I'm sure its rating would be just as impressive. ;P


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> Well you just eliminated The Dog Stars, one of the best books of last year, from your choices. There's no quotation marks in the book and the whole thing is written in poetic fragments. Looking at 5 pages of it would make you think it was written by a fool.


I'm totally willing to grant you that there will be the odd exception to my definition of writing quality. Flowers For Algernon, for example, because of some of the dialogue, but is considered a great book by many. But whether someone were to use my definition, or their own, or Stephen King's, some stuff is is not going to make the cut. Personally, I think the definition I came up with is a reasonable and fair yardstick by which to judge 99% of the fiction out there, but if someone has a better one, I'd be happy to hear theirs.

You say The Dog Stars is one of the best books of last year. But according to who? And being judged as what? A book of poetry? A novel? Because judging poetry by prose standards is kind of like comparing apples to prickly pears. Obviously it's not going to meet any of those standards, because its not meant to meet those standards. And I thought it went without saying - but apparently not - that I was talking about fiction written in prose, not poetry. The kind of story that one would find in the popular fiction section, or go looking for on BookBub. Because, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think books written in poetry fragments are going to start kicking thrillers and romances and urban fantasies off the best seller lists. (Please note, I'm not dissing poetry. I studied it in university and quite enjoyed it. I'm just pointing out that the reason prose fiction dominates the best seller lists is because that's what the largest part of the reading population wants.)


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

If websites are featuring books consumers dont like, then they will lose their following and fail. It doesn't matter what standards for good or bad are used. Consumers decide for themselves. There's no reason to substitute authors' preferences for Amazon stars if the sites are maintaining or increasing their followings. Authors have no property rights over sites owned by others. Nor do they have any reason to expect consumers to accept their standards.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> If websites are featuring books consumers dont like, then they will lose their following and fail. It doesn't matter what standards for good or bad are used. Consumers decide for themselves. There's no reason to substitute authors' preferences for Amazon stars if the sites are maintaining or increasing their followings. Authors have no property rights over sites owned by others. Nor do they have any reason to expect consumers to accept their standards.


I'd say the fact that the system can be so easily gamed might be a good reason to change the method of acceptance. Not because authors want it that way but because a more truthful standard might be beneficial to the readers who frequent the site.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> If websites are featuring books consumers dont like, then they will lose their following and fail. It doesn't matter what standards for good or bad are used. Consumers decide for themselves. There's no reason to substitute authors' preferences for Amazon stars if the sites are maintaining or increasing their followings. Authors have no property rights over sites owned by others. Nor do they have any reason to expect consumers to accept their standards.


Yes, that's what I was saying up thread. The advertising sites are for the benefit of the readers, but they are also for all of us. Bookbub does so well because the readers are learning to trust their vetting and it's in Bookbub's and our best interest that they find books their readers will like so they'll keep buying books, and thus, we will keep paying for ads. It's a win for everyone involved.

If your (general 'your', not aimed at anyone in particular on this thread) book just came out less than six months ago, give it some time to build up reviews naturally. I have to say that since Amazon stepped up their review reminders, my reviews have gone up by about a third, so chances are better than ever that books will receive reviews.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Shayne said:


> I'd say the fact that the system can be so easily gamed might be a good reason to change the method of acceptance. Not because authors want it that way but because a more truthful standard might be beneficial to the readers who frequent the site.


Hard to say unless we know the extent of gaming, and the percentage of gamed books that appear on the sites.

We would also have to contrast that with the gaming potential of any alternatives, and the cost/benefit of adopting alternatives.

We would further have to determine if consumers consider the alternative an incremental benefit. Authors may, but that doesn't mean consumers do.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> We would further have to determine if consumers consider the alternative an incremental benefit. Authors may, but that doesn't mean consumers do.


They might not consciously realize the benefit, but they'll certainly notice if they start getting a lot of '5-star' books that suck.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Shayne said:


> They might not consciously realize the benefit, but they'll certainly notice if they start getting a lot of '5-star' books that suck.


Sure. That would loop back to my original point. If the consumers don't like the featured books, the following of the site falls off.

But it seems the complaint here isnt that the featured books are bad, but that a deserving subset of books are excluded from the sites.

And apostrophes are a real challenge on an iPad.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

C.C. Kelly said:


> In my opinion, reviews are for other readers, not the writer.
> 
> These advertising web sites need an inexpensive and objective filter to help give their customers the best service they can. What better filter than people who read the book? Regardless of any gaming of the system, the review platform is based (right or wrong) on the opinions of those that read the book (in theory anyway).


The problem is that the review system is not always objective, nor is it always based on the opinions of those who read the books.

Personally, I would sooner compete based on my query and story writing skills than my willingness to to pay for reviews, or my financial ability to do so.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Shayne said:


> The problem is that the review system is not always objective, nor is it always based on the opinions of those who read the books.
> 
> Personally, I would sooner compete based on my query and story writing skills than my willingness to to pay for reviews, or my financial ability to do so.


I'm sure you don't mean for it to come across that all of us who use the sites pay for reviews, but that's what it reads like.  Or that we all game the system somehow. Why should a query to one person and a few sample pages to that same person, trump 200 reviews by actual readers?


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Do you think paid reviews are all that widespread? If you took all the books listed today at the blogs where a certain review threshold is required, how many of them do you really think made it there based on paid-for reviews?


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

I don't think anyone is accusing everyone who gets to and maintains 4-stars plus is gaming the system or pandering, just pointing out that these things are flaws in the practice and that it really does encourage that behavior.

Also, indirectly, it validates Amazon's utterly insane take that 3-stars is a negative rating when pretty much every other venue on Earth sees it as positive. This is especially a problem when most readers think they ARE giving you a positive review, not knowing that pushing you below 4 is giving you a kiss of death.

If Amazon wants to play that way, they really should make it clear to reviewers what a 3-star review actually means on the 'zon.

I review a bit myself and it always feels wrong to give everything I like or that does exactly what it's supposed to 4 stars there when I would give it 3 anywhere else. After all, that means things I really, really like get 5, and then what the heck am I supposed to give the stuff I think was life-changingly good?


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Shayne said:


> I'm totally willing to grant you that there will be the *odd exception* to my definition of writing quality. Flowers For Algernon, for example, because of some of the dialogue, but is considered a great book by many. But whether someone were to use my definition, or their own, or Stephen King's, some stuff is is not going to make the cut. Personally, I think the definition I came up with is a reasonable and fair yardstick by which to judge 99% of the fiction out there, but if someone has a better one, I'd be happy to hear theirs.


But isn't that what this whole discussion is about? The Odd exception? The terrible novel that has a 4+ star review and gone on to great E-book bargain site success because they've "gamed the system". If a site uses a standard (like 10 4+ star reviews) as their measuring stick are 9 out of 10 of those books going to be legitimate or are they going to be "gamed". Or what about the "odd exception" of a book that got a couple of 1 star reviews and blew its rating because "the reviewer didn't read the blurb".



Shayne said:



> You say The Dog Stars is one of the best books of last year. But according to who?


From http://www.peterheller.net/the-dog-stars/

★ NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER

★ INDIE BESTSELLER

★ AN ATLANTIC MONTHLY BEST BOOK OF 2012

★ THE iTUNES NOVEL OF THE YEAR, 2012

★ A GUARDIAN UK BEST BOOK OF 2012

★ AN AMAZON BEST BOOK OF 2012

★ HUDSON BOOKSELLERS' TOP FICTION TITLE OF 2012

★ A PUBLISHERS WEEKLY BEST BOOK OF 2012

★ A FLAVORWIRE BOOK THAT MADE THE MOST 'BEST OF 2012' BOOK LISTS

★ INDIEBOUND PICK FOR AUGUST

★ AN OPRAH BOOK CLUB PICK OF THE WEEK

★ AN APPLE BEST BOOK OF THE MONTH

★ AN NPR FIRST READ



Shayne said:


> And being judged as what? A book of poetry? A novel? Because judging *poetry* by prose standards is kind of like comparing apples to prickly pears. Obviously it's not going to meet any of those standards, because its not meant to meet those standards. And I thought it went without saying - but apparently not - that I was talking about fiction written in prose, not poetry. The kind of story that one would find in the popular fiction section, or go looking for on BookBub. Because, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think books written in poetry fragments are going to start kicking thrillers and romances and urban fantasies off the best seller lists. (Please note, I'm not dissing poetry. I studied it in university and quite enjoyed it. I'm just pointing out that the reason prose fiction dominates the best seller lists is because that's what the largest part of the reading population wants.)


I didn't say it was "poetry", I said it was "poetic".


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Also, indirectly, it validates *Amazon's utterly insane take that 3-stars is a negative rating* when pretty much every other venue on Earth sees it as positive. This is especially a problem when most readers think they ARE giving you a positive review, not knowing that pushing you below 4 is giving you a kiss of death.
> 
> If Amazon wants to play that way, they really should make it clear to reviewers what a 3-star review actually means on the 'zon.
> 
> I review a bit myself and it always feels wrong to give everything I like or that does exactly what it's supposed to 4 stars there when I would give it 3 anywhere else. After all, that means things I really, really like get 5, and then what the heck am I supposed to give the stuff I think was life-changingly good?


I'm not sure that I've seen it anywhere that Amazon considers 3 stars a negative rating.

From the perspective of the e-book bargain sites 3 stars is no-man's land. It's impossible (as evidenced from this thread) to determine if a 3 star book is good or not-so-good. It's a rating that some people give for "meh, I finished the book" and a rating that others will give for "it was the best book I've read in 5 years but it didn't compare to "Crime and Punishment"" so if your book is firmly in the 3 star realm then it's a risk. Or it's not at the top of its genre. Or it's not attracting readers of its genre. The e-book bargain sites are not a first level promotion opportunity, your book has to have gained a slight foothold before you can turn to the bargain sites.


----------



## P.C. (Peter) Anders (Feb 6, 2013)

Cappy said:


> Yep, it's kind of silly. Some of the best modern writers working today are averaging 3 stars or 3 1/2 stars on Amazon with some of their best books. Look at Zadie Smith or Ian McEwan.


Really? That's astonishing. 
Well, then that tells you something.
Reminds me of the Franz Kafka quote: "A Book should be an axe for the frozen sea inside us." For some of us, the axe might fall too sharply, and we would tend to take it out on the writer.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper (Feb 16, 2012)

jimkukral said:


> They're running businesses where they have determined their readers are more likely to want to download only books that are "higher rated". I get it. Makes sense, no?


^^This. It's about likelihood and maximization of profitability for most players. Also, it does help filter out the subs.

Having said that, I had an ad sponsorship from one of "those sites" accepted despite having NO REVIEWS. None. Granted, it's part of a series with a combined total of over 80 reviews and ratings of 4.2 and higher. The point is, don't get discouraged. Many of these sites are run by reasonable folks, and if you have other creds, some will make exceptions.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

NathanWrann said:


> From the perspective of the e-book bargain sites 3 stars is no-man's land. It's impossible (as evidenced from this thread) to determine if a 3 star book is good or not-so-good. It's a rating that some people give for "meh, I finished the book" and a rating that others will give for "it was the best book I've read in 5 years but it didn't compare to "Crime and Punishment"" so if your book is firmly in the 3 star realm then it's a risk. Or it's not at the top of its genre. Or it's not attracting readers of its genre. The e-book bargain sites are not a first level promotion opportunity, your book has to have gained a slight foothold before you can turn to the bargain sites.


This would be an adequate defense if 4 and 5 stars didn't have similar problems. There are plenty of people that give out 4 or 5 stars just for liking a work. Especially those few who _do_ realize that 3 stars hurts the author.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

NathanWrann said:


> But isn't that what this whole discussion is about? The Odd exception? The terrible novel that has a 4+ star review and gone on to great E-book bargain site success because they've "gamed the system". If a site uses a standard (like 10 4+ star reviews) as their measuring stick are 9 out of 10 of those books going to be legitimate or are they going to be "gamed". Or what about the "odd exception" of a book that got a couple of 1 star reviews and blew its rating because "the reviewer didn't read the blurb".


No. You asked what my definition of 'quality writing' was, and I told you what it was. When I said 'the odd exception' I was referring to the fact that the definition I gave was, I felt, a reasonable way to gauge 99% of the popular fiction out there, but that there would be a small percentage which didn't conform to those standards but was still good fiction.



NathanWrann said:


> I didn't say it was "poetry", I said it was "poetic".


It has proper grammar and it has punctuation, and I'm not crazy about the style but it has narrative cohesion. The way you described it - 'fragments' - made it sound more like poetry than prose to me.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Part of the problem is that five stars doesn't leave enough room for nuance.

I know some people will give a book five stars if they enjoyed it and they encountered no major problems, but some think that since the maximum they can give Shakespeare is five stars, all the others must receive less.

Ideally one should be able to quote on a scale of hundred. Shakespeare would e.g. receive 100, life-changing books 90 and very good books 80. Plenty of room to differentiate between those "very good books." A score of 80 would still translate to eight stars (or four in the current scale of five), while maintaining a healthy distance from the absolute top.


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

Some book I've read recently that don't average over four stars:

The Passage by Justin Cronin - 3.8
Canal Dreams by Iain Banks - 2.8
The Angel's Game by Carlos Luiz Zafon - 3.9
Inverted World by Christopher Priest - 3.8

In my opinion they were all five star except Canal Dreams which I would have given a 3.5. 

I too think the 4.0 star requirement is ridiculous. However I think that expecting authors to do a query/pitch to get a listing is unrealistic in terms of time. Personally I would drop the rating requirement to 3.5. I think that would be more realistic and wouldn't encourage so many fake reviews.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

As I see it, the rating requirement is a shortcut for site operators so that they don't have to get their hands dirty and actually look at the books they're putting on the site.

I suppose it's a lot of work to manually sift through submissions and decide what meets your site's requirements, so it's easy to impose a minimum star rating. IMO high star ratings mean nothing other than that the book has managed to find its right audience.


----------



## DarkScribe (Aug 30, 2012)

Vaalingrade said:


> This would be an adequate defense if 4 and 5 stars didn't have similar problems. There are plenty of people that give out 4 or 5 stars just for liking a work. Especially those few who _do_ realize that 3 stars hurts the author.


?

A review is an opinion. If a member of a particular reader demographic enjoys a book, how would you expect them to rate it? The only criterion necessary to review a book is the ability to read it. Readers are reviewing a book, not grading an essay. A writer needs - before anything else - to be able to tell an entertaining story. If that writer can also present that story in an erudite fashion - so much the better. Erudition, while a pleasant addition to the telling of a story, is not crucial. Witness all of the poorly written bestselling books that dominate the NYT lists.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> I'm sure you don't mean for it to come across that all of us who use the sites pay for reviews, but that's what it reads like.  Or that we all game the system somehow. Why should a query to one person and a few sample pages to that same person, trump 200 reviews by actual readers?


I didn't say that everyone pays for reviews, or that everyone games the system, and I certainly didn't mean to imply that. I said 'the review system is not *always* objective, not that it never is. The only reason I suggested it was because someone asked if there was some way other than the star system that could be used as a measure of the books that were applying for spots on the ad sites.


----------



## Greer (Sep 24, 2011)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> Do you think paid reviews are all that widespread? If you took all the books listed today at the blogs where a certain review threshold is required, how many of them do you really think made it there based on paid-for reviews?


What I think is that there are a bunch of marketing books out there advocating buying reviews, and sites that keep cropping up where you can buy reviews or 'review swap'. I suspect that there are tons of writers out there who are not on this board who don't know that those things, or sock puppet reviews, are considered unethical. And when there's a system in place that requires ten four-star reviews in order to get your book on a site that has a decent reach, I think it would be naive to assume that it's not happening on a regular basis. I'm not saying that most people do it, but I think it probably happens enough as to be unfair to the honest folks who don't game the system.


----------



## EmilyG (Jan 31, 2010)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Part of the problem is that five stars doesn't leave enough room for nuance.
> 
> I know some people will give a book five stars if they enjoyed it and they encountered no major problems, but some think that since the maximum they can give Shakespeare is five stars, all the others must receive less.
> 
> Ideally one should be able to quote on a scale of hundred. Shakespeare would e.g. receive 100, life-changing books 90 and very good books 80. Plenty of room to differentiate between those "very good books." A score of 80 would still translate to eight stars (or four in the current scale of five), while maintaining a healthy distance from the absolute top.


But that is part of the problem. Shakespeare would not be 100 on *my* scale. I would probably give him around 50 for most of his works. _Pride and Prejudice_ (as I have never been able to finish it) would be around a 10 even through it is the holy-grail of classic literature to a lot of people.

100's for me would be _We Band of Angels_ and _Life of Pi_. Very, very different books that moved me in its own way.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Patty Jansen said:


> As I see it, the rating requirement is a shortcut for site operators so that they don't have to get their hands dirty and actually look at the books they're putting on the site.


Interesting choice of words for the idea of looking at books--"get their hands dirty." I thought we liked books here? 

The reality is, at a site like KBoards, which I expect is not that different from many other sites where one can submit one's book, that "getting their hands dirty" would result in fewer slots for promotion. As far as I know, Harvey is the one doing the selecting, unless his family helps (his daughter is also a part time admin here). And Harvey has a life outside KBoards; this isn't a full time job. So, yes, using the star rating IS a way to cut the work load.



EmilyG said:


> But that is part of the problem. Shakespeare would not be 100 on *my* scale. I would probably give him around 50 for most of his works. _Pride and Prejudice_ (as I have never been able to finish it) would be around a 10 even through it is the holy-grail of classic literature to a lot of people.
> 
> 100's for me would be _We Band of Angels_ and _Life of Pi_. Very, very different books that moved me in its own way.


But isn't that the point? Not that each individual would choose the same books but that the 100 stars (which I think is excessive, plus hard to display on a web page ) would allow more nuance? So, would you give P&P a half a star on the current scale? (Which is what your 10 translates to on Amazon five-star scale.)

And *Terrance*--you can do apostrophes on the iPad's internal keyboard by doing a short swipe up on the key with the comma and exclamation point. Or by pressing and holding on that key and then sliding up to the exclamation point pop-up.

Betsy


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

I imagine someone has to confirm that a book submitted has four stars.  Do these promotion sites click through a few of the ratings to see what the comments are, and do the comments/reviews themselves have any impact on their decisions to accept a book?

Jodi


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

EmilyG said:


> But that is part of the problem. Shakespeare would not be 100 on *my* scale. I would probably give him around 50 for most of his works. _Pride and Prejudice_ (as I have never been able to finish it) would be around a 10 even through it is the holy-grail of classic literature to a lot of people.
> 
> 100's for me would be _We Band of Angels_ and _Life of Pi_. Very, very different books that moved me in its own way.


That is *not* a problem. The point is being able to have a more granular system of rating.



Betsy the Quilter said:


> Not that each individual would choose the same books but that the 100 stars (which I think is excessive, plus hard to display on a web page ) would allow more nuance?
> 
> Betsy


Who proposed displaying 100 stars?   



Andrew Ashling said:


> *A score of 80 would still translate to eight stars (or four in the current scale of five)*, while maintaining a healthy distance from the absolute top.


Never mind: it happens a lot that writers get low ratings because the reader thinks they wrote something they actually didn't.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I would actually love to be able to use half stars. There are many books that for me fit into the 3.5 range for some reason. Even 4.5, just a notch off a 5 star. I always have to round up or down then. That wouldn't require to show anymore than the 5 stars we have everywhere.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

I want a 69 star scale. It just makes sense. "This book is the best book I ever read. It deserves a 69!"


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2013)

Whenever I contact a convention asking them if they would like some swag for door prizes or charity auctions, they don't demand to know what my star rating is or see five reviews first. They say "Yes! Thank you!" and more often than not I get free ad space in their program. They don't seem to have any problem keeping attendees happy despite this lack of "quality oversight." When I contact magazines or genre specific websites to query about banner ads or display ads, nobody asks what my star rating is. Despite this lack of "quality oversight" these publications and sites seem to get along just fine. Whenever I do a giveaway on Librarything or Goodreads, the sites don't require a specific number of reviews or ranking first. Oddly, they don't seem to suffer any complains from their users. People keep coming back for more giveaways. Truthfully, the promo sites that require a four star overall rating and specific number of reviews are an aberration. 

And it doesn’t even serve any “quality” role. How many people have reported getting a bunch of bad reviews after a freebie giveaway that was promoted on these sites? Those bad reviews don’t happen because of poor quality control. They happen because the folks who regularly use these sites are not looking for high quality books. They are looking for adequate, cheap reads. They don’t sample. They don’t read the blurbs. They click and download the freebie and…maybe…eventually get around to reading it. It’s like when you go into a Dollar store to pick up a roll of tape and walk out with $20 worth of stuff that when you get it home you say “Why did I buy this?” I think it is safe to say most people have spent more than they intended upon entering a dollar store. But how many people come across a product in a dollar store and then say “WOW! This is amazing!” and go looking for it in the future? Or when you walk by the clearance rack in WalMart and grab a t-shirt for $1.50 that you only plan to wear when cleaning the house or doing yard work. 

In short, there is no logical reason to believe the star requirement actually has real value or that dropping the requirement would alienate the people who visit the site.


----------



## lynnfromthesouth (Jun 21, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> In short, there is no logical reason to believe the star requirement actually has real value or that dropping the requirement would alienate the people who visit the site.


I'm not sure they do either. I think it just cuts down on the amount of submissions they get. Though, I notice that now I just see the same books over and over again, and since Amazon has cracked down on freebie links, they've been doing less freebies anyway and moving toward discounted trade books.

As for how to tell if they are gaming the system, it can be fairly easy to tell from the reviews. They are all usually short and waaayyy too positive, with no negatives, such as "This is such an awesome book. It's the best book I have read in years", and sometimes with one really negative review that talks about serious problems, like no editing. A few like that is expected, but not when all of them are like that.

I also agree that 3.5 would be a better cutoff. For example, I have two 3-star reviews, both I think found the book through tags and didn't really read the blurb or the category it was in, and both said "Too young for me". That's fine. I'm not upset about them, but it gave me a 3.8 rating. Stuff like that is bound to happen. I think "hitting your target market" sounds good, but categories are not always how people find your books, and they may not read the descriptions or get samples.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper (Feb 16, 2012)

LynnBlackmar said:


> As for how to tell if they are gaming the system, it can be fairly easy to tell from the reviews. They are all usually short and waaayyy too positive, with no negatives, such as "This is such an awesome book. It's the best book I have read in years", and sometimes with one really negative review that talks about serious problems, like no editing. A few like that is expected, but not when all of them are like that.


This may be true in some cases (I actually believe it's the minority), but it's not an absolute truth. I've recently gotten a flurry of short very positive reviews (as well as a smattering of less flattering ones). The glowing ones generally all say pretty much the same thing: "Great book; couldn't put it down; highly recommended." I don't know these people, so if someone is gaming my books, it ain't me. Amazon started a few months ago sending out reminder "Review XYZ" emails to people. Those who respond do so, I believe, because they either truly liked the book or truly hated it, but in either case, most tap in little more than a couple sentences (welcome to the mobile/tablet 140 character-acclimated generation, folks).


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Whenever I contact a convention asking them if they would like some swag for door prizes or charity auctions, they don't demand to know what my star rating is or see five reviews first. They say "Yes! Thank you!" and more often than not I get free ad space in their program. They don't seem to have any problem keeping attendees happy despite this lack of "quality oversight." When I contact magazines or genre specific websites to query about banner ads or display ads, nobody asks what my star rating is. Despite this lack of "quality oversight" these publications and sites seem to get along just fine. Whenever I do a giveaway on Librarything or Goodreads, the sites don't require a specific number of reviews or ranking first. Oddly, they don't seem to suffer any complains from their users. People keep coming back for more giveaways. Truthfully, the promo sites that require a four star overall rating and specific number of reviews are an aberration.
> 
> And it doesn't even serve any "quality" role. How many people have reported getting a bunch of bad reviews after a freebie giveaway that was promoted on these sites? Those bad reviews don't happen because of poor quality control. They happen because the folks who regularly use these sites are not looking for high quality books. They are looking for adequate, cheap reads. They don't sample. They don't read the blurbs. They click and download the freebie and&#8230;maybe&#8230;eventually get around to reading it. It's like when you go into a Dollar store to pick up a roll of tape and walk out with $20 worth of stuff that when you get it home you say "Why did I buy this?" I think it is safe to say most people have spent more than they intended upon entering a dollar store. But how many people come across a product in a dollar store and then say "WOW! This is amazing!" and go looking for it in the future? Or when you walk by the clearance rack in WalMart and grab a t-shirt for $1.50 that you only plan to wear when cleaning the house or doing yard work.
> 
> In short, there is no logical reason to believe the star requirement actually has real value or that dropping the requirement would alienate the people who visit the site.


The thing is, there is nothing stopping anyone from starting a site that has no gatekeepers--and yeah, these sites are the new gatekeepers, I guess, but not entirely on their own. They are depending on the readers to be the gatekeepers and trusting their judgement, not just a handful of people sorting through a slushpile. Anyway, like I said, anyone can put up a site. They can do one that chooses books to post using a random number generator every single day, for example, or using the query method, but asking sites that have been successful operating the way they are now to change their methods because we don't think it's fair is asking a lot.

A query method could work for a site--they can use that as a way to attract readers--and maybe it will be a huge success. It would be great it it was, but it would still be seen as unfair by some authors. However, it might be nice to have different sites with different criteria and let the readers decide which sites work best for their needs.


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2013)

MaryMcDonald said:


> The thing is, there is nothing stopping anyone from starting a site that has no gatekeepers--and yeah, these sites are the new gatekeepers, I guess, but not entirely on their own. They are depending on the readers to be the gatekeepers and trusting their judgement, not just a handful of people sorting through a slushpile. Anyway, like I said, anyone can put up a site. They can do one that chooses books to post using a random number generator every single day, for example, or using the query method, but asking sites that have been successful operating the way they are now to change their methods because we don't think it's fair is asking a lot.


To be clear, nothing in any of my comments is concerned about fairness. I was specifically addressing the points that the requirement is _arbitrary_, _encourage and reward unethical behavior_, and _serves no valid purpose,_ particularly in light of the wealth of other advertising opportunities that do not require such things.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> If Amazon wants to play that way, they really should make it clear to reviewers what a 3-star review actually means on the 'zon.


When you create a review on Amazon, the first thing on the page is "How do you rate this item?" If you hover over the stars, a "tool tip" shows you what each star means:

1 - I hate it
2 - I don't like it
3 - It's okay
4 - I like it
5 - I love it

Note that Goodreads defines the stars differently:

1 - Did not like it
2 - It was ok
3 - Liked it
4 - Really liked it
5 - It was amazing

A 3-star rating on Goodreads is semantically identical to a 4-star rating on Amazon, but I doubt authors (or readers) see it that way.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

LynnBlackmar said:


> As for how to tell if they are gaming the system, it can be fairly easy to tell from the reviews. They are all usually short and waaayyy too positive, with no negatives, such as "This is such an awesome book. It's the best book I have read in years", and sometimes with one really negative review that talks about serious problems, like no editing. A few like that is expected, but not when all of them are like that.


That used to be true, but since Amazon started sending the emails encouraging people to rate and review their purchases, I've found a lot more of my reviews are of the short, "Great book! I couldn't put it down!" variety. If you look at their history, they might only have reviewed my book and maybe some other item they purchased--although looking back at some of them now, I see that some have posted reviews for other books/items since they posted one on my book/s. I guess a reviewer has to start somewhere.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> To be clear, nothing in any of my comments is concerned about fairness. I was specifically addressing the points that the requirement is _arbitrary_, _encourage and reward unethical behavior_, and _serves no valid purpose,_ particularly in light of the wealth of other advertising opportunities that do not require such things.


There may not have been in your comments, but the complaints that started this thread were about how it wasn't right or accurate that the sites have minimum requirements.

There might a lot of different ways to reach people with paper books, but there aren't nearly as many of those opportunities for ebooks. Before I had paperbacks, I tried to donate ebooks via Smashwords coupons. I had beautiful post card sized cards printed up with the book overs on one side and the description of the book on the other. I wrote the coupon codes on the cards and they were supposed to be part of a silent auction. They guy running the auction forgot to put them out (even though he had contacted me about the books, not the other way around) and by the end of the night, he was drunkenly flinging them onto tables he passed, saying, "Here! Have a book!" Most were left on the tables and presumably thrown out by the end of the night.

After reading about so many Goodreads free book giveaways resulting in no reviews, bad reviews by people who didn't read the books, or worse, getting the free books to re-sell, I think I'll pass on them.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

DarkScribe said:


> ?
> 
> A review is an opinion. If a member of a particular reader demographic enjoys a book, how would you expect them to rate it? The only criterion necessary to review a book is the ability to read it. Readers are reviewing a book, not grading an essay. A writer needs - before anything else - to be able to tell an entertaining story. If that writer can also present that story in an erudite fashion - so much the better. Erudition, while a pleasant addition to the telling of a story, is not crucial. Witness all of the poorly written bestselling books that dominate the NYT lists.


I think you're mistaking what I'm getting at. When I say 'just like', I mean 'liked, but did not love'.


----------



## Guest (Mar 26, 2013)

Rats!  I see I owe Betsy $10 ... how about $10 in ebooks?


----------



## J. W. Rolfe (Oct 21, 2012)

Dang, this thread sure did take off. Lots of opinions being shared, and I'm happy to see a meaningful discussion about this sore subject. I do want to say something to the book bloggers and advertisers who use and defend the 4 star rating system, which is mainly that if the demand is so great then it might be worthwhile to hire an extra part-timer to help sort through the requests. If costs are an issue, then raise the price for the advertising to whatever the market will bear. That alone might reduce the number of requests, although I'm sure there is a middle ground somewhere. After all, I would have more confidence in a website's ads if I knew that the books being promoted were truly screened rather than selected through arbitrary means.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "And Terrance--you can do apostrophes on the iPad's internal keyboard by doing a short swipe up on the key with the comma and exclamation point. Or by pressing and holding on that key and then sliding up to the exclamation point pop-up."


Bless you, Master Obi Wan


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Bless you, Master Obi Wan


 

Betsy
who is always on her iPad...
(Sorry I spelled "Terrence" wrong, btw....)


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Rats! I see I owe Betsy $10 ... how about $10 in ebooks?


 

I'll let you know....


Betsy


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

DRMarvello said:


> When you create a review on Amazon, the first thing on the page is "How do you rate this item?" If you hover over the stars, a "tool tip" shows you what each star means:
> 
> 1 - I hate it
> 2 - I don't like it
> ...


I as well doubt that most readers use those sites that way. E.g. I know for a fact that some use the star ratings simply to classify books while they're browsing. If they don't like Westerns they will give each Western a one star, without even having read those books. Actually, that is the point: they now have a list of books they needn't revisit because they have no intention of ever reading a Western. Too bad that this brings your average down.

The rating system on both those sites is a joke. Only when a book has a statistically significant number of ratings - let's say 1,000 - you can deduce from the average rating what "a lot of" people think of this book. You still don't know anything about the quality of the book, and it is still very subjective: you might like a book "most people" won't.

I'm beginning to think Andy Warhol was right: "Don't pay any attention to what they write about you. Just measure it in inches."


----------



## lynnfromthesouth (Jun 21, 2012)

Saul Tanpepper said:


> This may be true in some cases (I actually believe it's the minority), but it's not an absolute truth.


I did say "all", or "all but one" (maybe two). If there's a mix of types of reviews, I would believe it's less likely to be gamed. Also, people keep talking about hundreds and thousands of reviews, but most of these books on the blogs have less than 15. I keep most of the big freebie blogs on my reader and look at the posts daily. On occasion I will look at the sample of one that seems suspicious, and have found some really poor stuff.

I know someone that started an indie books blog, intending to promote freebies and the like, and now he just spams all the authors with paid advertising subscription requests (and he started doing that before Amazon changed how referral links were handled).


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

J. W. Rolfe said:


> Dang, this thread sure did take off. Lots of opinions being shared, and I'm happy to see a meaningful discussion about this sore subject. I do want to say something to the book bloggers and advertisers who use and defend the 4 star rating system, which is mainly that if the demand is so great then it might be worthwhile to hire an extra part-timer to help sort through the requests. If costs are an issue, then raise the price for the advertising to whatever the market will bear. That alone might reduce the number of requests, although I'm sure there is a middle ground somewhere. After all, I would have more confidence in a website's ads if I knew that the books being promoted were truly screened rather than selected through arbitrary means.


It's a good thought. I can only speak for KBoards, but from my experience we've tried to find the right balance between keeping the costs reasonable, and having an administratively-efficient way of filtering books.

For us, that has come down to filtering out book submissions based on:

- genre (no erotica, and we generally shy away from Advice/How-To books just based on customer demand)

- length (we get many submissions for books that are 20 or 30 pages long. Generally, we reject and refund books that are shorter than 100 pages in length. We do make exceptions based on our manual review of the book)

- star rating. We make exceptions occasionally to this, but generally accept only books at 4-stars and above. I agree this is arbitrary and is a flawed measurement of a book's appeal to our readers.

The purpose of the above is to have some standards (admittedly imperfect) that give our readers a reliable sense that when they go to our blog they're going to find books that interest them. We can't read every book, obviously, so we have to use the data and metrics that are available to us.

My perception is that readers (buyers) do care *somewhat* about star rating, but are more influenced by genre, a great blurb, strong cover, and price.

The unfairness of the 'star' system led us to initiate our 'Book Discovery' promotion which is open to all non-erotica books, regardless of star rating.

I would like to explore other ways that we can better serve our readers and our authors.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

The fact is, most casual readers do pay attention to reviews. I know everyone here says they don't pay much attention to them, but a lot of us read them and weigh what other people say. If a book has ten 3 stars and 1 five star and that's it, I'm probably going to pass without much more thought unless there is something else about that book that has me _really_ interested. Like it or not, reviews count.


----------



## EmilyG (Jan 31, 2010)

Interestingly, I was looking at some reviews for a book today on Amazon and at the bottom there was a new box with

FEEDBACK ON CUSTOMER REVIEWS
Overall, did the reviews provide enough information to help you make a decision?
Yes
No


I don't know what Amazon is going to do with that information but they are collecting it.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper (Feb 16, 2012)

EmilyG said:


> Interestingly, I was looking at some reviews for a book today on Amazon and at the bottom there was a new box with
> 
> FEEDBACK ON CUSTOMER REVIEWS
> Overall, did the reviews provide enough information to help you make a decision?
> ...


It's another way for Amazon to collect data and to engage you. I've gotten emails saying "A customer reported that your review helped them make a purchasing decision." It's good business on Amazon's part, for several different reasons.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> The rating system on both those sites is a joke. Only when a book has a statistically significant number of ratings - let's say 1,000 - you can deduce from the average rating what "a lot of" people think of this book. You still don't know anything about the quality of the book, and it is still very subjective: you might like a book "most people" won't.


I agree with you. Any rating system is going to be arbitrary and subjective because at the heart of it, the system is built on opinion. Worse, rating systems are built on aggregate opinion, which very quickly loses any semblance of meaning. I think 1,000 ratings means even less than 100. I value the reviews my readers have given me because I value their _individual_ opinions and observations. The average star rating tells me nothing I can use to make my books better.

As flawed as the current rating/review system is, I like it better than anything else I've heard proposed. I think asking the promo sites to actually look at books and make a qualitative decision about them is a worse solution. Talk about subjective! As soon as we did that, authors would start complaining about "the gatekeepers" at site so-and-so who wouldn't promote their books "just because they didn't like them." We should be careful what we wish for. Using ratings and reviews is far _less_ subjective, IMO.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

DRMarvello said:


> The average star rating tells me nothing I can use to make my books better.


I actually use it as a reader. If a book has just a couple reviews, then I don't pay much attention, but if it's got 20 or 30 reviews, and it's not breaking better than a 3.5ish overall, then I figure there's some problems, and there are plenty of other books out there to choose from. Yeah, I might be missing out on some good books, but that doesn't bother me. It's one of the first criteria along with a decent blurb and a cover that gets me to click on the thing in the first place, that the book has to pass before I even read the sample. And THAT'S the thing that makes the final decision for me. But first, the book has to get past those initial "tests".


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

DRMarvello said:


> We should be careful what we wish for. Using ratings and reviews is far _less_ subjective, IMO.


I agree. It's far _less_ subjective than having gatekeepers, simply because more people are involved. How about arbitrary?



vrabinec said:


> I actually use it as a reader. If a book has just a couple reviews, then I don't pay much attention, but if it's got 20 or 30 reviews, and it's not breaking better than a 3.5ish overall, then I figure there's some problems, and there are plenty of other books out there to choose from.


One of my pet theories is that it is far more important to have a lot of reviews than to have stellar reviews&#8230; as long as the average hovers around 3.5. I think most people don't look too close. They just see a lot of reviews, which means even more people bought it, so there must be something to it. As to the content of all those reviews: just opinions of some random people they don't know. It doesn't matter what they actually say.

I think that's why Locke decided to simply buy them. (He was still going strong last time I looked, by the way.)

Another thing I'd like to know is how books that get automatically discriminated against, even if they have a gazillion reviews with a 4.3 average, manage to gain traction.

ETA:



DRMarvello said:


> The average star rating tells me nothing I can use to make my books better.


Some people seem to think that reviews are for readers. I don't. I think everything someone puts on the Internet is fair game. If you don't like that, you should review books in your local waterhole, for a limited audience. But I do agree that reviews are not meant to make your (or my) books better, and not only because the "advice" is often contradictory from one review to the other comment.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

vrabinec said:


> I actually use it as a reader. If a book has just a couple reviews, then I don't pay much attention, but if it's got 20 or 30 reviews, and it's not breaking better than a 3.5ish overall, then I figure there's some problems, and there are plenty of other books out there to choose from.


Me too, and the few times I've deviated from that and picked up a 3-star book because the premise sounded interesting or it was by a favorite author, I've found the average was spot on - it was a mediocre book.

Quote from: DRMarvello on Today at 01:14:46 PM
"The average star rating tells me nothing I can use to make my books better."

I also accept that the purpose of reviews is to inform readers, not help authors improve. Not that reviews never say anything helpful, but for the most part we need to look to critique groups, self-study of better writers and their advice, workshops, and other places designed to help writers.

As to Julie's point about nobody turning away free stuff. If someone is just handing it to me as a door prize, of course I'm going to take it, hope I like it, and dump it in the garbage if I don't. If I'm actively seeking freebies, I'd rather have some sort of quality screen on them.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

NathanWrann said:


> Do you have a better system for judging the merits of an author's work?


Maybe instead of Amazon trying to hone in on the veracity of the review, it should shift focus to rewarding the the reader by embedding a coupon in the ebook near the end of the book, which could be redeemed by leaving a review or, at minimum, a star rating. The coupon would be a discount, say 15 or 20% off the purchase of the next e-book on Amazon.

This would accomplish several things: It would give no-star books with some sales some reviews, thus diminishing the author's urge to pay for reviews. Assuming the book has some merit, it would diminish the weight of one-star reviews with numbers of higher reviews. Some books would rack up pinball scores in the thousands, adding weight to the center of the bell curve.

Reviewers who take pride in their long, analytical reviews would still write those reviews. Most of the ratings might well be "drive-by" ratings--but now, there would be many more ratings for the prospective book buyer to judge the book by.

This is a time-tested business model for customer appreciation. Instead of glutting the market with zillions of free books and less paid bounce than in former times, in Select, the new system would reward the reader and author equally, with a sale and a coupon --as more reviews accumulate, more book browsers will be attracted to the book climbing in the rankings, resulting in higher sales.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

DRMarvello said:


> As flawed as the current rating/review system is, I like it better than anything else I've heard proposed. I think asking the promo sites to actually look at books and make a qualitative decision about them is a worse solution. Talk about subjective! As soon as we did that, authors would start complaining about "the gatekeepers" at site so-and-so who wouldn't promote their books "just because they didn't like them." We should be careful what we wish for. Using ratings and reviews is far _less_ subjective, IMO.


Well said. I agree.


----------



## Cappy (Sep 6, 2011)

Going back to the original topic, I can see why promotional sites use the 4-star bar. It's difficult for them. And I'm not sure how they could do things differently.

But I guess it's a cultural thing that I'm worried about. I just don't want the star system to grow in power and become the final say on whether a book is good or not. Or else, like has been mentioned before, we're going to start demoting amazing, but sometimes difficult, books by great writers to the second division. It could get to a point where the future Hemingways might not even get read.


----------



## lynnfromthesouth (Jun 21, 2012)

Hudson Owen said:


> Maybe instead of Amazon trying to hone in on the veracity of the review, it should shift focus to rewarding the the reader by embedding a coupon in the ebook near the end of the book, which could be redeemed by leaving a review or, at minimum, a star rating. The coupon would be a discount, say 15 or 20% off the purchase of the next e-book on Amazon.


That's a really good idea.


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> Maybe instead of Amazon trying to hone in on the veracity of the review, it should shift focus to rewarding the the reader by embedding a coupon in the ebook near the end of the book, which could be redeemed by leaving a review or, at minimum, a star rating. The coupon would be a discount, say 15 or 20% off the purchase of the next e-book on Amazon.


I would prefer not to encourage Amazon to embed ANYTHING in MY books. I do understand the theory here, but in practice I would be uncomfortable with this. Beside the fact that I don't want to open the door to Amazon placing ads in my books without my permission (and once that door is open, it won't close) there is a practical issue of this would encourage POOR quality reviews. If I am reading a book on my Kindle, and I have to access the discount from the book, I'm going to try to write the review from the Kindle. Even with the Fire, writing anything beyond Tweet length is cumbersome. All this would do is encourage more one or two sentence reviews. Also, I think it would confuse a lot of people. Already we see a lot of weird reviews because Amazon sends out those emails encouraging people to review their purchases. And people leave half-reviews that say "I haven't read this yet" because they think they have to review the book even if they haven't read it yet. I'm cautious about any process that seeks to encourage QUANTITY without concern for quality.


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2013)

But they already do embed something similar: the "now that you've finished" feature that triggers when you get to the end.  It wouldn't be much of a change to put a "review this and get 15% off your next story!" feature.  Also, if they transitioned away from those "review your recent purchase emails" to something like this, it could go a long way to get rid of those "I didn't read this!" reviews you complain about.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I would prefer not to encourage Amazon to embed ANYTHING in MY books. I do understand the theory here, but in practice I would be uncomfortable with this. Beside the fact that I don't want to open the door to Amazon placing ads in my books without my permission (and once that door is open, it won't close) there is a practical issue of this would encourage POOR quality reviews. If I am reading a book on my Kindle, and I have to access the discount from the book, I'm going to try to write the review from the Kindle. Even with the Fire, writing anything beyond Tweet length is cumbersome. All this would do is encourage more one or two sentence reviews. Also, I think it would confuse a lot of people. Already we see a lot of weird reviews because Amazon sends out those emails encouraging people to review their purchases. And people leave half-reviews that say "I haven't read this yet" because they think they have to review the book even if they haven't read it yet. I'm cautious about any process that seeks to encourage QUANTITY without concern for quality.


However the program would actually work technically, the principle of rewarding the reader with a coupon is a sound business model. And the author gets a review or rating. What we all want is a system that guarantees fairness, we want reviews that, at least, reflect the main themes of our book, reviews that are not illegally obtained by gaming the system, etc.

But no system can guarantee that. You can't guarantee quality. Amazon could demand a pledge of fairness from the reviewer--but how to enforce such a pledge?

If a reader knows she will receive a coupon for reading your low-rated, recently published book (by insensitive, boorish, dumb, perverse readers), which seems interesting to her, she might take a chance on you, and see your novel differently and give you, say, three stars instead of one or two. That way, your book gets a fighting chance to go on and find its true audience.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Joe Vasicek said:


> But they already do embed something similar: the "now that you've finished" feature that triggers when you get to the end. It wouldn't be much of a change to put a "review this and get 15% off your next story!" feature. Also, if they transitioned away from those "review your recent purchase emails" to something like this, it could go a long way to get rid of those "I didn't read this!" reviews you complain about.


I agree that it makes more sense to keep the call for a review at the end of the book rather than sending an email before the reader has even had a chance to read the book. But I don't like the idea of giving readers an _incentive_ to post potentially bogus reviews.

I'd prefer to get reviews from readers who actually _want_ to post a review. I doubt good things will result from encouraging people to post reviews when they wouldn't normally do it on their own.



vrabinec said:


> I actually use it [star rating] as a reader...


Me too. And in much the same way you described.

As Andrew said, ratings and reviews are public content, so they are for readers and authors both. As an author, individual reviews have content that I can choose to ignore or accept as reader feedback. Star rating affects my ability to advertise and it affects my book's ability to attract readers, but it doesn't give me actionable feedback from my readers.


----------



## ElisaBlaisdell (Jun 3, 2012)

Cappy said:


> Going back to the original topic, I can see why promotional sites use the 4-star bar. It's difficult for them. And I'm not sure how they could do things differently.
> 
> But I guess it's a cultural thing that I'm worried about. I just don't want the star system to grow in power and become the final say on whether a book is good or not. Or else, like has been mentioned before, we're going to start demoting amazing, but sometimes difficult, books by great writers to the second division. It could get to a point where the future Hemingways might not even get read.


Although I don't like the star system, and despise the idea of using the stars as a guide to action of any kind, I don't think we have to worry as much about the classics as we do.

If they were not classics, they would not be in nearly as much danger of low ratings. Two words. Required Reading.  Back when I had to read _Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man_, the only thing that would have kept me from giving it a one-star review would have been the passionate belief that one star was too good for it.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "The fact is, most casual readers do pay attention to reviews."


I'm horrified at the notion that the rest of the world acts like I do, but I confess to never reading reviews when looking for fiction as a consumer. Before writing a book, I never even looked down the page below the blurb. I purchased hundreds of Amazon books before venturing down into that unknown territory. But I do question how many people use reviews because I have never seen any good data. I don't think we know.

But I also have to confess that I am culturally attuned to reflexively consider something with five stars to be better than something with fewer stars. That's not the product of critical thinking, logic, or even choice. It's what I have absorbed through the culture.

So, for those who are influenced by stars, we can't escape them. They sit right next to the book title on all the Amazon lists. Everybody sees them. Reviews are read by choice. Stars are force fed.

I accept many are smarter than I am and aren't susceptible to such manipulation.



> "It could get to a point where the future Hemingways might not even get read."


Given the size of past slush piles, and the current KDP offerings, I suspect many Hemingways have been ignored.



> "Beside the fact that I don't want to open the door to Amazon placing ads in my books without my permission (and once that door is open, it won't close) there is a practical issue of this would encourage POOR quality reviews. "


There's a simple way to do this. Amazon delivers an Amazon package containing the book. The ads aren't in the book, but are included in the package. Similar to a magazine. Ads aren't inside many articles, but they are carried in the package. They already promote other books on our book pages.


----------

