# One Star Reviews When Choosing a Book?



## Andrea Pearson (Jun 25, 2011)

Do you read one-star reviews? If so, why? If not, why? If you _do_ read them, do they ever dissuade you from downloading a book, or do they make you want to read the book?

I read them. I hate it when a book is poorly edited or written, and one-star reviews always mention the editing if it's bad. Also, I don't like being surprised with explicit material. I'd rather know ahead of time what to expect.

I have downloaded books before, based off of the bad reviews. I like to see if I agree or disagree with what the reviewer said, if it isn't something regarding grammar.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I look at 1 stars all the time. I check to see if someone complained about certain things. Like the book ended up on a cliffhanger with no notice in the description, its part of an installment. Or if it is a different genre as it was sold as. 
There is usually a lot of stuff I can find out in 1 stars.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

I scan them, and read carefully if it seems profitable.  Mainly looking for a common complaint between them about something that would bother me.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Yes, I read them. Not necessarily every time but if I'm unsure about trying a sample, I read a few positive and few negative reviews. Depending on what they say, it may influence my decision to check it out further. Sometimes what someone didn't like about the book is not something that would really bother me. Or it may be complaints about formatting or editing which I can tell has since been resolved. But the average consensus holds more weight for me - there's always going to be someone who doesn't like a book and as long as those are in the minority, I figure it should be pretty safe.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

I pretty much always read them - or at least some of them.  Mostly it's to see if there are comments on editing issues.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Yep. I want to see if any have information I may find useful. is that information repeated by others?


----------



## backslidr (Nov 23, 2012)

If I see one or two in a long list of reviews I don't bother, but if there are a bunch of them I'll check them out.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

7vn11vn said:


> If I see one or two in a long list of reviews I don't bother, but if there are a bunch of them I'll check them out.


If the reviews are all 5-stars followed by a handful of 1 and 2-star reviews - then I immediately want to know what's wrong with the book and whether those 5-stars are all friends and relatives posting.


----------



## LT Ville (Apr 17, 2011)

I usually read them or skim them to see what they say. I have been scared away from a few books by 1 star reviews that made the book sound like a waste of time and money. That said, however, I tend to ignore 1 star reviews that don't give a real explanation. If you didn't like a book, I want to know why. It's not enough to simply say that you didn't like the book. Maybe the thing that you didn't like about it is something that isn't a deal breaker for me. Plus I think explanations are beneficial to the authors because every author can use constructive criticism.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Yes I do. Especially if I'm paying a high price for a Kindle book. But sometimes what the reviewer says still makes me want to buy the book. I bought NW: A Novel by Zadie Smith last week. The reviews weren't good, and I could see this was because they said she was trying a new, experimental style, different to her usual style which readers had enjoyed. That intrigued me.


----------



## Alba Arango author (Dec 29, 2012)

I ALWAYS check the low reviews. And I, too, like to compare what I have read with the low reviews to see if I agree. 

I do feel bad giving low reviews. But sometimes, it is really necessary. I won't admit to how many times I've purchased a book because it sounded interesting without reading the reviews, and then it turns out to be awful. Boring stories or uninteresting plots are one thing (highly subjective), but bad writing and poor grammar is another.  I just have to warn potential buyers and, more importantly, the author about the need for an editor.

Alba


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

I actually don't read too many reviews of books--good or bad-- until after I read the book. I want to know if others thought the same thing about the book that I did.   However, if I see a book as three or less stars overall and more than a handful of reviews, I'll just skip it entirely. If it has 3 stars but lots of reviews, I'll take it that the book must have something controversial that divided readers. That's not a bad thing depending on what it is. 

Mostly, I glance at the rating and read the blurb. If it sounds intriguing, I do the Look Inside feature. If it seems well written and I want to read past the first few pages, I'll buy it.


----------



## Andrea Pearson (Jun 25, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> If it sounds intriguing, I do the Look Inside feature. If it seems well written and I want to read past the first few pages, I'll buy it.


I really need to do that more often. You can almost always tell how well a book is written by looking inside, but I forget to do that sometimes.

I have a hard time taking a risk on new authors and rarely download books from someone new, unless the book is really low priced or even free. Maybe this is a bad thing, but honestly, we've all been burned, haven't we? I've never been much of a risk taker.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Andrea Pearson said:


> I really need to do that more often. You can almost always tell how well a book is written by looking inside, but I forget to do that sometimes.
> 
> I have a hard time taking a risk on new authors and rarely download books from someone new, unless the book is really low priced or even free. Maybe this is a bad thing, but honestly, we've all been burned, haven't we? I've never been much of a risk taker.


That's what the Kindle sample feature is for. 

And yes, I tend to look at the lower starred reviews for many of the reasons cited above, but taking any that just say it was bad without any reason why with as much of a grain of salt as those that just say it was great -- I'm looking for both positive and negative reactions from reviewers who seem to look for the same sort of things in a book that I do -- and I _always_ sample anything from a new (to me) author, unless it's free or on sale for a limited time.


----------



## Kathelm (Sep 27, 2010)

I'm more likely to read 1-star reviews than 5-stars.  Seeing what sort of things people complain about can go a long way to ascertain both the quality of the book ( mostly vague or nitpicky 1-stars is a reason to buy a book) and the content.  It's also a good way to find out whether the book really is what it's advertising itself to be.

Well-written, informative, and thorough low reviews tell you a lot more about a book than most positive reviews.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

I often wish I had used the 'Look Inside' feature, and I would never have bought the books. However, some books have a great start but the authors just can't write a whole novel. There again, some write an average first chapter but the whole novel is good and takes a while to get into. So maybe the Look Inside isn't that helpful unless it is actually dire.


----------



## UnderControl (Jan 4, 2013)

I'll read them, but the biggest review factor for me is the percentage of 4 and 5 star reviews to lower star reviews.


----------



## marianneg (Nov 4, 2008)

I always look at one-star reviews. I want to know why someone hates it so I can decide if that would be applicable to me.


----------



## backslidr (Nov 23, 2012)

Geoffrey said:


> If the reviews are all 5-stars followed by a handful of 1 and 2-star reviews - then I immediately want to know what's wrong with the book and whether those 5-stars are all friends and relatives posting.


Yes, that's a good point. I figure that there are always going to be a few who don't like something, so I don't give them that much weight. What I'm most interested in is if the complaints are about bad editing and grammar. I'd rather read a bad story than a good one that is full of errors. Actually, I'd rather not read either.


----------



## Carrie Rubin (Nov 19, 2012)

UnderControl said:


> I'll read them, but the biggest review factor for me is the percentage of 4 and 5 star reviews to lower star reviews.


I'm with you. For example, if it's a Stephen King book and it has far more 3s, 4s, and 5s than 1 star reviews, then I'll certainly read it. If most of the reviews are 1 and 2 stars, then I probably wouldn't, no matter how much I liked the author.


----------



## Christopher Bunn (Oct 26, 2010)

I generally find the 1 and 2 star reviews more helpful than the 5 star reviews. If a low review is written well, is specific, and somehow resonates with my tastes, then I take it seriously and move on. Life's too short to waste on questionable books.


----------



## JDHallowell (Dec 31, 2012)

I used to take 1-star reviews a lot more seriously, until my own books got stuck with a couple of malicious ones, one from someone who wasn't happy with the way I used to moderate a discussion forum, and another from a "reviewer" who uses her review blog to solicit book submissions and then tries to extort money from authors. I realized that there was really no way of telling whether the reviews, good or bad, were legitimate or not.

Now I pay much more attention to the blurb and the sample.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

I'll look at the one-star reviews. Sometimes it gives me useful information, but most often they give me a laugh. Generally, I find two-star reviews more helpful. There are good reasons to give a book a one-star review, but a lot of one-star reviews are pretty strange.


----------



## Grace Elliot (Mar 14, 2011)

A definite trend in this thread by the looks of it.
Yes, I too read 1 star reviews - and more often than not end up chuckling. I usually end up learning more about the person that wrote the review, than what's wrong with the book!


----------



## Greg Stahl (Nov 11, 2012)

I'm relatively new to Kindle reading, but I've developed something of a pre-purchase (though unconscious) checklist. 1) Skim genre and description, 2) skim preview, 3) skim reviews. Like others here, I think one-star and five-star reviews often mean a bit less. I think it's funny, actually, that people who have reviewed my story with five stars elevate it to the same status as vastly superior books. Nevertheless, I certainly skip poorly-written reviews of any number of stars. Some of the best and most thoughtful reviews I've read in the Kindle store are three-star reviews by folks who regretted not being able to give four or five stars. In the cases when I've gone on to read those books, I found the reviews to be spot-on.


----------



## RJMcDonnell (Jan 29, 2011)

The last two one star reviews that I read complained about issues that had nothing to do with the content of the books reviews. One reviewer said she didn't receive an ebook after placing the order. I clicked on her reviews link, saw that she had a total of three reviews, and all were one star with the same complaint. The other one star reviewer wrote it in ALL CAPS with spelling and grammatical errors. His reason for the one star review was that he didn't remember ordering the book. Both of these sounded like customer service problems rather than legitimate review issues. I brought them to the attention of Amazon, but was told that the one star reviews would stand.


----------



## Carrie Rubin (Nov 19, 2012)

RJMcDonnell said:


> The last two one star reviews that I read complained about issues that had nothing to do with the content of the books reviews. One reviewer said she didn't receive an ebook after placing the order. I clicked on her reviews link, saw that she had a total of three reviews, and all were one star with the same complaint. The other one star reviewer wrote it in ALL CAPS with spelling and grammatical errors. His reason for the one star review was that he didn't remember ordering the book. Both of these sounded like customer service problems rather than legitimate review issues. I brought them to the attention of Amazon, but was told that the one star reviews would stand.


How frustrating. Hopefully, potential readers will read through the reviews and see this.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

There are probably as many 1-star reviews I ignore as 5-star ones ....


----------



## KindleGirl (Nov 11, 2008)

I read the low scores, as well as skim most of scores to get a general idea of how well liked it was. Most low scores are just problems with customer service, but sometimes I will find a decent written review that has merit. Most one stars sound like they are written by angry people so I never know how much was really about the book. If they have a legitimate gripe and give their reason it means more to me. I've passed up books that have quite a few low scores, but it's usually because I've found reviews that point out things that would bother me, not just the score.


----------



## NicWilson (Apr 16, 2011)

I try to read a sampling of all ratings. I ignore basically any review, no matter how good or bad, if they don't explain their rating accurately. I love a good thorough critique. The only dealbreaker's for me are editing problems. Most other elements are just too subjective for me to take other readers seriously. I don't doubt they have good points, but most of the time those points don't affect my reading or enjoyment.


----------



## kwmccabe (Oct 5, 2011)

I read the one and two star reviews to see if the editing and grammar are totally off. That always turns me off a book. If the reviews don't mention that, then I usually purchase regardless of the 1 and 2 stars.


----------



## Vukovina (Mar 30, 2012)

I glance at them. I'm more likely to glance at them than to glance at the 5-star reviews. But, much like the books themselves, the 1-star reviews range from 5-star 1-star reviews to 1-star 1-star reviews, which is why some websites have that "_x_ people found this review helpful" thing, which is more or less a review system for reviews, but you could also keep going and have "_x_ people found this _x_ people found this review helpful helpful" things all the way until the end of time and turtles, so, like someone already said, I just look inside after a while and that usually tells me more than the reviews...


----------



## vindicativevisage (Jan 9, 2013)

Reminds me of something I did yesterday: looked up reviews for classic books and read the one-star reviews. On Charles Dickens and H. G. Wells, the one-stars were because the book was "boring" - and some of the ones on C. S. Lewis were about how anti-religious the book was (it was one of the Chronicles of Narnia), and the reader missing the bigger picture. Then the Roald Dahl reviews for Witches. Incredible, some of these reviews, and not in a good way - an upsetting one. Then, when I see a 1-star or a 2-star (as the ONLY rating) on a newbie writer, I'm like, "Maybe I can give you a chance." To each their own, I guess.


----------



## MoniqueReads (Dec 31, 2011)

I try to read at least three reviews before I place a book on my TBR list.  I first read a 5 star review (if there are any) then I read a 3 star review after that a 1 star review.  I have learned by using this method I get a wider range of opinions.  What might have been seen as a strength by one reviewer might be a weakness with another.  Normally they don't always complain about the same thing so I can see if there might be problems in the book that will hamper my enjoyment.


----------



## Donna White Glaser (Jan 12, 2011)

If there are a lot of 1 stars, I'll at least scan through them looking for common complaints. Only a few 1 stars might mean differences in personal taste, so I think that's normal. I also try to see if the 3-4 stars balance out the 1 stars, which might indicate a good story with technical issues. Some can forgive those, some won't. I don't really count 5 star reviews as valid unless there are more than 5-7 of them. I figure any author can get that many from biased/family/friends, but it gets tougher over 10.


----------



## Anisa Claire West (Sep 19, 2012)

If the majority of reviews are 1 or 2 star, then I would be wary of the quality of a book.  But if the 1 stars are mixed in with higher reviews, then I look at it as a difference of opinion.  Tastes vary.  Even the top selling Kindle books have 1 star reviews (some have hundreds of them!)  If the book sample is engaging, I will buy the book no matter what any reviewer says.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

Andrea Pearson said:


> Do you read one-star reviews? If so, why? If not, why?


I rarely read reviews, one star or otherwise, because I'm afraid they'll give away the ending or some other important part of the book. Instead, I just look at the overall star rating. If I do scan the reviews, I try to only read the first couple sentences because spoilers are usually buried further down.


----------



## DNSimmons (Apr 1, 2012)

I normally read a 1 star review that's is detailed as to why they feel it's a one star book. Then I'll read a 3 star and last a 5 star just to get the idea of what won a person over and what turned a person off. But above all, it's really the premise that sells me on a book. I look for one that has an original hook. I like to read books that take a genre into a new direction.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

I think 1 star reviews can be interesting, informative, and entertaining.  For example, a reader complained bitterly about a novel being a the "slowest paced thriller ever written" which is odd since it was literary fiction.  I find clueless people amusing.   But I can see what I might like from what others hate.    Some readers are going to hate "slow paced" novels and blast them with their 1 star reviews,  but one readers "slow" is an others "deep with details and meaning."

While I have no solid proof, I think there are more fake 5 star reviews than fake 1 stars.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

I always read low-star reviews, but rarely high-star. I can decide if I might like something by the description and sample - I don't need good reviews. But low-stars might tell me that it's poorly-edited (instant turnoff) or give me a reason to say no. Or maybe a reason to say yes if my taste differs from the reviewers.


----------



## Natasha Holme (May 26, 2012)

I love one-star reviews. So entertaining. I posted these one-stars a couple of times recently, but everyone should see these, they're so funny ...
The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold. 
The Book of Mormon.


----------



## TWD Glasgow (Jan 10, 2013)

RJMcDonnell said:


> The last two one star reviews that I read complained about issues that had nothing to do with the content of the books reviews. One reviewer said she didn't receive an ebook after placing the order. I clicked on her reviews link, saw that she had a total of three reviews, and all were one star with the same complaint. The other one star reviewer wrote it in ALL CAPS with spelling and grammatical errors. His reason for the one star review was that he didn't remember ordering the book. Both of these sounded like customer service problems rather than legitimate review issues. I brought them to the attention of Amazon, but was told that the one star reviews would stand.


The worst one star review I saw said that the person didn't like romance novels and guess what it was a romance novel they bought, clearly labeled as romance. Go figure.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

The majority of one-star reviews on otherwise decetly-reviewed books tend to be the reader not understanding something about the books.

Sometimes that's the author's or publisher's fault for not informing the readers very well in the description. But more often than not it is the reader being silly.

Case in point being how often a one-star is given to a series title for making the person want the next book . . . 

Admittedly, I will give 4 instead of 5 stars for pointless cliffhangers if there were any other issues with the book. I do this even when a book is a series title. I find it cheap writing, but a 4 star review is still solid, and nothing for an author to be too ashamed of. In any case, I generally don't give anyone three stars unless they've actually failed to write well in some way, so I wouldn't deduct a star from a four star book just because of a cliffhanger.

But to get back to the point, yes I read them. I generally do not pay as much attention to them as I do to the other star reviews however. (In part because they tend to be very brief and poorly written . . .)


----------



## Loubeez (Nov 5, 2012)

One star reviews don't sway me or even two stars. I make my own mind up    I read the  'look inside' and that's what makes me buy/download. Sometimes I read a one star review and it says how bad the book is and I find I want to read the book because of this. I have actually read lots of books with one star reviews and some I have enjoyed. One star reviews that have nothing to do with the writing, i just dismiss, i.e, didn't download properly. 
Everyone is different, what I find good, others may not like!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Mathew Reuther said:


> Case in point being how often a one-star is given to a series title for making the person want the next book . . .


Really? I've never even seen this...

Folks, a couple of things--

first, a couple of our author-members have mentioned their books in their responses. A reminder that this is the Book Corner and you must answer as a reader, not a writer.

Also, a couple of the responses have bordered on bashing reviewers. Please bear in mind that readers who review books are reading the posts here. I've left a one star review and it had nothing to do with the delivery of the ebook, the title of the book, the book being a genre I didn't expect or anything similar to what's been mentioned here. Please be careful of how you describe reviewers, thanks.

Betsy
KB moderator


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Really? I've never even seen this...


There's millions of books. How many of the one-star reviews on them have you read? It's not really a shock that you have not seen it. I doubt you look for it. After all, if the blurb is good, the cover is intriguing, and you see a reasonable average, you probably don't check the one-stars. (They are rarely features as the most helpful critical review.)

I have never one-starred a book. If it's bad enough to get a one star I didn't finish it. If I didn't finish it, I didn't review it. That would, after all, be unfair. I suppose it would be possible to write a book and be fine for the entire first three quarters and then completely lose it at the end, but that strikes me as unlikely. I've not run into a book that ended so badly I needed to drop it below a two. (Because really, a one in my book is for "should not have been published" . . . so it should be an affront to English throughout, I'd expect.)

And I think maybe you're forgetting that those of us who write also review. I was a reader long before I was a writer. I still read. Every day, in fact. I still review. I just finished Old Man's War by John Scalzi. Loved it. If you like Sci-Fi and haven't read it, you should. (Lest you assume I am now shilling for him, Scalzi doesn't know who I am. Unless he remembers those of us who have told him to revise SFWA's draconian membership requirements to reflect the new era of publishing. Which I doubt.)

In any case, by "bashing" reviewers I'd be going after myself. (I doubt you meant I was bashing them, because I said nothing remotely close to that, but you did directly quote me, so I'm responding.)

Not every single human being who writes a review is actually writing a) something truthful, b) something fair, c) something legible, d) something to do with the quality of the writing: story, characters, etc. *YOU* may do so, and *I* may do so . . . other people? Definitely not. Case in point, the reviews where it is all good stuff, but one star. Probably falls under a or c. Either the reviewer misunderstood the stars, or lied about what they thought.

I would hope that you as a reader can recognize that some reviews are literally not reviews of the book, and that more often than not a one star is posted for some purpose other than a novel being rife with errors, disconnected from any kind of plot, and containing three characters who are so one-dimensional you forget even their names.

I've seen vindictive reviews posted by "competition" to drive down an author's average (the modern ebook gatekeepers often require 4+ stars to blog a review or newsletter advertise, for example), as well as reviews by people who clearly did not comprehend what genre the book was.

This is not bashing every single one-star reviewer. (Though honestly, maybe I respect what it takes to write too much, but one star should mean that it's actually bad. Not "I don't like the story" but BAD WRITING.) But a much, much higher percentage of people who give one-star reviews are doing so out of some malicious intent, or out of some personal failing.

Here's a good one. I'll paraphrase: "Shipment lost in the mail, this is a one star book because the mailman never delivered it."



So really, as a reader you're cool with a book's average (visible on the thumbnail page and definitely a consideration for some readers) taking a hit because of people whose paper copies didn't arrive and who aren't wise enough to contact Amazon customer support? I strongly doubt that.

But here's one special for Kindle boards: "I had a lot of books on my Kindle and I can't read them and this is one of them and I am angry." So, again, CS issue, and they're venting in a book review. Maybe not the best example of a reviewer, that one, huh?

My point is simple: YOU are no doubt lovely and any one of the authors on the boards would be lucky to have you read their work and review it. YOU are also a statistical anomaly. YOU are far, far more passionate about books (and the Kindle) than the vast majority of humanity. Please don't let the fact that YOU are conscientious get in the way of your understanding that a great number of people are not.

There really are some bad reviewers out there. Acting like that's not the case isn't going to cause anyone who has actually taken the time to read the reviews specifically to find unfounded ones to smile and nod.

Well. Not me anyway. 

(Again, note, my entire original premise is still "otherwise well reviewed" books. If a book gets nothing but one-stars, it probably deserves it. I don't read those, because I seek quality. I don't review them, because I... you get the point.)


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Geemont said:


> I think 1 star reviews can be interesting, informative, and entertaining. For example, a reader complained bitterly about a novel being a the "slowest paced thriller ever written" which is odd since it was literary fiction. I find clueless people amusing.


Ha! That reminds me of the people who read non-fiction and then don't seem to understand that it wasn't fiction. That's right, I've seen reviews for biographies that say things like "This was really dry, it read more like a biography than a novel." Um, yeah, that's because it IS a biography.

I hope that is not seen as "bashing reviewers" - I am a reviewer too and no stranger to giving one star reviews. But let's call a spade a spade.



> While I have no solid proof, I think there are more fake 5 star reviews than fake 1 stars.


Oh yes, they are a known problem on Amazon.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

For fun and discussion purposes I just read ~300 one star reviews of a single book. (Obviously one of the more popular titles on Amazon.)

I broke the reviews down by category.

70 - Morality (These people had a problem with the book morally.)
39 - Derivative (People who felt the work was derivative or copied earlier works.)
34 - Boring (Readers who simply found the book not entertaining.)
28 - Poor Writing (Those who took exception to the plot, the tense, grammar, or anything like that.)
20 - Customer Service Issue (Individuals who had a problem with Amazon.)
14 - Did Not Finish (Literally what it says, people who did not actually finish reading the book.)
10 - Shallow (A group of people who wanted more depth or length to the work.)
10 - Characterization (Either the main or secondary characters seemed too superficial to these reviewers.)
10 - Nonsense (Unintelligible reviews. It's possible these people also did not understand the star system.)
8 - Does Not Understand Star System (Otherwise positive statements seem to indicate a failure to click correctly.)
7 - Depressing (Akin to morality, but the main message was that the subject matter was too sad.)
7 - Higher Literary Purpose (Those who wanted some great reason for the piece of fiction to have been written.)
7 - No Rationale (People who simply said they did not like it.)
7 - Did Not Read (Individuals who stated clearly not having read the book they were reviewing.)
4 - Disbelief (Readers whose primary problem was inability to believe any of what the author was presenting.)
1 - Protagonist (Deep and passionate hatred of the main character.)
1 - Disagree With The Ending (Wanted the story to go a different way.)

Now, if I break this down I personally would say we can throw some of these reviews out. They have zero bearing on the book.

These categories include: Customer Service Issue and Does Not Understand Star System. That's 28 one star reviews, or roughly 9-10% of all the one star reviews that are flat out worthy of deletion.

Moving on, we can look at some of the more dubious of categories in MY opinion. (Feel free to have your own. Discussion is good.)

These are: Disagree With The Ending, Did Not Read, No Rationale, Derivative, Higher Literary Purpose, and Nonsense.

A breakdown is in order before I give the numbers on that.

Disagreeing with the ending is not worth a one star review in my opinion. I absolutely think you can dock for an ending you did not like, but one-starring something which you have otherwise not identified as being bad just because you don't like the end? No.

Did not read? Do not review.

No rationale? Unfinished thoughts should be kept to oneself until they have substance.

Derivative? Anyone with any understanding of the theory of plot is aware that there is nothing new under the sun. There are no new stories. Some pretty pieces of wrapping that we toss about, but nothing is new. Nothing has been new since pre-history. Nothing will ever be new again. If you one-star something just for being derivative (and some of these reviews harped on about that ONLY and I am not sure they read the book) you need to go one-star a bunch of "classics" as well.

Higher literary purpose? Funny, I did a paper on this in AP English many years ago. Steven King has written many novels. I can think of relatively few of them which have served a higher literary purpose. He writes good prose. He has strong characters. He grasps suspense. But as a general rule he is not enlightening us as to the human condition. I can agree that you can want more out of a novel than just entertainment, but slamming a work with one star because you wanted a morality play? Uncool.

Nonsense. Literally I do not know what these people were saying, and if I cannot comprehend what they are saying they probably should have just not written anything.

Drop those categories and you have 64 less 1 star reviews. That's about 21% of the total. Pack that in with the above and you are very close to a third of the one-star reviews that shouldn't be on there.

But hey, we can go on.

Did not finish? How do they know how good the book was? The Fellowship of The Ring is so eye-gougingly slow at the beginning it's hardly worth continuing with. The Two Towers is, in the middle, so slow that you WANT to go chase the lights and die in the swamp. Yet these are two books of what is still one of the finest fantasy series ever written. They have some plodding parts, yes. But as a WHOLE they are good.

And then let's just go after morality (and you can throw in depressing if you want) . . .

A book's setting may be morally reprehensible, but if it is a work of fiction, then applying your own morality to it becomes a tad ridiculous. I watched Django Unchained tonight. Instead of screaming: "OMG so much blood, and they say the 'N' word so much!" I came away with respect for the authenticity of the setting (if in the stylized way Tarrantino always presents his stories) and yet I am not a mass murderer, a bounty hunter, or a great supporter of racism or slave trading. Some subject matter is unpleasant, sure. It remains fiction. Trying to say that a violent book makes you want to be violent or a book about pre-teen sex makes kids have sex is ridiculous. These themes exist in the real world, and THOSE are the pressures we as human being react to.

Anyway, it was a highly amusing exercise. You drop somewhere between 10-50% of one star reviews on at least one book depending on what qualifies as a legitimate reason to one-star a book in your eyes.

I think we can all agree that even 10% is not statistically irrelevant, can we not?

Look forward to hearing other opinions.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

history_lover said:


> Oh yes, they are a known problem on Amazon.


Both are actually a known problem. And unfortunately Amazon has proven far more willing to "combat" supposedly bogus 5-star reviews (many written by real people) than the one-stars which are being used as a weapon.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Methinks some of you are really thinking about this way too much.   They're just reviews.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Really? I've never even seen this...
> 
> Folks, a couple of things--
> 
> ...





Mathew Reuther said:


> There's millions of books. How many of the one-star reviews on them have you read? It's not really a shock that you have not seen it. I doubt you look for it. After all, if the blurb is good, the cover is intriguing, and you see a reasonable average, you probably don't check the one-stars. (They are rarely features as the most helpful critical review.)
> 
> ....
> 
> In any case, by "bashing" reviewers I'd be going after myself. (I doubt you meant I was bashing them, because I said nothing remotely close to that, but you did directly quote me, so I'm responding.)


    

Um, Mathew? Less caffienne, seriously, dude. 

If you re-read my post, quoted above, I quoted one tiny bit of your post, and responded to that. After that, I said "Folks," and continued my comment, which was meant to address several other posts that I felt unnecessarily, yes, bashed reviewers. If your post didn't do that, that part of my post didn't apply to you.

Your post that I originally quoted did seem to imply that it was rather common for a one-star review to be given "for a series title making the person want to buy the next book."

Yes, there are tons of reviews; but that argument also means there must be relatively few one-star reviews for the above specific issue. I've personally read a lot of one-star reviews; I've also read a lot of writer complaints about one-star reviews and that was a new one to me.

I don't disagree that people give one-star reviews for things other than the quality of the book itself. I think that happens pretty often. If that generality is what you meant by your comment, we're in agreement. And I don't have a problem with people commenting on reviews; I have a problem with some of the things I've seen said (not necessarily by you) about the reviewers themselves. Again, if you're not bashing the reviewers themselves, this doesn't apply to you.

As for the rest of your post, which did seem to be addressed to me from what I read, a couple of things stand out.

One: yes, I do read one-star reviews. For the same reasons many here have stated. And, two: yes, of course, writers are readers, too. (Though sometimes here on KindleBoards, I do wonder...  <--just a little moderator humor, don't take it personally.) But there were posts here in this thread that specifically addressed one star reviews from a writers' point of view, which is not allowed. Again, if you didn't do that, that part of my post didn't apply to you. Those discussions are for the Writers' Café, and we like to remind our author-members (all of them, not just you) of that occasionally.

Best,

Betsy


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Mathew Reuther said:


> Did not read? Do not review.


Did not read at all or did not finish?

Personally I think if I read enough of a book to know I disliked it enough to stop reading it, I read enough to express why I chose to stop reading it. As long as I disclose the fact that I did not finish it, I don't see why I shouldn't express my opinion on what I did read.

But yeah, I don't see how someone can have a valid opinion on something they didn't experience at all, even the sample!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

history_lover said:


> Did not read at all or did not finish?
> 
> Personally I think if I read enough of a book to know I disliked it enough to stop reading it, I read enough to express why I chose to stop reading it. As long as I disclose the fact that I did not finish it, I don't see why I shouldn't express my opinion on what I did read.
> 
> But yeah, I don't see how someone can have a valid opinion on something they didn't experience at all, even the sample!


I agree.

Mind you, I don't put reviews on Amazon. But I generally 'share' on FB from the Kindle when I'm done. Next time I'm on FB at the computer, I add a brief comment to explain my rating. If I didn't finish it, it's a 1 star. Period. And I explain WHY I decided it wasn't worth any more of my time.


----------



## lmroth12 (Nov 15, 2012)

I read them out of curiosity. However, if the predominant ratings of the reviews are 3 or 4 stars I have a tendency to throw the 1 stars out as biased stemming from the followings attitudes:

1) "I expect better from this writer," for a traditionally published author.
2) "How dare this person think they can write," for a self-published author.

My theory is that the person downloaded the book for a reason and should have been able to determine from the Look Inside feature whether it was worth giving it a try. If a book is truly bad enough to warrant a 1 star review it should have been obvious from the free sample. For what it's worth: my opinion is that a 1 star review is generated by a reader with a grievance unless the overall review ratings are 1 or 2 star.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

lmroth12 said:


> I read them out of curiosity. However, if the predominant ratings of the reviews are 3 or 4 stars I have a tendency to throw the 1 stars out as biased stemming from the followings attitudes:
> 
> 1) "I expect better from this writer," for a traditionally published author.
> 2) "How dare this person think they can write," for a self-published author.
> ...


Or, maybe the book was just horribly bad, to the reviewer. And maybe it didn't show as horribly bad in the first 10%. (Assuming the reviewer looked at the sample or 'look inside', which not everyone does.) And not everyone likes or appreciates the same things: A style that one person might find fascinating might bore another to tears. You never can tell.

That said, it's pretty obvious to me which one star reviews are worth paying attention to and which aren't. Same is true for five star reviews.  But, I don't think you can paint them all with the same brush. Nor is it particularly easy to, say, come up with a list of 'rules' that will mean, without a doubt, that a review is fake, or invalid, or just not helpful. It's kinda like porn: can't define it, really, but I know it when I see it.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

history_lover said:


> Did not read at all or did not finish?
> 
> Personally I think if I read enough of a book to know I disliked it enough to stop reading it, I read enough to express why I chose to stop reading it. As long as I disclose the fact that I did not finish it, I don't see why I shouldn't express my opinion on what I did read.
> 
> But yeah, I don't see how someone can have a valid opinion on something they didn't experience at all, even the sample!


I differentiated between did not read and did not finish. The did not read category were people who specifically stated that they had not read the book. (In some cases they were reviewing a film version, in others they just wanted to hate on a book they had not read.)


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Or, maybe the book was just horribly bad, to the reviewer. And maybe it didn't show as horribly bad in the first 10%. (Assuming the reviewer looked at the sample or 'look inside', which not everyone does.) And not everyone likes or appreciates the same things: A style that one person might find fascinating might bore another to tears. You never can tell.


Which is fine, but a DNF means you don't know how good a book actually is. You know how good you think a book probably is based on how far you got. You have no evidence that it actually IS that bad. You only have evidence that says the first x% was so bad.

In the rare instance that I do not finish a book (I can think of a few I don't have an inclination to fire up on the Kindle again) I simply leave them alone. Again, as I have said, that may be out of respect for what it actually takes to create. But it's how I roll. 



> That said, it's pretty obvious to me which one star reviews are worth paying attention to and which aren't. Same is true for five star reviews.  But, I don't think you can paint them all with the same brush. Nor is it particularly easy to, say, come up with a list of 'rules' that will mean, without a doubt, that a review is fake, or invalid, or just not helpful. It's kinda like porn: can't define it, really, but I know it when I see it.


I certainly agree that you can tell a "more legitimate" review of any star rating from one that is "bogus" just by reading. (I categorized things as such when I did my breakdown last night.) And I think most readers can when they take the time to do so. My personal concern is that one of my criteria as a READER (so as not to violate any board rules wherein we must segregate different parts of our personality for no obvious reason ) for picking new titles *is* the star rating on the thumbs page.

I'm not alone in that, either. Those ratings matter, and reading them may reveal the illegitimacy of their content, but you never get that far if cover+title+rating average=pass . . .


----------



## Loubeez (Nov 5, 2012)

Umm..ok, back to the question.   I did answer before and I can only speak for myself. One star reviews can sometimes help me by not wasting my time. If the review is like, 'boring story, crap ending', and it doesn't give me anything constructive about the story or what was wrong with it ,and if it's only, like, a few peeps that have starred it 'one stars', I'll still read it because, at the end of the day, it's my decision,   As I said before,  I read, 'look inside'. if I like the writing and the flow of it, I'll buy! What I like, someone else may not like. Out of all the the books I downloaded last year, (and there was one hundred and fifty) there was only one that I couldn't finish because it was soooo boring . It's still on my kindle and I probably will give it another chance, because I'm like that!
I also read low stars out of curiosity, but it doesn't make my decision, if the blurb is good, I'll give it a go!


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I am thankful to anyone that leaves 1 stars for specific things even if they didn't finish the book. I don't care if they finished it. If something was so bad they felt sharing, I am thankful. That way I don't have to waste my time and money on it. There is no requirement that a book be finished before reviewing. None. 
Sample means nothing. Not everyone samples, nor should they be required. Everyone can read any which way they want and everyone has a right to review any which way they want. 

There are certain things I would give 1 or 2 stars for. One of those would be bait and switch. If a book is marketed and sold as a specific genre and I get to the end and its not, that is a automatic 1-2 star for me. I don't care how its written, I am not qualified to judge that, I am just a regular reader. Its all about how I feel. Reviews for books are very very personal and everyone feels different. 

For example, I gave a 1 star to a book that some consider their favorite romance of all time. I love romance, I was livid with that book. I gave it a 1 star and I stand by it. That is how that book made me feel. 

There are many valid 1 stars and there are many valid 5 stars and everything in between. There are also fishy ones. But one cannot say that every 1 star is somehow suspect. Just as one cannot say every 5 star is suspect. If I hate a book, I have every right to 1 star it if I want. And what made me hate it is my personal opinion and that is valid just like anyone else's. 

So when I read reviews I keep that in mind. I look at the 1 stars for specific reasons. And many times I stay away from the book if certain things are mentioned. I have limited time and money so I want the best reading experience I can possible get. That is just how I vet. Everyone is different.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Mathew Reuther said:


> I differentiated between did not read and did not finish. The did not read category were people who specifically stated that they had not read the book. (In some cases they were reviewing a film version, in others they just wanted to hate on a book they had not read.)


Sorry, I did not make it that far down.



> Did not finish? How do they know how good the book was?


Like I said - if I hated it enough to stop reading it, I think I have a pretty good idea how good/bad it was for ME.



> The Fellowship of The Ring is so eye-gougingly slow at the beginning it's hardly worth continuing with. The Two Towers is, in the middle, so slow that you WANT to go chase the lights and die in the swamp. Yet these are two books of what is still one of the finest fantasy series ever written. They have some plodding parts, yes. But as a WHOLE they are good.


In your opinion. Not necessarily in mine. Furthermore, there are books which are simply badly written. I'm not talking about the pace of the book or the plot but the grammar, the vocab, the dialogue, etc. I do not have to read the entire book to understand that a phrase like "a symbolic symbol" is terribly written. I do not need to read an entire book to know that a paragraph written in past tense in the middle of a chapter written in present tense is terribly written.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

history_lover said:


> Sorry, I did not make it that far down.


Ah, see, again, if I can't manage to read an entire post, I don't feel I can rightfully understand it in full. I think you admirably proved that I'm correct. Also, I'm pretty sure that was an unkind tact to take in responding to me, considering I written nothing which should give offense. I'd appreciate it if you could manage to be civil to me. Thank you.



> Like I said - if I hated it enough to stop reading it, I think I have a pretty good idea how good/bad it was for ME.


And again, no, you do not. As with my post, you have no clue what the whole picture is. You only know what you felt however far you managed to get through. You may feel it's ok to condemn someone's work without comprehending it, I do not. I find it lacks conscientiousness. Since we're so concerned with ourselves now, I'll point out that for ME maintaining my integrity as a reader is important. That means not reviewing a DNF. YOU may absolutely feel differently.



> In your opinion. Not necessarily in mine. Furthermore, there are books which are simply badly written. I'm not talking about the pace of the book or the plot but the grammar, the vocab, the dialogue, etc. I do not have to read the entire book to understand that a phrase like "a symbolic symbol" is terribly written. I do not need to read an entire book to know that a paragraph written in past tense in the middle of a chapter written in present tense is terribly written.


As a general rule the only way you'd run into such a thing is on a book with no reviews where someone had managed to do an unusually good job with their blurb and their sample pages. That's not typical. Most books you will run into where such a thing is a problem you will find have a) obviously over-hyped reviews, b) no or poor/bad reviews, c) a questionably-worded blurb, and d) obvious errors in the sample chapter(s).

Any of these things *should* have warned you off.

So, unless you're someone who likes to dumpster dive, you should have a rare enough occasion to stop reading purely for writing ability. (At least technical writing ability.) There are enough good books out there to never run into one as bad as you're talking about.

I've read some bad books, but even my DNF pile isn't worth one star. They are probably more like 2-3 star books that I'd rather spend time on 3-5 star books on. Notice the overlap? A book can be a probable 3 stars and be not really my thing, or three stars and be my thing. One I'll finish, the other I won't. I don't review purely based on my own biases. It's why I can read a romance novel and review it for what it is, and not worry about the fact that I do not overly cleave to the genre as a whole.

And finally, I don't dispute the existence of one-star novels. I don't dispute that they deserve their poor reviews. I simply believe that unless you are willing to read a book the whole way through you should not be reviewing it. *Well or poorly.* I have seen 5-star reviews that say "I'm 35% through and loving this," or "I totally want to finish this but I've got too much homework, but you should read it!" Those people are ALSO not doing what I believe a reader should do before leaving a review.

Of course, if you've managed to not read far enough, I suppose you'll miss this part, but again, I'm simply trying to point out that a) novels are not easy to write and out of respect for the act of creation I avoid crapping on anyone and b) an entire book must be read before one truly understands it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

OK, folks...I'm a little behind reading the threads today, but it looks like there might be a need for cleanup in aisle 4...  locking the thread while I review what's going on.

Everyone take a deep breath and read something else.  Lots of threads here on KB.  

Betsy


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

OK, I've read through. I've modified a post to remove what I considered a personal attack (which are, of course, against Forum Decorum) and another post that referred back to the now-removed descriptor. 

A reminder that we require civil discussion here on Kindleboards. Strong feelings are allowed, of course; but please, choose your words carefully.

Unlocking the thread now. Carry on. Although when a thread starts to devolve to just a couple people picking each other's posts apart, it's generally considered to have jumped the shark. Agree to disagree and move on unless there's something new to be added to the discussion.

Thanks.

Betsy
KB Moderator


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Mathew Reuther said:


> Ah, see, again, if I can't manage to read an entire post, I don't feel I can rightfully understand it in full. I think you admirably proved that I'm correct.


A post on a forum is not the same thing as a book. At all. If you can't see the massive difference, I can't have a sensible conversation with you.



> Also, I'm pretty sure that was an unkind tact to take in responding to me, considering I written nothing which should give offense. I'd appreciate it if you could manage to be civil to me. Thank you.


How was I uncivil? Did I call you names? Did I swear? I was just being honest - your post was indeed a rant and it was rather incessant. There is not necessarily anything wrong with that. I rant incessantly on occasion myself! Have I now personally attacked myself? Are the mods now going to edit my comments about myself? Geez. Mods, if you're going to edit anything, how about the blatant disregard for your warning about not attacking reviewers? This kind of "reviewers are wrong for giving 1 star reviews" attitude from authors is beginning to overrun this forum. Other members have specifically stated in the past that they have basically been bullied by authors here out of feeling free to express themselves by giving negative reviews. Yet somehow that goes untouched while my little comment about a rant gets edited? Give me a break.



> And again, no, you do not. As with my post, you have no clue what the whole picture is. You only know what you felt however far you managed to get through. You may feel it's ok to condemn someone's work without comprehending it, I do not. I find it lacks conscientiousness. Since we're so concerned with ourselves now, I'll point out that for ME maintaining my integrity as a reader is important. That means not reviewing a DNF. YOU may absolutely feel differently.


How do you know I don't comprehend it? Are you me? Are you inside my head, do you feel what I feel, think what I think? No? Then how dare you presume to know what I do or do not comprehend? If I comprehend enough about a book to know that I don't want to continue reading it then I know enough about a book to review it. I am perfectly entitled to express how I feel about what I DID read of the book.



> As a general rule the only way you'd run into such a thing is on a book with no reviews where someone had managed to do an unusually good job with their blurb and their sample pages. That's not typical. Most books you will run into where such a thing is a problem you will find have a) obviously over-hyped reviews, b) no or poor/bad reviews, c) a questionably-worded blurb, and d) obvious errors in the sample chapter(s).


Wrong. These were real life examples, one of which was a well reviewed book from a MAJOR publisher written by a very popular historical fiction author. It was also one I read BK - before Kindle. The other was a Kindle freebie - thus why I didn't sample.



> Any of these things *should* have warned you off.


LOL, exactly! I read a book until something warns me off and then I stop. And if that thing is enough to warn me off and make me stop reading, why shouldn't I mention it in a review and rate it accordingly? If it was bad enough to "warn me off", as you put it, why shouldn't it be bad enough to rate 1 star?



> So, unless you're someone who likes to dumpster dive, you should have a rare enough occasion to stop reading purely for writing ability. (At least technical writing ability.) There are enough good books out there to never run into one as bad as you're talking about.


There's plenty of good books out there but to think I would never run into one as bad as I described is completely unrealistic.



> Of course, if you've managed to not read far enough, I suppose you'll miss this part, but again, I'm simply trying to point out that a) novels are not easy to write and out of respect for the act of creation I avoid crapping on anyone and b) an entire book must be read before one truly understands it.


So what this comes down to is that you're an aspiring self published author and you don't like getting 1 star reviews so you don't give them out yourself and you're trying to bully everyone else into the same. This isn't really about whether someone DNF or not, this about you trying to discredit the vast majority of 1 star reviews _because you simply don't like them_.

Well, too bad. Of course writing a novel is difficult. As one of my favorite quotes goes, "if it was easy, everyone would do it". But the fact that it is difficult is why it's only natural that there would be a lot of crappy work out there too. And I am entitled to give those a negative review/1 star if I felt that it was bad enough to stop reading it.

And before you label me as someone who merely doesn't respect the act of creation and doesn't know what it's like to put a lot of effort into something only to have to slaughtered by a bad review - I'm a photographer. I have been through more critiques than I can count. I have had someone say that a photo of mine is "boring" - I even once overheard a fellow photographer telling someone else that I'm "not even a good photographer". I know what it's like. But unlike you, instead of trying to bully everyone out of expressing their opinion unless it was favorable, I got over it, I moved on, and I tried to focus on becoming a better photographer. If someone in a critique had something negative to say that I could learn from, I tried to learn from it instead of trying to bully people out of saying it in the first place.

If you can't deal with negative reviews, don't put your work out there.

Mods - lock it if you need to, I'm sorry that I continue to pick apart the post... but this bullying seriously needs to stop and I could not just stand by and let it happen.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Thank you history_lover for putting into words a lot of what I have felt while reading and commenting in this thread. 

What has started as a interesting discussion has turned into a badgering of reviewers. Uncomfortably aggressively, if I might say so. 
I don't like the idea of equating a 1 star with someone not "comprehending" a book. One doesn't need to read every word to know its not good or one doesn't like it. 

I don't have any more to say as I don't want to be badgered and picked apart today.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Atunah said:


> What has started as a interesting discussion has turned into a badgering of reviewers. I don't like the idea of equating a 1 star with someone not "comprehending" a book. One doesn't need to read every word to know its not good or one doesn't like it.


But does one need to have read it at all? I clearly pointed to the fact that some people give one star reviews when they have not read something and have even admitted to it. How many do it when they are not admitting to it?

Not every reviewer is equally honest. Not every human being has integrity. That's just truth. Neither you nor I made that a fact. It just is.

Again, as I said to Betsy earlier, I am sure that you (and the people in this thread) are just as conscientious as a reviewer. I am sure that you make the attempt to read every book that you leave a review for. And I am sure that you do your best to ensure that the books you read are ones you will potentially enjoy.

I am simply pointing out that there are others who are not.

Why people insist on seeing that as a personal affront, I don't know. But it isn't.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

This discussion appears to have run it's course.  I'm locking it for now until I've had a chance to go through it more thoroughly.


----------

