# An author's plea to readers



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Ladies and gents,
Let me first say that we (authors) love you.  What we love even more is reviews from you ... mostly anyway.  That said, please consider that our livelihood is on the line every time you tap out your feelings about a particular book.  I say that not to sway you to give 5-star reviews where they aren't warranted, but rather to ask that you please simply be fair in your critiques.  I know of one author here who recently received a very unfair 1-star review from someone on another forum who was simply angry at her.  It was essentially a personal attack disguised as a review.  For most of us indie authors, we are highly accessible.  My email address is posted right on my website among other places, so I would definitely rather hear a beef via email rather than hashed out in a review of my book.  And I suspect the other author would feel the same way.

Additionally, please be careful of unfair and unfounded accusations.  My novel has, to date, 16 5-star reviews, 2 4-stars, and 1 3-star.  I couldn't be happier, needless to say.  Interestingly though, the last two reviews that I received were virtually polar opposites.  While the latest was a 4-star that opened with "very well-written," the 3-star prior said essentially the opposite.  I have no problem with the 3-star review or the reasons she gave it that review, but I do take issue with one sentence in particular: "Maybe the 17 spectacular reviews came from 17 of the author's dearest friends and family."  This makes me cringe because it's simply untrue.  One need only look at the locations of the reviewers to know better (all over the world).  But my point here is to ask all readers, when reviewing a book, to please be honest and keep your critiques to what's on the pages, not your personal opinion of the author or speculation about other reviews.  No novel is going to please all people.  It's perfectly normal and reasonable for people to have different opinions - sometimes drastically.

We have to develop thick skins in this profession, and we have to work our collective rumps off to reach the readers who may enjoy our books.  Please bear in mind the importance of your review when writing it - people will read it and make judgments based on it.  Again, I just ask that you be fair and keep your reviews to what's within the pages of the book.  I also know that this is common courtesy to most here, so this probably only applies to a few.  And maybe it's a pointless request, but I figure it can't hurt to ask, or at least highlight the potential ramifications that some readers may not have considered.

Know too that your good reviews are blessings that brighten a day like nothing else.  Even just knowing that you're out there reading our work is such a thrill.  We share a unique bond over our books, and it is with great pleasure that we share it with you.  I know that I, for one, welcome all feedback from readers and enjoy corresponding about my books.  Thanks so much on behalf of all authors (although I can only technically speak for myself of course).  And by all means, keep reading!! 

-Jenn


----------



## historywesternromancelvr (Apr 6, 2010)

I second this one.  And this hits home for me, as I've been receiving a lot of 1 star reviews brought on by someone and her friends who don't like me.  (This stemmed from a personal conflict.)  Needless to say, the reviews were the "rip you apart" kind.  So yes, people will leave scathing reviews just because they don't like you.  And just as those reviewers hope, those reviews kill sales.  I went from about $2000 to $600 in royalties in one thirty day period.  Sure, I'm still selling, but with the way sales have been plunging, you can see that those reviews had a significant impact.  I do not have a group of family and friends lining up to review my books, so any good reviews I get really do come from people I don't know.  I just wish the emails from my readers (average about three new ones a week) who say, "I love your books!" would go on Amazon and give me those reviews because if they did, those negative reviews would quickly shrink into the background.  But, at least for me, people will only come to me personally about my books, and I don't feel it's right to ask them to go on Amazon.

Yes, I'm frustrated.  I'm disheartened.  I seek out authors who are getting similar reviews to mine and doing my part to throw an encouraging review their way.  I may not be able to do anything about my stuff, but maybe I can help boost others.


My hope in sharing this is that anyone thinking of giving a bad review will please at least be fair and constructive, instead of nasty about it and if you do like a book, please submit a good review on that author's behalf.

Thanks for the topic, Jenn!


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

In order to encourage people to write a review, I've offered up a contest.  For anyone who posts a review of one of my books on Amazon, I enter them into a random drawing to win a signed copy of my second novel when it's released.  (For Kindle owners, I'm equally happy to provide a free Kindle copy and a signature card.)  Note that I of course do not specify that it has to be any certain type of review.  And I do not at all feel bad about requesting reviews from people who contact me.  I usually say, "If you haven't done so already and if you have the time, a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated."  I think most people will oblige if you do that.  They just may not think to do it on their own.  We authors are far more in tune to and worried about reviews than readers are.  I know that I haven't reviewed every book I've ever read.

Hope that helps,
-Jenn


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

This topic comes up fairly frequently, as I recall.  I've moved the thread to the Book Bazaar where other such threads have been.  We generally reserve the Book Corner for discussion about books in general as opposed to issues affecting our own indie author members.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Ann in Arlington said:


> We generally reserve the Book Corner for discussion about books in general.


And of course, books in specific... 

This is an ongoing problem for indie authors; it is particularly difficult when bad reviews are based on something other than the book itself. There have been other discussions in the Book Bazaar about how to deal with those kinds of situations.

Betsy


----------



## Susanne O (Feb 8, 2010)

It's very difficult. But how do you get such a review removed?  This one is actually abusive in its tone and very upsetting to read.


----------



## sierra09 (Jun 20, 2009)

You can report it to Amazon, as can others who see it and view it as abuse, but it's up to Amazon in the end to actually remove it.

I echo Jenn's original post fully. While we all enjoy the reviews, if a reviewer has a problem or something serious then contact the author. It could be something that may be able to be fixed.


----------



## David Derrico (Nov 18, 2009)

I have found that people who contact me (through email, FB, my website, etc.) who like the book essentially have no idea that reviews are so important. I find that I have to nicely ask them to post reviews, and I recently had a similar contest (where I gave away a free paperback) to help remind and reward them for making the effort.

On the other hand, I find that negative people (like a reviewer who has 14 other reviews, every one of which is 1- or 2-stars) will jump right up and be so eager to leave a nasty review. (This guy even said he liked the first book, yet he couldn't be bothered to leave a good review, but made the time to leave a 1-star for the sequel.) I've had two separate instances now of several 1- and 2-star reviews coming only hours or minutes apart, and each by people who have never before left a book review on Amazon. Odd. Out of all the books in the world, something about mine was SO awful, they were compelled to review it and no other books.

As I said, people usually either leave lots of reviews or they don't at all. I have to encourage people who like my book to please leave a review because it's really helpful and I appreciate it immensely, and they say "I never would have even thought about posting a review if you didn't ask." Several never end up leaving a review even after I ask (and I don't want to nag). So, who's encouraging these first-time reviewers to leave a nasty review for me and only me?

I know my books aren't perfect, but I also know they're not 1-star material. And I know any fair reviewer could find positives and negatives in my books, so the 100% negative, really mean-spirited reviews just strike me as ... odd.

Sorry for venting a bit, but it's a serious problem in the Amazon review system. Less than 1% of people leave reviews, and the sad fact is most of those 1% have some sort of agenda -- positive or negative. Your average reader just doesn't take the time to leave reviews. So you end up with books with lots of 5-stars and lots of 1-stars and almost nothing rational in the middle.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

I think it's fine to encourage people who've contacted you to express admiration for your book to write a review, but I'm not sure it's kosher to hold review contests. It seems to me you're predisposing the contestants to be favorable, to return your favor, or potential favor. Just my gut reaction.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Susanne OLeary said:


> It's very difficult. But how do you get such a review removed? This one is actually abusive in its tone and very upsetting to read.


I would cut and paste the forum exchange into the email to Amazon, along with the review. If we don't fight this sort of thing, then we'll be cowed into a ridiculous level of self-censorship.


----------



## Daniel Arenson (Apr 11, 2010)

historywesternromancelvr said:


> And this hits home for me, as I've been receiving a lot of 1 star reviews brought on by someone and her friends who don't like me. (This stemmed from a personal conflict.) Needless to say, the reviews were the "rip you apart" kind. So yes, people will leave scathing reviews just because they don't like you. And just as those reviewers hope, those reviews kill sales.


If you get really nasty, unfair reviews on Amazon.com, you can contact Amazon Support, explain the situation, and they'll remove the offensive reviews. I know an author who did this. Don't let vindictive readers bully you online. Amazon doesn't tolerate it either; you just need to let them know.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Here, David, this ought to cheer you up:

http://www.salon.com/books/amazon/index.html?story=/books/feature/2010/04/02/mean_amazon_reviews_open2010


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

David, you have spammer tags on your books so I would bet that the two are connected.  Maybe all of those 1 star reviews are by the same one or two people.  A cluster of first time reviewers all negatively posting about the one book is suspicious.


----------



## Susanne O (Feb 8, 2010)

Amazon support? is there an e-mail address?


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Eric - I don't really think that having a contest to encourage reviews makes people give unfairly favorable reviews because the only people who know about the contest are already fans.  But I agree with David that many fans just don't think to put their love of a book into a review.

-Jenn


----------



## HelenSmith (Mar 17, 2010)

Eric



> this ought to cheer you up


Very funny.

You might enjoy this if you haven't already seen it:http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/apr/18/amazon-orlando-figes-books A historian's wife anonymously rubbished his rivals' books in reviews on Amazon.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

HelenSmith said:


> Eric
> 
> Very funny.
> 
> You might enjoy this if you haven't already seen it:http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/apr/18/amazon-orlando-figes-books A historian's wife anonymously rubbished his rivals' books in reviews on Amazon.


Very entertaining. IMO the wife took the fall for hubbie.


----------



## Margaret (Jan 1, 2010)

As a fairly new Kindle reader who is not an author, let me say that I never thought of writing a review for a book until Jenn requested that I do one.  Before I got my Kindle I read mostly classics and best sellers, and I don't think that either Jane Austen or James Patterson were looking for a review from me.  When I started downloading works by the indie authors, it truly did not occur to me to review what I had read.  I look at reviews before I purchase a book, but I never thought about who wrote them.  I will make an effort to review books by the independent authors from now on, but it really does not come naturally to me.  It is strange - I have no problem recommending a book to friend either in person or on the Kindle Boards, but writing a review on Amazon seems very different from that experience to me.  It is like putting a little of myself out where anyone can see it, and I am not completely comfortable with that.  I guess that is one of the reasons I am not an author.


----------



## David Derrico (Nov 18, 2009)

Eric C said:


> I think it's fine to encourage people who've contacted you to express admiration for your book to write a review, but I'm not sure it's kosher to hold review contests. It seems to me you're predisposing the contestants to be favorable, to return your favor, or potential favor. Just my gut reaction.


I understand that reaction, but as Jenn said, the promotion was directed at people who had already become a "Fan" on my FB page, and had expressed that they liked the book. And ANY review (no matter how many stars) got the same random chance of winning.



Eric C said:


> I would cut and paste the forum exchange into the email to Amazon, along with the review. If we don't fight this sort of thing, then we'll be cowed into a ridiculous level of self-censorship.


To be honest, I already self-censor myself every single time I post, and I would never say anything polarizing or disagreeable or that I think might upset anyone, for fear of retaliation. Now, I'm not a negative person to begin with, so it's not hard to stay positive, but I don't end up expressing any sort of controversial views (or anything on religion, politics, etc.), and it does make me feel a bit "vanilla" sometimes. I also refrain from sticking up for people on forums or getting involved (except via a supportive PM), I leave it to the mods, for fear of retaliation from the person bullying or trolling them, and I hate that. The sad fact is that the Amazon system gives anonymous trolls too much power over us, since my name is on every post.



Eric C said:


> Here, David, this ought to cheer you up:
> 
> http://www.salon.com/books/amazon/index.html?story=/books/feature/2010/04/02/mean_amazon_reviews_open2010


That's a great article... the site is down, but I believe it's the one about 1-star reviews for famous classic books? Yeah, I know some percentage of the reviewing population will hate literally _anything_. It's still frustrating when it feels like more than a small random smattering, but a concentrated attack.



farrellclaire said:


> David, you have spammer tags on your books so I would bet that the two are connected. Maybe all of those 1 star reviews are by the same one or two people. A cluster of first time reviewers all negatively posting about the one book is suspicious.


You're probably right, I just wish I could prove they were related. Someone tagged my books with "spammer" since I guess I had the nerve to post on the Amazon forums (which I actually do pretty sparingly). Maybe that motivated someone to hate me enough to do this, I don't know.



HelenSmith said:


> You might enjoy this if you haven't already seen it:http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/apr/18/amazon-orlando-figes-books A historian's wife anonymously rubbished his rivals' books in reviews on Amazon.


I would really hate to think that it's an author who considers me a "rival" (I put the word in quotes because I don't consider other authors as "rivals"). But my mind keeps coming back to that as the most likely explanation, either an author or someone who thinks I'm a "spammer" or for whatever reason dislikes me and is trying to cause me harm.


----------



## DonnaFaz (Dec 5, 2009)

I recently received a review that claims my book is filled with typos, grammar errors, and 'wrong word choices'. Previous reviewers have refuted the review, but who is going to take the time to click the comments on the bad review?  I've never argued with anyone on the discussion boards.  I did support Jenn on a thread recently when she was the target of nasty accusations...but I don't think that had anything to do with it, really.  Sierra thinks that maybe this reviewer got my book mixed up with another he/she had read.  I really don't know...but the erroneous review STILL rankles.  

I'd love to have an e-mail address to complain to Amazon.

~Donna~


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

DonnaFaz said:


> I recently received a review that claims my book is filled with typos, grammar errors, and 'wrong word choices'. Previous reviewers have refuted the review, but who is going to take the time to click the comments on the bad review? I've never argued with anyone on the discussion boards. I did support Jenn on a thread recently when she was the target of nasty accusations...but I don't think that had anything to do with it, really. Sierra thinks that maybe this reviewer got my book mixed up with another he/she had read. I really don't know...but the erroneous review STILL rankles.
> 
> I'd love to have an e-mail address to complain to Amazon.
> 
> ~Donna~


If it's only one review that disagrees with all the rest then I'm sure most people will ignore it or else check out the sample and see for themselves.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

We are at the mercy of any yutz with a keyboard and a credit card.

I know the troll reviews hurt, but unfortunately Zon will only delete the ones that violate their guidelines. To do that, they have to get pretty personal. Usually, the author has done absolutely nothing to deserve it. That doesn't matter--there are people out there with serious issues and this allows them to feel better for some reason. The internet makes it easy to hurt people in so many ways...with few consequences.

Trolls will sometimes go to great lengths to make their reviews appear legit--they'll steal a few phrases from other reviews to make it appear that they've read the work (which they haven't). Take heart, though. Fortunately, troll reviews are still pretty easy to spot. 

One thing an author must NEVER do, in my opinion, is respond to such a review in any way! An eagle soars above the detritus on the ground. 

Sorry this is happening to some of my Kindlefriends. I can relate, believe me.


----------



## historywesternromancelvr (Apr 6, 2010)

I feel so much better knowing I'm not alone in this.  I did try reporting the obvious ones to Amazon but nothing happened.  And I agree that multiple 1-star reviews at once is very suspicious.  (Same thing happned to me.)  I guess we hope that people who do like our work will take the time to tell their friends how great we are.  I'd think some word of mouth would get traction. 

I have noticed some anti-author sentiment over on some of the Amazon forums, which makes me wonder if the negative reviews are simply because we happen to have written a book and had the nerve to participate in a discussion (even though we haven't plugged our book or said anything offensive).  I really don't understand it and probably never will.  I guess some people just want to be snarky.  

Anyway, this has been a real eye opening topic. I wish I had found something like it sooner instead of feeling like I was the only one.


----------



## DonnaFaz (Dec 5, 2009)

farrellclaire said:


> If it's only one review that disagrees with all the rest then I'm sure most people will ignore it or else check out the sample and see for themselves.


Claire, I do hope you're right. Nah...I know you're right. <g> (Really strange that you responded to my post. I just bought A Little Girl In My Room today. Really strange...in a creepy kinda way. LOL)

Historywesternromancelovr, (that's a LONG name <g>) I agree with Archer. There is some anti-author sentiment over in the forums...I don't understand it and I've never experienced anything like it in my 20 yrs as a published author, but we should be eagles. I really like that idea. I want to soar.

~Donna~


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Susanne OLeary said:


> It's very difficult. But how do you get such a review removed? This one is actually abusive in its tone and very upsetting to read.


From experience, you ignore it. To touch a mean spirited one-star review is like picking scab. It won;t heal, and in fact, will delight the reviewer, drawing traffic and discussion and more attention than you want. It's hard. But do, what I do now. Incorporate the spirit of the reviewer into one of your more vile characters in your next work and spill all your anger into that character It's theraputic, artful and you can dream that the individual will review the book and look in the mirror. Of course, they won;t see themselves. They never do.

I had a 2 star review a few weeks ago that was so wonderfully written and balanced, I DID respond to it on Amazon - saying that it was insightful (as opposed to inciteful) and thanked the reviewer in public on Amazon. In fact, here's what I posted:

"Thank you for your opinion in this well balanced and extremely well written review. I always appreciate feedback from my readers, especially when it is expressed so well.

Thank you,
Edward C. Patterson "

Too many authors drink themselves into olivion, dive off cliffs or lvetch about responses to their art. Your readers see these reviews and can see them for what they are, and also see your response. Bad responses feed negatively into your brand.

Ed Patterson


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

DonnaFaz said:


> Claire, I do hope you're right. Nah...I know you're right. <g> (Really strange that you responded to my post. I just bought A Little Girl In My Room today. Really strange...in a creepy kinda way. LOL)
> 
> Historywesternromancelovr, (that's a LONG name <g>) I agree with Archer. There is some anti-author sentiment over in the forums...I don't understand it and I've never experienced anything like it in my 20 yrs as a published author, but we should be eagles. I really like that idea. I want to soar.
> 
> ~Donna~


I've been told I'm creepy alright   (And thanks!)

I personally haven't gotten any aggro (yet) anywhere but I can see how tempting it must be to respond to something that seems unfair. Soaring above it is great advice because even if the review is unfair, letting loose at the reviewer is what people will remember in the long term. Most people stop sympathising once the author loses their heads. Besides, look at how many 1 and 2 star reviews the big name bestsellers get. Hasn't done them much harm.


----------



## historywesternromancelvr (Apr 6, 2010)

I like the idea of making the reviewer a bad guy in a future book.  If nothing else, it would be a great stress relief and maybe even laughable.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

I'm thinking that a short fiction piece about a reviewer who sets hereself up as a queen of mean and parasitically feeds off author's works (turns some cash and rules them like the evil step sister) is in order, and might be my next contribution to the Kindleboard short fiction anthology. Since such a creature exists, I have plenty of material.   

Ed Patterson


----------



## nomesque (Apr 12, 2010)

Bad reviews (not negative ones, but the ones dripping with emotion and severely lacking in useful detail) are interesting things. First, it doesn't hurt to work out why people might react negatively to a book - or, for that matter, an author. If you can figure out what might have set a particular person off, you can decide whether that's something you want to change in the future.

My first ebook has received bad reviews galore, a few fair negative reviews, but mostly positive reviews. Why the high number of bad reviews? Not me, because surprisingly I haven't upset anyone in ages. But the book itself is full of potential offense-causers (swearing, adult themes) and it's difficult to warn people sufficiently with the current Smashwords setup. It also has genuine faults, mind. But I'm pretty sure it's the offensive content that's spawned the majority of the invective. *shrug* I'm not planning to tone down my writing to avoid the bad reviews, so I guess they'll keep on coming - although I'm hoping that once Smashwords lets me use more words in my descriptions, I can warn people about what they're getting into.

Bad reviews don't always hurt sales, oddly enough. Sometimes the contrast between positive and "this is crap, don't read it EVER" reviews intrigue people enough that they'll buy the book out of sheer curiousity. Like me eventually buying Harry Potter and Dan Brown books, because I wanted to know the truth of the wild claims floating about the internet.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Nomesque:

Oddly enough, you're correct. My first one star review (only have 2 out of 165 reviews), garnered my a weekend with 68 sales. Perhaps I should hire a cretin or two to boost sales with a hack job review.  

Ed Patterson


----------



## Susanne O (Feb 8, 2010)

They removed the review!!! I got a lovely e-mail from Amazon saying they had removed the review because they wanted Amazon to be a place of constructive reviews of use to other customers. I could cry 'sniff'...

I love Amazon!!!!


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Susanne OLeary said:


> They removed the review!!! I got a lovely e-mail from Amazon saying they had removed the review because they wanted Amazon to be a place of constructive reviews of use to other customers. I could cry 'sniff'...
> 
> I love Amazon!!!!


Awww, I'm happy for you.

David Dalglish


----------



## HelenSmith (Mar 17, 2010)

I'm glad you got it sorted out, Susanne.

Ed and Nomesque and Historywesternromancelvr, have you seen Theatre of Blood, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070791, the Vincent Price movie in which a Shakespearean actor takes revenge on theatre critics in a variety of gory ways? Very funny.


----------



## Susanne O (Feb 8, 2010)

Thanks, David.

the only problem is, I can't reply to the e-mail and send the person in question a big kiss...


----------



## J Dean (Feb 9, 2009)

I'm still considering writing a short story about a brutal critic...


----------



## Susanne O (Feb 8, 2010)

Great idea for a story. Then the author could find out the identity of the critic and stalk him...


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Good for you, Susanne!


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Susanne OLeary said:


> They removed the review!!! I got a lovely e-mail from Amazon saying they had removed the review because they wanted Amazon to be a place of constructive reviews of use to other customers. I could cry 'sniff'...
> 
> I love Amazon!!!!


Nice!


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Yes I saw _Theater of Blood_, and it's quite fitting, espacially Robert Morley eating his puppy dogs a la _Titus Andronicus_. Food for reviewers - a hair of the dog that bit us.

Ed Patterson


----------



## David Derrico (Nov 18, 2009)

Susanne OLeary said:


> They removed the review!!! I got a lovely e-mail from Amazon saying they had removed the review because they wanted Amazon to be a place of constructive reviews of use to other customers. I could cry 'sniff'...
> 
> I love Amazon!!!!


Great to hear it! Score one for the good guys.


----------



## Toni Leland (Apr 22, 2010)

J.L. Penn said:


> ...but I do take issue with one sentence in particular: "Maybe the 17 spectacular reviews came from 17 of the author's dearest friends and family."...
> 
> -Jenn


Sometimes these nasty comments are just that, based on someone's own opinion of your work; other times, the reviewer (if you can call it that) has a hidden agenda, such as being involved with another author's competing work.

Thick skin is good to have, but as writers, we don't have to be abused in public, at least not on Amazon!


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Funny story - I led a group of Indie authors to review a well known work to save its integrity. This work, when it first came up on the Kindle recieved one review, a one-star by a reader who downloaded the sample and wrote the review based on the first few pages. They said that it was about the Depression, and too historical and the rest of the book must be dreadful. Now for the punch line -

The book was _The Grapes of Wrath _ by John Steinbeck and for a few days it was up on the Kindle with one-star. We all fixed that.

Ed Patterson


----------



## Lisa Hinsley (Jan 11, 2010)

Jenn, just wanted you to know I went to the reviews in question and marked them down. I got the impression somewhere that helps Amazon to find and delete them?


----------



## Louann Carroll (Feb 24, 2010)

I am so happy the bad review was removed. A friend of mine, an Indy author, has been targeted with several malicious reviews from the same person. I didn't believe how bad it could get until I visited her Amazon site. I literally felt ill and hope the same doesn't happen to me. I know people have differing tastes, but when it gets personal, it's sick. 

However, if it increases your book sales, that's a different story.


----------



## J Dean (Feb 9, 2009)

Does this mean you don't need my 12 gauge now


DRAT!!!!


----------



## ldenglish (Jul 18, 2009)

What about reviews where the reviewer quotes or mentions a plot device that does not exist in your book? I have a number of those, which make me think, excuse me, did you read the same book I wrote? These need not necessarily be negative reviews either. It makes me chuckle, but at the same time I'm bothered that readers will think the book contains something it does not. Does anyone have those type of reviews?


----------



## sierra09 (Jun 20, 2009)

Before I could say no but now since my one title has been revised, several of the reviews and the things mentioned in them will not apply to the new version since a number of those items have been removed.


----------



## lib2b (Apr 6, 2010)

ldenglish said:


> What about reviews where the reviewer quotes or mentions a plot device that does not exist in your book? I have a number of those, which make me think, excuse me, did you read the same book I wrote? These need not necessarily be negative reviews either. It makes me chuckle, but at the same time I'm bothered that readers will think the book contains something it does not. Does anyone have those type of reviews?


There are two reasons why a reviewer might put something like that in a review. Maybe they didn't read the book at all, or at least not closely. It's also possible that they misinterpreted something that was really there, so it wouldn't hurt to think about what is in the book to see if maybe there's something that's not as clear as you thought it was. Everyone comes into reading a book with different background and that can lead to different interpretations. I guess it depends on how outlandish the contents of the review are. Do they say, "I really didn't understand the part about the purple duck," when there is in fact nothing even slightly resembling a purple duck?


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

ldenglish said:


> What about reviews where the reviewer quotes or mentions a plot device that does not exist in your book? I have a number of those, which make me think, excuse me, did you read the same book I wrote? These need not necessarily be negative reviews either. It makes me chuckle, but at the same time I'm bothered that readers will think the book contains something it does not. Does anyone have those type of reviews?


No, but I had a reviewer who was mystified about a place called "Tara." I'm glad I didn;t make a reference to "Camelot" or rotary dial phones. 

Ed Pattersion


----------



## ldenglish (Jul 18, 2009)

lib2b said:


> There are two reasons why a reviewer might put something like that in a review. Maybe they didn't read the book at all, or at least not closely. It's also possible that they misinterpreted something that was really there, so it wouldn't hurt to think about what is in the book to see if maybe there's something that's not as clear as you thought it was. Everyone comes into reading a book with different background and that can lead to different interpretations. I guess it depends on how outlandish the contents of the review are. Do they say, "I really didn't understand the part about the purple duck," when there is in fact nothing even slightly resembling a purple duck?


I see what you're saying, and I have thought about misinterpretation due to the writing, but that is not the case here. I mean a clear statement of something that does not happen. For instance, a reviewer (not on Amazon) said my paranormal mystery stories "encompasses demons, pixies, and anything not of this world." Not true, and no indication of any supernatural creatures apart from the ghosts and demons. That seems to me more like an assumption. I would quote a couple of extreme examples, but I think the reviewers use these Kindle boards and I don't want to embarass anyone. 

From the reviews, I do believe they read the books, but as you suggest, not closely. I wondered if anyone else gets the same thing, which either given them a laugh or bothers the heck out of them.


----------



## ldenglish (Jul 18, 2009)

Edward C. Patterson said:


> No, but I had a reviewer who was mystified about a place called "Tara." I'm glad I didn;t make a reference to "Camelot" or rotary dial phones.
> 
> Ed Pattersion


ROFLMAO!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Edward C. Patterson said:


> No, but I had a reviewer who was mystified about a place called "Tara." I'm glad I didn;t make a reference to "Camelot" or rotary dial phones.
> 
> Ed Pattersion


See, and my question would be, are you referring to the ancient seat of the high kings of Ireland, (from whom I am descended). . . . or Scarlett's home. . . . . .or both. . . . I wouldn't put it past you for it to be both.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

It would be funny if this reviewer wasn't infesting the web even as we speak.  

Ed Patterson


----------



## cherylktardif (Apr 21, 2010)

Ed is right. Ignore negative reviews. Unless they are extremely inflamatory. Then report to Amazon and let them handle it. If they don't remove the review, go back to ignoring it. Like Ed, I've found it very satisfying to turn nasty reviewers (or nasty people I know in general) into equally nasty characters in a novel. Then I kill them off.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I'm sure I've read somewhere about an author who got a review removed...perhaps one of our other author-members will weigh in.

Betsy


----------



## cherylktardif (Apr 21, 2010)

I was able to get a review removed. I contacted Amazon and reported the review/reviewer. It was a fellow author who didn't like the 2 star review I gave him. In my review I commended him for some aspects, including his marketing. 

Back story: I'd met him in person and he'd asked me twice if I'd exchange books with him, something I don't normally do. I finally agreed. He warned me that his book had a few editing issues. After I read his book (about half of it), I realized that editing was only part of the problem. He had no writing training at all and the book was full of glaring errors in sentence and para structure. And he hadn't edited it at all. He'd self-published it (something I'm all for), but hadn't bothered to make it saleable. 

I struggled with my review and in the end, wrote it using the "sandwich method". Say something positive, point out a couple of things that need work, and end with positive. The two stars I gave him was one star too many, but I didn't want to squash him. I wrote the review in a way that I'd hoped would encourage him. And it was an honest review. He didn't appreciate my comments in the least. In fact he wrote one of the nastiest reviews I've ever seen, even after admitting he didn't read my book, which by the way is a Canadian bestseller and has had rave reviews from Midwest Book Review, Writer's Digest and more. When Amazon read his "review", they immediately recognized it as an attack, not a valid review. They took his down. They left mine up. Later I deleted it.


----------



## ldenglish (Jul 18, 2009)

cherylktardif said:


> In fact he wrote one of the nastiest reviews I've ever seen, even after admitting he didn't read my book.


That's awful. I'm amazed that anyone had the gall to review a book they admit they never read! The NERVE of some people . . .


----------



## historywesternromancelvr (Apr 6, 2010)

It is awful when people get personal.  Even if you don't like someone, the book should be judged on its merits.  But sadly, that is often not the case, and though I am not against seeing fellow authors get 5 star reviews, if that is all they ever get (like out of 10 reviews), I start to get suspicious.  I'd think a 4 should be somewhere in the mix (at the very least).
  
However, I think I will use a nasty reviewer on my own work to inspire me in a future book.  That idea definitely has merit.

I read an article today where the author recommended commenting to the bad reviewer (one who gets nasty), but I don't see the point.  I think ignoring it is better in the long run.  I heard that an author who did that got attacked even more.  (Like any of us need more of that!)


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I'm still fairly new to this little game of reviews, so I'm waiting for my first truly bad review. I'd like to think I'll be able to laugh or roll my eyes and shrug it off, but I know better. It's going to devastate me. Then I'll grumble a bit, post here about it, complain a whole bunch to my wife, go to bed, and then be feeling okay by morning.

That being said, I'll be okay if I go, like, ten years before I get my first.

David Dalglish


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

When you respond to a negative review (take it from my experience from the one reviewer that I've needed to deal with), you can expect a three ring circus that drives every troll to the review site. In that case (and I didn't respond to the review directly, but to my network of friends, which was googled and reposted), I was called a loser, a baby, a whimp, and "finally somebody is warning readers about that writer of worthless books." It didn't make my Sunday, I'll tell you that. But since the reviewer wrote most of these comments under "guise names", at least I had the dubious satisfaction to know that the comments to my constituency made her so angry that she twittered that she was dipping my books in dog food and, in response to my How to book, "downloaded it and deleted it." It was my mistake to repsond, even indirectly, and the only person I really hiurt was myself. So I strongly urge you to not respond. I can't teach you how to ignore it or make it less hurtful. Thick skin helps, and fortunately, I'm a tough old Queen from Brooklyn. 

I have responded to positive bad reviews - ones that were well written, honestly read, opinions expressed in a manner that is dignified and well-meant. My response is always "Thank you for your well balanced opinion. I always appreciate feedback from readers. God bless."

There is an upside. For every one-star review I've gotten (and I can't complain, I've only gotten 2 out of 165 reviews), I have a hughe spike in sales for the book that was dissed. Go figure. No review huirts sales, but some reviews hurt feelings. 

Ed Patterson


----------



## historywesternromancelvr (Apr 6, 2010)

Thanks, Ed.  I suspected it was bad advice from that author who suggested it.  I haven't done it, though I have engaged in off-stage whining (to personal friends).  I admit that based on your comments on these boards, I have a lot of respect for you and value your opinion.


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

I just recently got a lame 2-star review that said, "This book is how it would be if I were to write a book.... boring and tedious."

I found it funny that she insulted herself right along with me. LOL  I did not, however, find the 2 stars funny.    People can say what they will about the premise, the plot, the characters, whatever, but if there's one thing I absolutely know my book is not it's boring.  Makes me wonder if that person actually read the book.  It truly is amazing how very different the reviews can be - from best book ever to parrot cage liner.

-Jenn


----------



## nomesque (Apr 12, 2010)

J.L. Penn said:


> I just recently got a lame 2-star review that said, "This book is how it would be if I were to write a book.... boring and tedious."
> 
> I found it funny that she insulted herself right along with me. LOL I did not, however, find the 2 stars funny.


LOL. Maybe it was meant to be taken humorously... I hope!

Here's the thing with negative reviews - sometimes they come because a book's somehow gained exposure outside its comfy little niche, and people are reading the book who really don't like that niche at all. It's irritating that people can't recognise that and mention it in their review, but... *shrug* there's life. Getting out of a niche and heading into the mainstream is usually a good thing, if scary as all get out.

My favourite bad review so far says, "I could have written better in eighth grade, in an hour" ... I giggled over that one, and was REALLY tempted to reply with, "10000 words in an hour? I'd LOVE to see that! I'll even waive the eighth grade thing. Ready, set... go! Send me the manuscript in 1.5 hours' time (to give you time to spellcheck), and I'll post it straight onto Smashwords for you."

But I didn't. I never reply to reviews, although I might drop someone I know an email if I notice they've reviewed, and say thanks. I think it gives people more freedom to be brutally honest - even if it's dripping with vitriol - if the author isn't clearly hanging about replying to stuff. Besides, defensiveness is too much of a temptation at times, and it's toooo unprofessional.


----------



## JennSpot (Feb 13, 2009)

This is an interesting topic.  I had no idea authors took these reviews so seriously and personally.

As a reader, I have to be honest...I NEVER, EVER read book reviews...not on-line, not in the front of a book and definitely not in a magazine or other source!    So a bad or good review would not influence my purchase AT ALL.  

When I am browsing for books, either on-line or in a bookstore, the title and cover are what catches my eye initially.  Then I read the book description.  If that peaks my interest, then I will download a sample or if I am in a store, read a little bit.  

I will say...poorly written book descriptions have turned me off of a book.  

So don't take bad reviews so personally...some people don't care about them at all...surely there are other readers like me out there?  Keep writing!


----------



## lib2b (Apr 6, 2010)

I recently read a post at author Jim Hines's blog about how to him, negative reviews are actually good in their own way. It was an interesting take.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

My favorite negative review comment was by a reviewer who, while assailing my grammar and use of words, said:

*The underline story was good.*

Then went on to crucify me for using too many _italics_. Perhaps I needed italics when my good story was underlined.

  

Ed Patterson


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

> The underline story was good.
> 
> Then went on to crucify me for using too many italics. Perhaps I needed italics when my good story was underlined.


Oh golly, that's funny.

I only have one review... and it's not too bad so I don't know what I'll do when I get one that rips the book apart. *gah* What is terrible is when people do that as a personal attack. I had no idea people did that. How horrible.

Vicki


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Victorine said:


> Oh golly, that's funny.
> 
> What is terrible is when people do that as a personal attack. I had no idea people did that. How horrible.
> 
> Vicki


'Trust me, they do,' said the experienced victim of mindless trollage.

(And Ed, I DO love it when a reviewer writes a marginally literate review criticizing grammar. I've not yet had THAT pleasure, thankfully, but it always makes me smile sardonically at the irony.)


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Well that same reviewer writes five-star reviews with the same abominable grammar and also does not finish books when she finds 2 errors in the first 2 paragraphs - but still posts a one-star review. Some of us are mere mortals.   Others are demi-gods, and yet others are semi-demi-hemi-gods. I love this thread as it gives us all a safe zone to vent and then get on with the business of writing.

Ed Patterson


----------



## Ed_ODell (Mar 27, 2010)

I, like every other author, want to see only 5 stars. However, I've read a lot of 5 star reviews (and have received some) that don't read particularly well. I wonder if that can in any way affect the perception of a book. I can't help but think that a well-written 4 star review might benefit a book more than a poorly constructed 5 star. Thoughts?

That said, I'm always open to -- and even prefer -- well written 5 star reviews.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Mr. O Dell. I'm gonna need to peek at your work, because you've been showered with fice-stars of late, even by one of those broken English reviewers.   Have you submitted you questionnaire to The Indie Spotlight yet (I don;t see 'em. My colleague handles them).

Ed Patterson


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Oh Lordy, I'm getting hammered it seems.  After 20 great 4 and 5-star reviews (mostly 5s), the last three have all been 2s and a 1.  The latest was not a verified purchase and mine was the only thing they've ever reviewed.  Thank goodness I've had sufficient feedback to know that my book IS good and that people on the whole really enjoy it.  But these darn recent reviewers seem to be hurting my sales a bit these last couple of days.  I swear sometimes I think people just can't stand to see a book get a lot of great reviews.  Ugh!  It's such a shame.

-Jenn


----------



## sierra09 (Jun 20, 2009)

Jenn, I'm sorry to hear about the recent review situation and especially when one of them is by someone whose first review had to be a bad on of your title. That's one of the biggest issues with Amazon's review system that's bad. A reviewer should have to show their review style and have a number of them under his or her belt before being allowed to leave a 1-star. Of course once most readers who look at the review peer farther into it and see that it is the only review by this person I'm sure they will weigh the other reviews over it.
I hope that made sense because it did when I thought it out.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

> After 20 great 4 and 5-star reviews (mostly 5s), the last three have all been 2s and a 1.


If it's any consolation, Jenn, if I see a bad review I always look deeper to see what other people said. And I never let a bad review sway my decision to buy a book. I always read the beginning of it to see if I like the style and story. If it's got a good hook, I'm sold!

Now I'm off to check out your book! 

Vicki


----------



## Ed_ODell (Mar 27, 2010)

Edward C. Patterson said:


> Mr. O Dell. I'm gonna need to peek at your work, because you've been showered with fice-stars of late, even by one of those broken English reviewers.  Have you submitted you questionnaire to The Indie Spotlight yet (I don;t see 'em. My colleague handles them).
> 
> Ed Patterson


Ed P.

I have sent the questionnaire to Mr. Banks. I'm very much hoping you'll decide to Spotlight me.

On a personal note, I'm writing a humorous short story. I've got to say you are one wittiest posters I've seen on any site. Once it's finished (only 6000 words), I'd like to get your input. You do keep it lively! Therefore I grudgingly acknowledge that Ed P. might be funnier than Ed O. But I still have an apostrophe, and that's got to count for something.

Ed O'Dell


----------



## ReeseReed (Dec 5, 2009)

I've noticed something interesting going on with my book's page...it seems that someone is voting all my good reviews "unhelpful"  and my 2 stars "helpful"...certainly not losing sleep over it, but it did strike me as odd.


----------



## sierra09 (Jun 20, 2009)

I look at that and the people who like to put the wrong tags on books as that there are some bored people floating on Amazon at times.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Yes, there are.
Bored,
Malicious,
Vindictive,
Sophomoric,
Covetous,
Neurotic,
Probably Constipated,
(Fill in your own adjective...)

(Fortunately, they're not allowed on Kindleboards! Only the cool, nice people get to hang around THESE waters.)


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Ed O:

I would be delighted to read that story ([email protected]). And based on RedAdept's reviewer (a bona fide reviewer and a pioneer), I will be downloading your book for my TBR pile.

Ed Patterson


----------



## David Derrico (Nov 18, 2009)

J.L. Penn said:


> Oh Lordy, I'm getting hammered it seems. After 20 great 4 and 5-star reviews (mostly 5s), the last three have all been 2s and a 1. The latest was not a verified purchase and mine was the only thing they've ever reviewed. Thank goodness I've had sufficient feedback to know that my book IS good and that people on the whole really enjoy it. But these darn recent reviewers seem to be hurting my sales a bit these last couple of days. I swear sometimes I think people just can't stand to see a book get a lot of great reviews. Ugh! It's such a shame.


A spate of bad reviews after amassing several good reviews? Check. Almost all from people who picked my book to write their very first review ever? Check.

Sadly, it was probably just a matter of time until you got some haters. There's just no such thing as a book that only gets 5 stars. Not Shakespeare, not Hemingway, no one. You get enough readers, and SOMEONE out there is gonna trash you. Period. The only way to avoid it? Don't sell too many books. Some people ONLY leave bad reviews, and if you sell enough, you catch one. That's the current Amazon system, and it's made me pretty much ignore reviews. On the plus side, a few bad ones make your reviews look more "believable" and your average is still VERY high. For what it's worth, I voted some of the crappy ones down.



ReeseReed said:


> I've noticed something interesting going on with my book's page...it seems that someone is voting all my good reviews "unhelpful" and my 2 stars "helpful"...certainly not losing sleep over it, but it did strike me as odd.


Someone with a vendetta not only leaving a bad review but taking the time to vote EVERY good review down and EVERY bad review up? Check. Happened to me too. Some people just want to hurt you as much as possible, I guess. I spent some time doing some voting of my own on your reviews as well.

Oh, and that same someone not only voted every single good review of mine down and every bad review up, but then went and left 1-stars on both of my books on Barnes & Noble the same day. If he knew where I lived, he'd probably egg my apartment too.

It's just so strange. I've read lots of books, and I have never ever ever hated a book that bad. I've read bad books, and books I haven't finished. But I would just never react that way to a book. I'd say "not for me" and grab the next one.



sierra09 said:


> I look at that and the people who like to put the wrong tags on books as that there are some bored people floating on Amazon at times.


Bizarre and insulting tags? Yup, here too.

So, just know that you guys do have company. As soon as I started getting _some_ success (and by "some" I mean "nowhere near enough to pay rent or put food on the table or support my family") I was greeted with a wave of hostility. Who does this stuff and why? I don't know. I don't know what we ever did to these people to deserve such vitriol. It's frustrating, but we can't let a very vocal minority crush our dreams.

On the plus side, I've gotten some great reviews from people who have taken the time to email me, keep in contact with me on Facebook, comment on my blog, and generally remind me why I write. (And I'm sure you guys have too.) So I choose to focus on those people. And I keep writing.


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Sierra - Thanks! 

Archer - Too funny and too true!

David - Thanks for comiserating.   You're absolutely right, and I always knew I'd get the lousy reviews like everyone else, but like you said - can anyone hate a book THAT much?  It really is a bit nutty.  Even when I'm critical of something, I at least try to use the sandwich technique.  And if it's so bad that I can't even do that, I would probably just put it down and move on.  Additionally, personal genre taste would never lead me to write a bad review.  I can recognize when writing has merit but the plot, genre, etc. are just not for me.  It doesn't make it a bad book or a target for you-know-what flinging.  Ugh!  As you said, at least we're all in good company. 

-Jenn


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Victorine said:


> If it's any consolation, Jenn, if I see a bad review I always look deeper to see what other people said. And I never let a bad review sway my decision to buy a book. I always read the beginning of it to see if I like the style and story. If it's got a good hook, I'm sold!
> 
> Now I'm off to check out your book!
> 
> Vicki


Glad you feel that way (wish everyone did) and THANKS! 

-Jenn


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

Let me add my two cents here.  I never post a review unless I like a book.  I have been asked by writers to review their work and have.  But if I just don't like the book I won't post a review.  As a writer I know how much blood sweat and, you know, goes into writing a novel.  Just because you don't like Auntie Pasquale's Jumbalaya doesn't mean that all those other people queueing up to get in won't.  Don't ruin it for them!


----------



## HeatherMatthews (Apr 8, 2010)

I think the further along you get in this business, the more you get trashed...it's like earning your service stripes or something  

Putting yourself out there really hurts when a bad review comes in...but it's just part of the business. Millions of people with different mindsets, interests, and I.Q.'s...and any of them can love or hate you. Don't let them grind you down...the worst part is, writers are generally a bit sensitive and introverted anyway, so criticism really stings. But people writing reviews don't usually think about the hapless author at the other end... 

Jenn, I am sure you are a fine writer...it's just one opinion...

I also agree with many people posting here that the one-star reviews on Amazon are often the product of little jealousies or vendettas...but what can you do? It's a jungle out there...


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

As a professional quilter, I put work out there for public comment, so I know what it feels like to hear negative comments about something you've sweated over, and I feel your pain.  Our works are our babies.  At the same time, I appreciate serious critique or comments, even though I don't always agree with them.  I find it very useful to know how others (my customers) view my work.  

There's a difference between serious, thoughtful critique and other comments that come from some other place, who knows where.  So, when I've read a book, I will post a serious review, and if the book has warts, I will note them as well as its strong points. If it's just a matter of not my cup of tea, I may or may not review it, but if I do, I'll review it on its merits, not on whether or not I "liked" it.

And, by the way, serious readers can tell whether a review is a thoughtful one or by a jerk with an agenda.  You don't want as readers anyone who would believe a jerk's review.  (Well, I admit the sales are nice.  ) Pick any New York Times Bestseller, read the reviews, and you'll see the same kind of behavior on those threads.  There are some people who just want to tear down others, for whatever reason. 

Be strong! 

Betsy


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

> It's just so strange. I've read lots of books, and I have never ever ever hated a book that bad. I've read bad books, and books I haven't finished. But I would just never react that way to a book. I'd say "not for me" and grab the next one.


So true. It's just a book. . .not the cure for cancer and the solution to world peace wrapped up in the end to world hunger. . . . .there are way _way_ more important things to get up in arms about, if one is so inclined.

But, just so you know where I'm coming from: I read a lot. . .not as much as some, but more than many. I don't write reviews. For me, it's too much like doing book reports in 4th grade. . . had to do one every two weeks. . . .I got very good at it, 'cause you weren't allowed to just say you did or didn't like something; you had to say why -- and it had to be grammatically correct. . . .but I pretty much hated it.  So y'all won't ever see a review from me: good, bad, or indifferent.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Ah, but see, I know what it's like to put work out there and have no one comment on it...and, as a reader, I know when I go to look at a book and it maybe only has five reviews, (unless they're mostly bad), I worry that two are by the author's parents and two by his or her siblings...   I've been known to be the first one to post a review on an indie book....

Betsy


----------



## LCEvans (Mar 29, 2009)

I don't let bad reviews influence me when I buy books. I check out the sample and decide for myself if I want the book and I hope other readers have gotten aware enough to do the same. There are just too many nasty, negative "reviewers" out there who want to hurt other people. It's definitely a clue if the review only says the book is bad and doesn't give any details. This morning I happened to notice that a book I recently reviewed (that had only 5 stars), had gotten a 1 star. So I read the 1 star and it looked like the reviewer hadn't read the book. His objection--"Fellow writer whores" giving out 5 star reviews to promote each other's work. 
I wonder if this person has ever noticed the blurbs on the back of conventionally published books--blurbs the publisher has gotten from other authors. In any case, I wouldn't have reviewed the book and given it 5 stars if I didn't think it deserved it, but of course this negative person rushes to judgment and decides the book by an award winning writer is trash simply because it was reviewed and given blurbs by other writers. I did mark his review as not helpful. I didn't comment, though. I am resolved to refrain from commenting on negative reviews and on negative comments about my reviews.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Good on ya, Betsy. 

I've made my reviewing practices known around here already...and I do value insightful reviews even if they're not completely positive. There are imperfections in every work! The most recent review of Elfhunter points out that the fellow almost gave up on it (slow to start), but that it turned out to be one of his favorites. That would help me as a reader, because I'd be more likely to persevere (I don't mind a story that develops gradually if I know it's going to pick up and go!). Some of the most helpful reviews have been 3 and 4-bangers. A three-star won't prevent me from buying a book unless the 3's are in the majority. Then I might think twice.

Bottom line: I value every constructive opinion of my work. I don't value personal attacks from folks who haven't bothered to read them. But, like every population, the Zon-o-sphere has its share of wackos. One of those decided I needed to join the ranks of the greats by trolling me. I try to look at it as 'training for when I become a best-seller.'  ;-)

(Okay, stop laughing! You never know!)

LC--sounds like that 'review' should be easy to get removed by Amazon. If the author cares, he/she can contact CS about it.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Patrick: How about a link to the original news article?


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

archer said:


> Patrick: How about a link to the original news article?


The Figes scandal is huge just now. It's rocking academia, and Googling 'Orlando Figes' yields many a result.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/apr/23/figes-shameful-admission

Originally his wife said she wrote the scathing reviews, but then Figes himself 'fessed up. Deep kimchee, that.

CK


----------



## HelenSmith (Mar 17, 2010)

Archer

Here's a link to the story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/apr/18/amazon-orlando-figes-books. Or you can google 'Orlando Figes'. But it turns out it was the historian himself, rather than his wife, who wrote the reviews: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/apr/23/poison-pen-reviews-historian-orlando-figes

Edit: Oops, simultaneous post. See also Carolyn's link, above.


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

HelenSmith said:


> Archer
> 
> Here's a link to the story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/apr/18/amazon-orlando-figes-books. Or you can google 'Orlando Figes'. It turns out it was the historian himself, rather than his wife, who wrote the reviews.


Either way, it's freaky stuff 

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that the majority of so called negative reviews are not that negative after all. Just because the person doesn't agree doesn't mean that they are wrong - it's their opinion, it can't be wrong. It's what they have gotten from the book, their point is just as valid as anyone else's. I would pay attention to what they are really saying because I believe most reviews are genuine.

I know there are trolls and vindictive people out there who write reviews out of spite but I would guess the percentage of reviews like that would coincide with the amount of fake great reviews there are too. That's how the system works, it's flawed but that's just how it is. People aren't stupid, they mostly judge the reviews based on how useful they are and in most cases useful is when the reviewer says what they liked _and _ disliked. Tarring anyone who takes the time to read and review a book constructively as someone whose opinion should be discounted is pretty horrible imo and yet it is happening everywhere. Even well known writers have been known to do it.

I think it is amazing when someone is moved enough to try and help a writer to improve but I see that I'm in the minority most of the time. I keep seeing people say that they won't review because the know the writer will slate them afterwards if they don't praise it enough - to me that has a worse affect on the system than anything else.

There are writers that I won't review their book I have read and will most certainly not buy any more books from because of the way I've seen them treat reviewers. Now, no trampling each other to be first to jump down my throat about it.


----------



## ldenglish (Jul 18, 2009)

I never look at reviews, but I DO look at what the people on these boards say about a new book. That has become the recommendation I follow, because I know you guys are completely honest. I've found some excellent books due to your comments.

By the way, a note on a couple of comments I read somewhere on this board concerning reviews. Please don't think that because a review does not have an Amazon verified purchase notation, it is not a ligitimate review. I seldom review anymore, but when I did, 99% of the time I read the book as a pdf sent to me by the author or the LL Book Review. Therefore, I can't click on the verified purchase box. That does not mean I haven't read the book.


----------



## ray-reid (Apr 22, 2010)

This is a great discussion about an issue I hadn't given too much thought to before.  As bad as some of these reviwers are, at the very least (and I know it's cold comfort) at least people are talking or thinking about your work.  I've had some bad reviews in my time but I in some ways a bad review is better than no review, or at least that's what my theatre friends tell me.  That said, I would be gutted if a couple of bad eggs soured my sales - but in the end I dare say they will bounce back as new readers submit honest reviews


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Let's compare two hypothetical reviews.

1)  "The story took far too long to get into. Often the pace was plodding, and many of the characters were unoriginal pieces of cardboard. Even worse, the main character was very unlikable, and seemed to be an arbitrary insert of the author instead of a fleshed out, living creation. Very unhappy with this purchase."

2) "the story was dumb. i could write better in high school. Hhated the main char he was too dumb to know whats going on. clearly all 5 stars reviewers are friends of author LOL"

The first one would actually make me worry a little, since one of my biggest beefs is unlikable main characters. The second, however, I would ignore completely.

However, many people won't GET to read the reviews if they're skimming lists and see a low average. So even if poorly written, it can be a little damaging. Hopefully everyone gets enough solid 3+ reviews to negate out one or two idiot drive-by eggthrowers.

David Dalglish


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

callingcrow said:


> Let me add my two cents here. I never post a review unless I like a book. I have been asked by writers to review their work and have. But if I just don't like the book I won't post a review. As a writer I know how much blood sweat and, you know, goes into writing a novel. Just because you don't like Auntie Pasquale's Jumbalaya doesn't mean that all those other people queueing up to get in won't. Don't ruin it for them!


I agree, I won't post a review unless I have really good things to say. Now, if someone wants a private critique... sure, I'll be totally honest about their writing. I've learned so much about weak and strong writing... adverbs... passive voice... showing vs. telling... pov... pacing... all of which I will be happy to give anyone an honest critique of their work... but not publicly.

Vicki


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Claire - I agree that "negative" reviews can be useful if they're written with merit and at least a bit balanced.  Rarely have I read something that I couldn't find good and bad things to say about it.  I do understand those that "gush" nothing but positive things about a book b/c at the end of a great book, some readers are on a bit of a high and that's what they're going to convey.  But somewhere in the brain, before spewing out nothing but nastiness toward a book, a little filter should come on and temper it a bit.  As others said, it's just a book - how can it warrant such scathing bitterness if there's not a personal element we're not seeing?  I have most definitely taken realistic criticism to heart and made some changes based on it, but when someone throws out a simple one line lousy review or goes on and on about how the book was so awful it nearly ended the world (yes I'm exaggerating for effect  ), I have to wonder about the agenda.

-Jenn


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

Jenn, I get how you feel about it, I do.  But it is Amazon so I don't think people think of it in those terms sometimes.  Most people who write reviews aren't seeing it through a writer's eyes if you see what I mean.  They're writing it as a consumer. If I want to buy a printer, I might look at the reviews and look out for the problems people had with it and see if I can deal with that or if it would be a problem for me too.  People write those reviews to help other people decide on a purchase - if they were all afraid to say how they really found it because they might suffer a backlash from the company who made the printer then it would defeat the purpose of a review system.  They aren't thinking about a real person behind the product or book and yes there are exceptions but for the most part people are just giving their opinion, they aren't actively trying to make the writer feel bad.  Bad example I know but for the most part people aren't looking at the one line reviews that say great book or rubbish book.  They want to know why people found a book a certain way and that's why the middling, balanced reviews tend to get the most helpful votes.

I know there are some unnecessarily cruel reviews (I personally think they come from a very small group of people who have an agenda for whatever reason) but there are also really good ones that get flipped out on because the star rating wasn't high enough or whatever.  I've seen some crazy responses to reviews (not just on Amazon) and I know of a good few people who have removed their reviews because of the hassle.  I used to be asked to give critical reviews on a certain portal and I was always careful how I worded the reviews, thankfully I had very few problems but some of my peers were ridiculed for some of their reviews (even though they were asked to give them in the first place and they had given up their free time to do them) and had their own work ripped apart in retaliation by many new accounts.  Most gave up in the end so all of the writers who could have benefited from them lost the opportunity.

My point is that reviews don't work if people become afraid to leave one because the writer might take it personally and react.  And it isn't worth reacting badly to.  Look at all of the traditionally published writers who have gone loopy over a bad review very publicly.  What happens online is never forgotten, especially the embarrassing lapses in judgement like the writer who tweeted the reviewers personal information and encouraged her fans to react on her behalf.  Two things can happen in cases like that - either people refuse to review her work again or else they purposely give bad reviews just to see if they can provoke her.  Either way, the writer loses.  It bugs me because I see it through the eyes of someone who likes to read, write and review.  If I ever leave a review that isn't gushing, I'll have to expect to be called a troll because it could easily happen.  And I'm not great at gushing although apparently I'm pretty good at waffling.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Right on, Farrellclaire.

Ed Patterson


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

farrellclaire said:


> What happens online is never forgotten, especially the embarrassing lapses in judgement like the writer who tweeted the reviewers personal information and encouraged her fans to react on her behalf.


Yikes! Now _that_ is a bad idea no matter how you slice it!

I think it's a shame that writers have to be afraid of leaving honest reviews, but I do know what you mean. I tend not to post reviews under my author name unless it's something I really love because of the reasons you mention. But really, any honest review shouldn't be trounced in a just world. Don't get me wrong, gushing is always nice , but anything that doesn't seethe with hate should be acceptable. 

-Jenn


----------



## David Derrico (Nov 18, 2009)

farrellclaire said:


> I'm going to go against the grain here and say that the majority of so called negative reviews are not that negative after all. Just because the person doesn't agree doesn't mean that they are wrong - it's their opinion, it can't be wrong. It's what they have gotten from the book, their point is just as valid as anyone else's. I would pay attention to what they are really saying because I believe most reviews are genuine.
> 
> I know there are trolls and vindictive people out there who write reviews out of spite but I would guess the percentage of reviews like that would coincide with the amount of fake great reviews there are too. That's how the system works, it's flawed but that's just how it is. People aren't stupid, they mostly judge the reviews based on how useful they are and in most cases useful is when the reviewer says what they liked _and _ disliked. Tarring anyone who takes the time to read and review a book constructively as someone whose opinion should be discounted is pretty horrible imo and yet it is happening everywhere. Even well known writers have been known to do it.
> 
> ...


You're certainly correct that we need to be open to "constructive criticism." But I find it hard to take a review seriously if it can't think of one single solitary positive aspect of a book. One star reviews that are 100% negative and it's the person's first review ... I don't take much time considering those as "constructive" or honest.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Writers never win arguments with reviewers, provided the reviewer is at all reasonable. I'm not talking about here, but out in the wild. The reviewer is a surrogate for the reader and anything other than "Thank you for reading -- sorry you didn't enjoy it" comes across as elitist and unappreciative. I don't think that's really the case at all, but this is how others tend to see it, and from there it snowballs. Before the author knows it, they're mentioned on various blogs as behaving badly, and the word "boycott" is bandied about. Any writer does well to learn to step away from the keyboard rather than to tell the reviewer what they really think.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

David Derrico said:


> You're certainly correct that we need to be open to "constructive criticism." But I find it hard to take a review seriously if it can't think of one single solitary positive aspect of a book. One star reviews that are 100% negative and it's the person's first review ... I don't take much time considering those as "constructive" or honest.


Can't say I agree, David. If I go to a restaurant and have a bad experience I'm probably going to say something like: "That place sucks." I'm not going to add: "But the peas and carrots were just fine." An empty, useless in the particulars review that is all negative is one consumer's holistic reaction to the reading experience. A handful of these are really meaningless as no book is for everyone and all books are crap to somebody, but if enough such comments mount then the author is IMO hearing something significant.

In the Amazon review system context, the tricky part, it seems to me, is to separate the genuine negative reaction from the troll attack. If several readers have bestowed upon your book the honor of their first review and they're all one stars then it's easy to guess what's going on, I suppose, but it's not always so clear-cut.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

I do agree with the comments made here that it's best not to respond to negative reviews. But if you've just got to, I suggest doing it with humor.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Okay, finished the thread and have to say that all it did was give me a list of authors I'd not feel comfortable reviewing.

Indie authors have to pay their dues too. They skipped the submitting to a publisher dues and the working with an editor dues and the getting a hideous cover dues, but no one gets to skip the reviews. If anything, having not went through the traditional process, which spit-shines the book, they're even more vulnerable against folks who still expect it to read like a professional effort. In fact, because they start out with a little more of a stigma, it's all the more important that they act just like the traditionally pubbed authors. 

Getting a bad review, under any circumstances, is hurtful and it sucks. Getting an ignorantly bad review is even worse. It's part of the package though. Also, I promise that what even the most conscientious reviewer considers fair is going to differ from what some writers consider fair. I say this as someone who gives nearly 80% of the things I review on Amazon either 4 or 5 stars. I am not touching the book of an author who indicates they need kid gloves. I wish them well, because I know writing is tough, but I'm not the reviewer for them.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Michelle, I'd say most of the authors here are only commiserating about obviously hurt, trollish 1-2 star reviews, not legitimate ones that have things to offer us in terms of growth and later corrections. One of my first reviews was on a small blog (and then later reposted to goodreads as a 2 star). It thrashed my editing and recommended not purchasing my book. It sucked, it made me rethink my ability to write, and when I reread The Weight of Blood, it also horribly embarrassed me because _she was right._ I spent several days pouring over it again, fixing errors, and I think it's in a much better shape now because of it.

But not every low review is worthwhile like that. And I think the rest of these posts are talking about how they also are afraid to post honest reviews of crappy works, just because of the fear for retaliation. And what really sucks is that people will retaliate. You're right about indie authors bypassing rejection letters and not paying their publisher dues. For many, this gets books out and read that might not be read otherwise. Some of those books are good, some not. The problem is, some authors don't develop that thick skin you get from constant rejections. Others are paranoid about how good their work really is, and defend that opinion fiercely. Of course, there's also the jealous. And don't forget people with a beef against anything popular or indie, and will tear it down the second they find it rising toward the top.

I think many, many indie authors don't want to risk making anyone mad, period. It sucks. I hate it. But I don't know what other solutions there are. I've been lucky enough to build up a bit of a cushion of good reviews to negate a bad one, but many of us here don't have that luxury. We all want sales, we all want read, so why jeopardize that by publishing a 2-star review of an active indie author?

David Dalglish


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Reviews are intended to be helpful to readers, not authors. That's the bottom line. The only criterion I have as a reader (or a writer) is that the reviewer has actually read the book first. Trolls, who have not usually read the books they review, are pretty easy to spot. They might take statements from other reviews to make it appear that they've read the work, though they don't always bother. They tend to speak in superlatives ('this is the worst book ever written' and the like). They love to incorporate personal attacks. Often, a check of their reviewing history shows a pattern of abuse, but not always. The same caveat apply to the five-star reviews. Shills often speak in superlatives, too. (Come on, guys...is this REALLY the 'best book ever written'?)

_An author must never, ever respond to a negative review_, even if he/she knows it's a troll! In fact, _especially _if it's a troll!

I have a policy that prevents me from finishing (let alone reviewing) books that are really dismal or offensive, and I'm therefore unlikely to ever be in the position of giving a 1-star review. However, if a reviewer is in that position, that's fine--just tell the readers why you hated it. By all means, be honest. Same with books you love--tell us why you loved them, don't just gush about them. Keep in mind that your words should help other readers choose the right books for them.

Both authors and reviewers should display professionalism. As a reader, I won't pay attention to either one otherwise.

--'Archer'

(PS: Authors, not everyone will love your work. Those who don't love it are entitled to say so. ALL popular books have negative reviews. If you get some, you're in good company. Take heart!

As a brief note to Michelle, I don't think any of the folks responding here are expecting 'kid gloves'. Kindleboards (especially the bazaar) is a 'safe' place wherein authors might feel comfy venting and/or joking about their bad reviews. I don't think any reviewer needs to worry about any of the authors here. Some are just reeling from the ungloved cement blocks they've recently been hit in the face with.  You pointed out that indies have to pay their dues, and you're right. We might remember, though, that indies are pretty much alone in the world. We don't have agents or publishers watching our backs. We don't always have the best advice, either. Authors, like any other entrepreneurs, have to learn and mature.)

It take courage to publish, regardless of path. We knew the job was dangerous when we took it!


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Be assured, I gave up my reviewer examples here on topic in the spirit of stressing the importance of not responding to the one-star wonders, and also to provide alternatives to hard alcohol and increased therapy sessions to deal with it. I love reviews of all kinds, and listen to reader feedback. I revised 4 books this year based on feedback and relaunched them. Most of the feedback came in on reviews (not one or two stars, but 4 and five stars). So MichelleR, although I encourage reviews (God knows I have plenty), I wouldn't want anyone to shy away from reviewing one of my books because I mentioned my stalker reviewer in the topic on stalker rviewers.



Ed Patterson


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> Michelle, I'd say most of the authors here are only commiserating about obviously hurt, trollish 1-2 star reviews, not legitimate ones that have things to offer us in terms of growth and later corrections. One of my first reviews was on a small blog (and then later reposted to goodreads as a 2 star). It thrashed my editing and recommended not purchasing my book. It sucked, it made me rethink my ability to write, and when I reread The Weight of Blood, it also horribly embarrassed me because _she was right._ I spent several days pouring over it again, fixing errors, and I think it's in a much better shape now because of it.
> 
> But not every low review is worthwhile like that. And I think the rest of these posts are talking about how they also are afraid to post honest reviews of crappy works, just because of the fear for retaliation. And what really sucks is that people will retaliate. You're right about indie authors bypassing rejection letters and not paying their publisher dues. For many, this gets books out and read that might not be read otherwise. Some of those books are good, some not. The problem is, some authors don't develop that thick skin you get from constant rejections. Others are paranoid about how good their work really is, and defend that opinion fiercely. Of course, there's also the jealous. And don't forget people with a beef against anything popular or indie, and will tear it down the second they find it rising toward the top.
> 
> ...


You know, I get that. There are some reviews that are clearly about trashing an author. In some cases, it's clear the reviewer was either going to tear apart someone over the internet or kick the dog, and they were too lazy to get up and kick the dog. No reasonable person is going to give that type of review respect. The problem is that nothing in this thread is going to "fix" that type of reviewer. This is a useless thread to people of that ilk and might make responsible reviewers wary. This might reduce some negative reviews, but perhaps some some positive and mostly positive ones as well.

However, most reviews are more subjective than the dog-kicker ones. The OP asks that reviewers be fair and later asks them not to be unfair. Of course, there are things most reasonable people could agree are over the line, but there's a whole lot of territory before that point. An author works hard on a book and so any criticism is going to be hard to take, and some comments will always seem unfair from that perspective. Few reviews less than 4 stars are going to seem fair -- an author might accept it, even understand a criticism is valid, but it's going to sting.

I am not going to sit here and claim that writing a review is like writing a novel, but it still takes work. Reviewers are not immune from people voting down their reviews for whatever arbitrary reasons they want. That's when they, and I include myself, have to suck it up. Recently, I was told by someone that my positive review of a book meant that my husband beats me and my (non-existent) children and that people like me are why the Catholic Church covers up child molestation. I responded to the person, but ultimately I thanked the person for taking the time to add to the comments, because what else could I do? Get the comment removed? Maybe. ::shrug:: When you write anything, you open the door to comments fair and foul. You trust that people reading the unfair stuff have the brains to see it for what it is.

Of course there comes a time when a reviewer crosses a clear line and a writer has to take measures, but I think that option should be used sparingly.

Bad reviews are not supposed to feel good, but before the internet authors didn't spend a lot of time in endless debates and wallowing in rapid-fire exchanges with detractors. The advice about writing a post in which you vent your frustrations -- and then deleting it -- is a good one. In space no one can hear you scream, and the same holds true on the internet -- unless you let them in on the secret. You can get as angry as you want over a negative review, you can email trusted friends, you can make a voodoo doll that matches the picture of the reviewer, you can call them all sorts of names, and then you can make sure that person never actually knows how upset you were.

None of this means that writers can't discuss these things with other writers, but that isn't the title of the thread. The thread reads as some folks saying they can't handle criticism, or that there is an least an undefined point where it becomes too much. The thread is in a place not just for writers, but for potential readers/reviewers. With very few exceptions, professional writers learn to take it, and those are the authors I feel comfortable reviewing.

To say "poor indie author," and please don't risk their sales by giving them 2 stars is to ask that they not be treated like real writers, and that's the last thing that will help these writers and these books be seen as legitimate. Yes, it's true that a bad review has the potential to hurt them more, and that's why the editing should be solid and all the easily correctable stuff should be removed as a potential issue. It's crucial that an indie writer is held to the same standards as others, and to ask less or expect less means that people will look at the raves and, when the quality is not there, assume the author enlisted friends and family.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

archer said:


> We might remember, though, that indies are pretty much alone in the world. We don't have agents or publishers watching our backs.


You do have KindleBoards, though...

Betsy


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Betsy, that is SO true! This is our safe haven. 

We MUST maintain our professional demeanor, though, even around here. Every public communication reflects on us, regardless of where it occurs. I tend to make jokes, but sometimes I worry even about that! Humor is easy to misinterpret. Agents and publishers are really good at interfacing between the author and the public. Good ones will help train the authors, as well. We must be careful of all we say on the internet (or elsewhere).  

(Michelle, I cannot tell you HOW many times I have written posts and deleted them. React-delete-move on is an excellent mantra. Once posted, the words are 'forever' even if you go back and delete them.)


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

archer said:


> As a brief note to Michelle, I don't think any of the folks responding here are expecting 'kid gloves'. Kindleboards (especially the bazaar) is a 'safe' place wherein authors might feel comfy venting and/or joking about their bad reviews. I don't think any reviewer needs to worry about any of the authors here. Some are just reeling from the ungloved cement blocks they've recently been hit in the face with.  You pointed out that indies have to pay their dues, and you're right. We might remember, though, that indies are pretty much alone in the world. We don't have agents or publishers watching our backs. We don't always have the best advice, either. Authors, like any other entrepreneurs, have to learn and mature.)
> 
> It take courage to publish, regardless of path. We knew the job was dangerous when we took it!


Oh, I don't believe anyone here is going to threaten my pets, which A Chandler had to deal with, but I'm still going to skip the folks who are not ready for honest reviews. I actually commiserate with every complaint here and could share my own, but it doesn't change the fact that it's easier and safer and, oh, better karma to review people who are of the no quarter asked school of writing and reviewing.

Indie writers are quite often brave and innovative, and I have great admiration for that, but that courage needs to be renewed if they're to grow and thrive. I'd actually love to take a break from the big pubs and spend a month just reviewing indies, but I just feel like it'd be a recipe for grief. This thread hasn't allayed those concerns. 



archer said:


> We MUST maintain our professional demeanor, though, even around here. Every public communication reflects on us, regardless of where it occurs. I tend to make jokes, but sometimes I worry even about that! Humor is easy to misinterpret. Agents and publishers are really good at interfacing between the author and the public. Good ones will help train the authors, as well. We must be careful of all we say on the internet (or elsewhere).
> 
> (Michelle, I cannot tell you HOW many times I have written posts and deleted them. React-delete-move on is an excellent mantra. Once posted, the words are 'forever' even if you go back and delete them.)


You're a person too though. Frankly, writers are going to turn off readers when they hang out on message boards -- they're going to gain some too. I'm not sure you can second guess everything you type. Even here, when I'm saying I'd not be comfortable reviewing some people, I know other people might have a different reaction to this thread. 

I actually deleted my original version of my first post in this thread. I often type out responses to things, tell myself to "let it go," and never send. Sometimes I save a copy, just in case I change my mind. After I calm down though, it rarely seems worth it.


----------



## NickSpalding (Apr 21, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> When you write anything, you open the door to comments fair and foul.


Never 'twas a truer phrase uttered.

In my day job, I'm constantly bombarded with comments fair and foul about the quality (or otherwise) of my writing. I write copy for a major marketing firm, so I'm constantly having my prose picked apart by clients...and as my livelihood depends on this, I've developed a skin thicker than a rhino with psoriasis.

Fortunately, the world wide web gives everyone the opportunity to have their say and _unfortunately_, the world wide web gives everyone the opportunity to have their say.

This inevitably leads to the march of the idiots, where the hard-of-thinking can post inflammatory and unfair reviews of people's work just _because they can_. These people are unpopular at social occasions and are...invariably...mad at their dad's.

The upshot of all this rambling is that it's probably best to just ignore trolls when they post horrible 1 star reviews and pity them as they've probably never seen a member of the opposite sex naked and have a dead dog on their porch.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I actually do read reviews a lot more than I thought, now that I'm paying attention. 

I find I usually read a top review and a bottom review to see who does and doesn't like something - and very often the low review is the one that sells me on a product.  If the bottom review complains about things that don't bother me, then I know it's not a problem, no matter how many there are.  (And if it complains that the author includes things I really like, I'm really interested in the story.)

And, psychologically speaking, lots of reviews, even lots of bad ones, make a book feel more tested and popular.


Camille


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Michelle is tough reviewer and she's right about the sting (as we all know), but I would characterize her work as constructive.  A few months ago she critiqued eBully in a thread here at KB.  It did indeed sting and of course my knee-jerk reaction was not very admirable (luckily I kept it to myself).  I didn't agree with all of her remarks, but after I took a closer look at her comments and the manuscript I realized that she was right about a lot of problems.  

On a rudimentary level I learned what I often read about here on the boards -- being 110% sure that a book is properly edited isn't enough.  The right number is closer to 1000%.  Many of her ideas on structural changes were helpful as well.  

In short, it hurt like hell and was rather embarrassing to be flogged in public, but Michelle helped make it a better book.  I accept it as part of what we do and as a writer I'm better off with all the constructive criticism I can get. 

edit: I think she said she'd be willing to give it two stars.


----------



## lib2b (Apr 6, 2010)

archer said:


> Reviews are intended to be helpful to readers, not authors. That's the bottom line. The only criterion I have as a reader (or a writer) is that the reviewer has actually read the book first. Trolls, who have not usually read the books they review, are pretty easy to spot. They might take statements from other reviews to make it appear that they've read the work, though they don't always bother. They tend to speak in superlatives ('this is the worst book ever written' and the like). They love to incorporate personal attacks. Often, a check of their reviewing history shows a pattern of abuse, but not always. The same caveat apply to the five-star reviews. Shills often speak in superlatives, too. (Come on, guys...is this REALLY the 'best book ever written'?)
> 
> _An author must never, ever respond to a negative review_, even if he/she knows it's a troll! In fact, _especially _if it's a troll!
> 
> I have a policy that prevents me from finishing (let alone reviewing) books that are really dismal or offensive, and I'm therefore unlikely to ever be in the position of giving a 1-star review. However, if a reviewer is in that position, that's fine--just tell the readers why you hated it. By all means, be honest. Same with books you love--tell us why you loved them, don't just gush about them. Keep in mind that your words should help other readers choose the right books for them.


I typed up a response to this thread this weekend and deleted it, because I wasn't sure how it would be received, but you state exactly what I was going to. Reviews are for the benefit of other readers, not for the writers. When I write a review, whether I post it on my blog, to Goodreads, to Amazon, or to Smashwords, that is who my intended audience for the review is. It's not that I don't think about the writer and their feelings, because I do. I do not ever say anything about the authors personally, just the book in question, and I never review a book I did not read the whole way through. It only makes sense that the majority of books out there are 3-star books - average. If most books were 4 and 5 star books, then 4 and 5 stars wouldn't mean much. As a reader, I look to reviews to "warn" me of things in a book that I won't like so that I can avoid books that aren't to my taste. It's very frustrating if all the reviews on a book are full of sunshine and rainbows because I _know_ not everyone can possibly like or love any one particular book. I would expect all books to have a wide range of reviews with at least some of every rating.

I read a link on this thread to a blog post in which the blog's author said to help indie authors we should review their books and make sure to give them 4 and 5 star reviews;we're not supposed to judge if it's Shakespeare, just if we enjoyed it. I really don't agree with that. I'm going to judge an indie book with the same standards I would judge a traditionally published book, and if that means 1,2, or 3 stars, that's what I'm going to give. That means if the grammar is really poor or the typos are out of control, it's going to be rated down for it. I'm no grammar expert, so that means if even I notice something is off, it must be pretty bad. Besides, 3-stars is a book that I liked. 4-stars is a book I really, really liked, and 5-stars is a book that I adored more than most other books I've read. Most books I review fall in the 3/4 star range. I keep track of what books I've read and I judge my enjoyment of one book against my enjoyment of another. Did I like this book more, less, or the same amount as these other books? That is how I decide on my star ratings. If all books I liked got 4 stars or better, the star ratings would completely lose their meaning and value to me. Note - this is using the Goodreads meaning of star ratings...Amazon is slightly different, so I adjust there...I pay attention to OK, Liked it, Loved it, not number of actual stars.

That being said, I actually don't like star ratings or rating systems like that. I wish there were radio buttons to select next to the words that the star ratings stand for and you could just see the bar chart, like Amazon has now, except instead of 1 star, 2 star, etc., you would see "Didn't like it, "It was OK," "Liked it," and "Loved it" and how many of the reviews thought those things.

Note: After posting a 1-star review on Amazon of a fairly popular, traditionally published book and getting negative responses to it from "fans" of the book who disagree with my assessment, I do avoid posting negative reviews on Amazon of anything that's really popular. I have a friend who posted a negative review (well-reasoned, specific, and constructive) of a different best-selling book on Amazon and people tracked her e-mail address down somehow and began harassing her over e-mail about it. This is why, for instance, I will never post anywhere public on the internet how I feel about the Twilight books.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Excellent sentiments lib24.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> To say "poor indie author," and please don't risk their sales by giving them 2 stars is to ask that they not be treated like real writers, and that's the last thing that will help these writers and these books be seen as legitimate. Yes, it's true that a bad review has the potential to hurt them more, and that's why the editing should be solid and all the easily correctable stuff should be removed as a potential issue. It's crucial that an indie writer is held to the same standards as others, and to ask less or expect less means that people will look at the raves and, when the quality is not there, assume the author enlisted friends and family.


First off, you're right about how this thread was supposed to be an appeal to reviewers. Since it evolved into talk about bad reviews, I forgot its original intent. So no, this thread won't accomplish that, but hey, conversation's are organic, so let's take this where it goes.

Anyhoo, I've lamented this before in a different thread: the kid gloves is bad for indie publishing. Bad, bad, bad. There is a danger that we all band together, slap each other on the back, and instead of being a place of honest critique become instead a band of self-serving ego-inflating butt-kissers. If someone has a problem with my book, _tell me._ But you're right, the reviews on Amazon are not for the authors but the _readers._ It almost makes me feel like I should just make a second account on Amazon to write honest reviews for, but then somehow it'd be found out and the backlash could be even worse. That's the problem being an indie, our work is so fragile, our reviews and recommendations so vital, that it can be almost paralyzing.

Again I ask, though, what is the solution? We all suck it up, write reviews of works we read, regardless of whether we liked it or not? Who here has the guts to risk the damage? It seems many come to a middle ground (I'll email the author but not let the public know how much I disliked the work). Heck, even I've done that before, and yes, it was because I feared retaliation. But how much do we honestly care for our readers then? If I think a work is crap, shoddily written, poorly edited, and has an unlikable main character, what good does it to tell the author but then let more and more readers buy it, read it, and judge ALL indie books by that work?

That's the risk: the bad books latch onto the good ones like a drowning man and pull both down. Somehow its got to stop.

David Dalglish

*attaches bullseye to his shirt, both books, and his car, and then cringes*


----------



## David Derrico (Nov 18, 2009)

I'm sorry if we've conveyed the impression that reviewers should be "afraid" to leave honest but negative reviews. Reviewers should feel justified in giving their honest opinion of a work, indie or traditional.

And I'm sorry this thread kinda evolved into complaining about bad reviews. I do think it's a more constructive, safe, and supportive place for us to do it than by responding directly to the reviews (which is a bad bad bad idea). But you're right that we should remember this is still a public forum. I think we tend to feel "safe" about expressing ourselves in the Book Bazaar, which is normally a good thing, but perhaps we still need to be on our guard with what we say. As D. Dalglish pointed out, most of us are terrified to express ourselves online for fear of reprisal, so we let our guards down a little here, for better or worse.

I can only speak for myself, but I'm not trying to scare anyone away from reviewing my book. On the contrary, I would welcome anyone I met here on KB to leave a review, because I know KB members here are honest and passionate readers, and not angry Internet trolls or someone with an axe to grind. (Also, if I get enough honest reviews, the few troll reviews become inconsequential.) But, as someone above pointed out, we do have to discern and discard the trolling reviews written out of anger or whatever other purpose, because to listen to them would just give trolls power over us. Some of those reviews are fairly easy to pick out, but some are 50/50. That's what I meant above when I said that a first-time review that is 1-star and personally-attacking and 100% negative is, most likely, a troll. Maybe not, maybe someone just honestly hated it and didn't feel like pointing out the high writing level or good formatting or lack of typos and instead hated X and Y and Z. Fair enough. But I don't choose to spend a lot of time listening to feedback from reviewers or "editors" who are ALL negative. I just don't find it balanced or useful.

One other point: I'd never get up in arms over a 3-star review, or even a decent 2-star. (Would I be _thrilled_? No, but whatever.) But I've read enough books to know that mine is not one of the worst ever written, not 1-star material. And that 1-star (which is really a person saying "I want to hurt you as much as possible") takes _twelve_ positive, balanced 4-star reviews just to inch the average back over 3.75 (to be rounded up to 4). And I don't think it's fair that one angry person can counteract 12 honest readers -- and much more than that if he makes an extra account or gets a friend or two involved.


----------



## lib2b (Apr 6, 2010)

David Derrico said:


> One other point: I'd never get up in arms over a 3-star review, or even a decent 2-star. (Would I be _thrilled_? No, but whatever.) But I've read enough books to know that mine is not one of the worst ever written, not 1-star material. And that 1-star (which is really a person saying "I want to hurt you as much as possible") takes _twelve_ positive, balanced 4-star reviews just to inch the average back over 3.75 (to be rounded up to 4). And I don't think it's fair that one angry person can counteract 12 honest readers -- and much more than that if he makes an extra account or gets a friend or two involved.


Honestly, that's why I don't like the star rating system. I know some readers want to "quick and dirty" rating to look at to see overall what people are saying, but I think unless you've got hundreds or thousands of reviews, it's not a good indicator of general consensus about a book...because not enough people have read/reviewed it for there to be a fair general consensus. For my own reading/purchasing decisions, I ignore the number of stars and read the review content, but I know that's probably not true for all.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

lib2b said:


> It only makes sense that the majority of books out there are 3-star books - average. (snip) Besides, 3-stars is a book that I liked. 4-stars is a book I really, really liked, and 5-stars is a book that I adored more than most other books I've read.


I think that's the way the review system is supposed to work on paper, but in practice most people regard anything less than 4 stars as a pan.

Every time I fill out a customer service survey, if I answer any question with anything less than "Extremely Satisfied" I get phone calls from people who want to help me with my "complaint". Somewhere along the line anything less than 5 stars - in anything - became the new Fail.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

As a reader, I rely on samples of the work. I won't buy an unknown without access to a writing sample, no matter how glowing (or awful) the reviews. Period.  If someone leaves a great review that speaks of how well-edited a book is, and the sample says otherwise, it makes the reviewer look b-a-d. Most unwise.

I don't feel any obligation to protect potential readers of bad books by spending valuable time struggling through a book I hate--I'll let others do that. There are plenty of folks out there to read and review books both 'good' and 'bad'. My opinion is only an opinion. It's not so fraught with wisdom that I must share it with the world in all circumstances.

Readers can access the sample as easily as I can.

And while I take David's point about being 'dragged down' by bad books, the way to overcome that is to write good books. We all knew the perils of going indie before we started down the path to print. Trust me...with effort, the cream will rise. The lead will sink without any sage opinions from me.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Just noticed again the sig on the email I use for reviews:
From my close observation of writers... they fall into two groups: 1) those who bleed copiously and visibly at any bad review, and 2) those who bleed copiously and secretly at any bad review.
Isaac Asimov

Thanks, Dave. I knew you wanted to bear me over the head with a chair, because in your position I'd have wanted to do the same. The reason why some indie book reviews are so low is that the stories are good enough, but they're not quite ready. A reviewer can feel more like an editor than they might like and making sure the easy stuff is correct can often push a review from negative to positive. The best thing any indie writer can do is acquire honest friends who like to read, and convince them that you really do want honesty. I believe that most writers, on some level, know if a criticism is valid. People will always make useless comments. These folks will want you to change the book to something entirely different and not appreciate what the author was trying to accomplish. A writer seeking improvement will know the comments that are truly unhelpful. He or she can work with the rest. A writer eventually develops a strong self-editor and the friends, while good to have, become less crucial.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> The best thing any indie writer can do is acquire honest friends who like to read, and convince them that you really do want honesty. I believe that most writers, on some level, know if a criticism is valid. People will always make useless comments. These folks will want you to change the book to something entirely different and not appreciate what the author was trying to accomplish. A writer seeking improvement will know the comments that are truly unhelpful. He or she can work with the rest. A writer eventually develops a strong self-editor and the friends, while good to have, become less crucial.


I totally agree with you Michelle. And maybe not only from friends... but other authors. My friends wouldn't know why adverbs are redundant and what the heck passive voice is. My friends all told me my novel was great! But then I started submitting chapters to critiquecircle.com, and got critiques from other authors. That was the best thing I ever did.

Vicki


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Victorine said:


> I totally agree with you Michelle. And maybe not only from friends... but other authors.
> Vicki


Yeah, those are the ones I meant --astute readers and writers. You ask the people who would be your ideal reader - not the ones who'd give you automatic praise, but people who like and read and _understand _your genre. That doesn't mean others can't help, but aim for people you like and who you feel know a little something about your type of writing.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Don't ever focus too much on one review, positive or negative. It's the analysis of all the reviews that can really tell you something.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Oh, and this is apropos, Harlan Coben's tweet today announcing his "reader email of the week":

"_Caught _is the first of your books I've read.Your writing style of smart aleckness is annoying beyond belief, I cannot finish the book."

Now that's how to handle a bad review.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Dangit, I keep seeing people agreeing with David, and I don't know which David. I may have to bring out the Oligart Foosengloswiser pen name again.

Oligart.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Haha! Okay, Foosie!


----------



## sierra09 (Jun 20, 2009)

David, so long as you don't ask me to call you Mr. Foosengloswiser it'll be good if you go to that.  

I think the reason Smashwords may not get as many reviews is that most people probably buy the books from Amazon, B&N, etc and can leave reviews on there even if they haven't bought the actual product. The main rule is they had to have bought something in the past. Smashwords you have to purchase before reviewing so if people have bought a book from Amazon they wouldn't want to rebuy on Smashwords to leave a review. 
These days when I think of it, I'll look to see if the author I'm considering is on Smashwords and buy from there so I can leave a review there and then leave one on Amazon, etc.


----------



## nomesque (Apr 12, 2010)

So, here's a list of the things that - in my opinion - make a review *bad*, as opposed to negative:

- lack of any detail ("This book sucked, DO NOT BUY" or "fantastic, loved it, everyone should read")

- not acknowledging personal preference vs low quality (ie, if the book's a historical romance and the reviewer HATES historical romances with a passion, it helps if they acknowledge that point - helps people who love the genre to discount the review and others who hate the genre to give the review more weight)

- not disclosing how much of the book the reviewer actually read

... and I think those things are bad from writer *and* reader points of view. The writer doesn't learn anything useful from a bad review, and neither do potential readers.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

I hope the comments about the _Theater of Blood_ didn't put any reviewers off their bubble and squeak. 

Ed Patterson


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

archer said:


> Reviews are intended to be helpful to readers, not authors. That's the bottom line.


This little gem right here is why I don't see a reason to get too concerned about reviews, good or bad: I am not their target audience. If there's constructive criticism in them, all the better. I love getting a list of things I can fix. But for a troll to simply bash as the author? I'm not a character in the book!  Keep on topic, that's all I ask.



LCEvans said:


> I read the 1 star and it looked like the reviewer hadn't read the book. His objection--"Fellow writer whores" giving out 5 star reviews to promote each other's work.
> I wonder if this person has ever noticed the blurbs on the back of conventionally published books--blurbs the publisher has gotten from other authors.


Yes! That's exactly what traditional books are doing. And why should we shy away from such a comparison? If I got this sort of comment, I'd be tempted to comment back, saying, "Thank you for comparing my reviews to those on the New York Times Bestseller List. I appreciate your perspicacity." But I wouldn't actually comment back, as I'm not actually fluent in troll. I might mention it here in the Kindleboards though. 



archer said:


> An eagle soars above the detritus on the ground.


And then swoops down and eats it for breakfast. Mmmm, detritus.


----------



## Chloista (Jun 27, 2009)

William Campbell said:


> I guess it's a two-way street, since I'm hoping that doesn't include me, which I now worry after having tossed a comment into this thread. Perhaps I should have kept quiet.
> 
> I'll take any review I can get, and that's a one-way street. Get the review, done. I don't respond to reviews good or bad. It's a review, not a message to me. When the author responds for any reason, the anonymity of the review system is threatened and I can totally see that reviewers would then be hesitant to express their opinions. If a reader wants to write to me, that's different. We may chat endlessly, and even that could be talk of praise or criticism. But it's a message to me, not a review. The two are different.
> 
> ...


Excellent post. I like your style of handling reviews.

I rarely review books on Amazon. However, I read a great many reviews before making purchases. And the book reviews I like reading best contain both positive and negative entries. Generally, I figure the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I've purchased some really, really bad books that received glowing reviews; and I've taken a chance on some books with negative reviews that turned out to be excellent. And, yes, the way a review is written has a lot to do with whether I decide to give it (the review) any credence. Overtly hostile reviews tell me more about the reviewer than the book; but, that's also true of the reviewer who gushes with praise.

I understand the point of view of authors about some of the nastier reviews and how it may impact an author's career. But, truthfully, when a topic like this arises, it makes me feel a bit uncomfortable. Even hostile reviewers should be allowed to express their point of view, I think. They are entitled to their opinion about anything that is being placed before the public. Afterall, like 'em or not, they are part of the public. And you may wish them to be more analytical in their reviews of books -- but that can be said for good reviews as well. I'm sure Stephen King received his share of bad reviews. Even John Steinbeck did. Granted, though... the immediacy of online reviews and the expanded audience that can read them probably has a deleterious impact on things.

I'm not sure how you deal with this sort of thing if you are an author. But I do like Mr. Campbell's feelings about reviews.

I am very grateful to authors for the many hours of enjoyment and flights of fancy they have given me. I admire your dedication and talent.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

nomesque said:


> So, here's a list of the things that - in my opinion - make a review *bad*, as opposed to negative:
> 
> - lack of any detail ("This book sucked, DO NOT BUY" or "fantastic, loved it, everyone should read")
> 
> ...


I almost always, either explicitly or implicitly, state who and I am and why I picked the book. It's usually pretty much the first line or lines.

I selected this, because I'd heard good things about this author. Because I love this genre. Because... This is right up my alley. Or I'm stepping outside my comfort zone. (BTW, I wish there was an option to decline to rate -- that way people could try different things and acknowledge that the book was just not for them, as opposed to bad.)

I do this so the reader can evaluate me. Am I like them? Do you start out at the same basic place? Are we looking for the same things in the book?

A few actual examples:

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: *Fight Club, A Novel* (Kindle Edition)
I chose to read this because I wanted in on this cultural touchstone. I hadn't read the book and I hadn't seen the movie, and yet I constantly heard references to it. Even in a paranormal romance I read recently. I figured it was time to catch up with both the book and the movie. I don't think I'm the ideal audience either.  

***​
This review is from: *Fairy Tale Lust: Erotic Fantasies for Women* (Paperback)
Customer review from the Amazon Vine™ Program (What's this?)
I selected this book, because I love reading fairy tales and exploring the subtext of folklore. I also adore good erotica. Lastly, I love short story anthologies! This seemed like an ideal selection for me.

***​This review is from:* Scent of the Missing: Love and Partnership with a Search-and-Rescue Dog* (Hardcover)
Customer review from the Amazon Vine™ Program (What's this?)
I picked this book because I'm always attracted to books about animals, and because this one is about a cool job! 

***​
This review is from: *Olay Pro-X Intensive Firming Treatment Kit *(Health and Beauty)
Customer review from the Amazon Vine™ Program (What's this?)
<snip>

I selected the product, because I'm at an age where this is the type of product that would interest me. Good skin, but perhaps not what it was when I was eighteen and unable to appreciate it. I'm not older than dirt, but I was dirt's first babysitting job. Okay, I'm not even that old, but a perusal of the magazines at the check-out would have me believe that early forties is when I should be terrified of looking my actual age. So, pretty much ripe for the plucking! Olay!
***​
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: *Lessons From a Scarlet Lady* (Kindle Edition)
3.5 stars.

Kindle Readers: Please note that this book has a prologue, but that the book opened - at least for me - at chapter 1. The prologue is also not mentioned in the table of contents. I only discovered it because I hit the back button by mistake. Without it, you'll be missing the much discussed carriage scene.

I selected this book, because ... well, I don't entirely know. I'd pre-ordered it, so I must have heard something good about the author or she must have impressed me on a message board somewhere. Besides, gorgeous cover, which - as a Kindle owner - I can only appreciate from afar. I'm sure I was also interested because the plot promised some raciness. While I appreciate trembling virgin heroines, I also like a story with more advanced sensuality. 
***​
I will also never state in a review that I'm absolutely right. I only state my impressions. I welcome opposing views in the comments, politely stated. If the comment makes someone change his or her mind from my review -- okay.

I'm completely okay with someone reading one of my reviews, realizing we wanted different things from the book, and making a decision based on that. "Michelle R. likes spanking in her erotica, and I hate it. She recommends this book, but her review tells me it isn't for me," is just as good as if someone takes my advice.

Knowledge is power. All good reviews empower.

3 stars is a neutral to fairly positive review, dammit. It means that, while it didn't knock my socks off, I'm not weeping about time I'll never get back either. A 3 star item can be fairly bland across the board, but it can also be quite good in several areas, but have a few too many issues. I don't care if Amazon places these as negatives, it's in the middle and so they're being pretty arbitrary. I will continue to treat it like a recommendation for people who are inclined to like the author, genre, topic.

If I'm reviewing it, I've read the whole thing. If there ever was an option to decline to rate, I might then include books I didn't finish.


----------



## sherylb (Oct 27, 2008)

OK, I’ve kept up with this thread and just have to jump in with my thoughts as a reader.

Authors, you need to keep in mind that when people read your book, they are investing their time and money, and trusting that the writer will make it worth their while. When I read it is a total experience. Sometimes it is hard to get my attention because I am so immersed in a book. I am lucky enough to have a husband who understands and tolerates hours of me not speaking and often not even moving! I read a lot of books and always have so I have a fair understanding of how they are supposed to be structured and how the words feel when they flow right, and when the story fits. (Even though I would not ever even attempt to write a book. Yikes!) I give the writer a huge amount of leeway on facts, typos and other errors and if the book is bad enough, I just don’t finish it. Usually.

Last year I bought a book from Amazon by a writer who introduced it on Kindleboards. (As it turned out he joined just to push his book and was never heard from again.)  I read the blurb and the story sounded really interesting, I read all the reviews and they sounded great, it was in a genre that I love and actively pursue and I thought I was in for a wonderful experience. I even bought it without downloading a sample! Silly me. I realized by about a quarter into the book that I had been suckered, the book was horrible.  The more I read the worse I felt, and I usually don’t finish a book that I dislike. I disliked this book so much, I had to finish it just to tell people how bad it was and why. The review I wrote was the only review I have ever felt compelled to write on Amazon and it was a one star. I felt, and pay attention here, I FELT ripped off, hurt that I had been lied to, and mad for wasting my time reading this book. I even waited a week before writing the review. The review I left did not mention my feelings, but told exactly why I disliked the book and did not attack the author, and there was no doubt about why I left the one star.

Yes, I left a one star review and it was my first one, but I am not a troll.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

There has been mention here (in the last two posts) regarding the reader investing time. In fact, that's the point. There's been mouch discussion about pricing (and this is not the place for it, only I make a point). The $ .99 or the $ 1.99 that a reader pays for the book is a mere token - a toll. We pay more for a bottle of diet coke. However, it is the reader's time investment that's the real price of the book; it's real worth. What a reviewer generally expresses is how that time was spent - a pig in the poke, a great expience, a worthwhile journey with some off moments. The worst thing that can happen is that a reader cannot finish the book because they can no longer or are unwilling to invest the time.

Ed Patterson


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

sherylb said:


> Last year I bought a book from Amazon by a writer who introduced it on Kindleboards. (As it turned out he joined just to push his book and was never heard from again.) I read the blurb and the story sounded really interesting, I read all the reviews and they sounded great, it was in a genre that I love and actively pursue and I thought I was in for a wonderful experience. I even bought it without downloading a sample! Silly me. I realized by about a quarter into the book that I had been suckered, the book was horrible.  The more I read the worse I felt, and I usually don't finish a book that I dislike. I disliked this book so much, I had to finish it just to tell people how bad it was and why. The review I wrote was the only review I have ever felt compelled to write on Amazon and it was a one star. I felt, and pay attention here, I FELT ripped off, hurt that I had been lied to, and mad for wasting my time reading this book. I even waited a week before writing the review. The review I left did not mention my feelings, but told exactly why I disliked the book and did not attack the author, and there was no doubt about why I left the one star.


I think that's wonderfully expressed. I was informed several months ago by a Vine book that I'm motivated by doing the right thing. I'd never thought about it much, but that's right. I put a high value on kindness, but honesty is pretty much of equal importance to me. I believe in trying to be fair and I think there's no such thing without balancing these two qualities. It's very easy to think the kind thing to do is not not give a bad review -- to be "nice" to the author, either by glossing over your real opinion or simply opting not to review. (If you don't have anything nice to say...) The problem is that this is only kind in the most surface, obvious way, and doesn't take into account that people look at reviews for assistance. No one in the above example was particularly kind to you, Sheryl. The only way to have done right by you was to have valued honesty as much as easy benevolence. A reviewer should at least think your couple bucks and free time is as important as the feelings of Aunt Sally, the aspiring writer, or the the guy they know from the discussion board.

A reviewer should try to be kind, because _human beings_ should try to be kind, and those are the ones doing most of the reading and reviewing. They shouldn't assume the writer wanted to produce something bad and they shouldn't sharpen their rapier language skills on someone who's invested a lot of time and effort on something. However, built in the very word "reviewer" is the concept of truthfulness. "I have experience with this book and I'm here to tell you about it so that you can make a decision." I don't want to be the person responsible for someone making the wrong decision between Buy Book and Buy Lunch

...because that's just not nice.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

As a Vine Reviewer, I only review products, because of that concept of truth. I review less and less in the book area. I prefer to reach readers one reader at a time, and in places like Kindleboards, support my fellow authors with tactful recommendations. As a reviewer, I sill will rise to the ocassion and over the TBR list to do one, but there's so much more beneficial writing and authorig that I can do. and make an impact, and hopefully a positive one before I reach the clearing at the end of the path.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Joyce DeBacco (Apr 24, 2010)

To Sherylb, I'm sorry you had a bad experience with a new author. It makes the rest of us look bad. But did you read the sample given by Amazon? Usually, that's a clue whether the author is a skilled writer and can pull everything together. I don't know how many sample pages you get from Amazon. That's why I offer the first two chapters on my website. I think after reading that much, you'd know if you'd be interested in the rest.

Joyce


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Joyce, that almost makes it sound like it was her fault for the book being bad.

"Did you read the sample? If you had, you wouldn't have read it, hated it, and told the rest of the world it was bad."

An honest review is GOOD for readers as a whole. Defending bad books is not.

David Dalglish


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

Authors should also be using excerpt sites and bookbuzzr to give readers samples. I hope that when a reader buys my books they have already sampled my work, either through a download, my website, Search inside the Book, bookbuzzr and other ways - or have read something else I've written. Authors, should be confident that they are not selling pigs-in-a-poke. If someone buys based on the description and the reviews and is disappointed, it is hardly the authors fault unless the description says the books about NASCAR racing and it's about Button Makers on an Iceberg. I mean, I feel bad when a reader is disappointed, but my reviews are from readers not friends and family (I have few friends (the older you get, the thinner that arena), and my family never reads my books, let alone compose a review), and those from other authors are not pity pieces, and not reciprocal. So they are what they are. And there are samples of my work at every turn. A reviewer that states they hate the work is legitmate (every review is legitimate, as this is America, you know), however they cannot state that they were led astray without sharing the blame.  

Ed Patterson


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Edward C. Patterson said:


> If someone buys based on the description and the reviews and is disappointed, it is hardly the authors fault unless the description says the books about NASCAR racing and it's about* Button Makers on an Iceberg.*
> 
> Ed Patterson


That's my WIP!


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

> We should shy away from it because it's cheesy and this comparison to big-name authors is a convenient half-truth used to justify the unscrupulous activity. When a publisher solicits a "blurb" (as they call them) from one author to endorse another, the endorsing author is typically someone higher up the publishing food chain. Someone of more prominence, better selling, usually from the same house and helping along other authors below them. I don't think Stephen King and Dean Koontz trade blurbs. They don't need to, they're both already at the top of the food chain. Now, if Mr. King wanted to trade blurbs with me, well now, my sales would skyrocket no doubt, while my blurb would go largely unnoticed. Who recommends this? Who is he? At the moment, at the bottom of the food chain.


Actually, I think your entire point about "relative point on the food chain" is irrelevant, because that's not why the comparison is being made.

The comparison is being made because the blurbs on the backs of books are _marketing contrivances_.

Do you think those blurbs come into existence because those authors ran into each other at a writer's convention, or are drinking buddies or something?

They are solicited by the marketing departments of publishers, or by editors or agents from their pool of mutual clients. They are promotional material, and to that extent are 100% as "insincere" as "traded" reviews. That's why the comparison is being made - because ALL blurbs are from "interested parties", in one way or another, when they aren't from newspaper or magazine reviewers.


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

William Campbell said:


> And a response to that...
> 
> We should shy away from it because it's cheesy and this comparison to big-name authors is a convenient half-truth used to justify the unscrupulous activity. When a publisher solicits a "blurb" (as they call them) from one author to endorse another, the endorsing author is typically someone higher up the publishing food chain. Someone of more prominence, better selling, usually from the same house and helping along other authors below them. I don't think Stephen King and Dean Koontz trade blurbs. They don't need to, they're both already at the top of the food chain. Now, if Mr. King wanted to trade blurbs with me, well now, my sales would skyrocket no doubt, while my blurb would go largely unnoticed. Who recommends this? Who is he? At the moment, at the bottom of the food chain.
> 
> This honesty may not win me any friends, but to ask readers for their honesty and not offer my own, well that's what we call a hypocrite, right? So I'm being honest. This indie author trading reviews business is tomfoolery and I'll have no part of it. If an author, indie, well-established, or NY Times bestseller comes across my work and likes it enough to say kind words (or criticism), that's fine. No trading though, that's not right. Besides, it reeks of insincerity. The same reason I do not solicit any friends or associates to post reviews of my work. I want reviews from people who don't know me, so I can trust the reviews will be unbiased. Unfortunately, that leaves me with few reviews at this point. And that is why my "plea" to readers is -- please post more reviews, whether words of praise or telling us how it stinks. I invite readers from all corners of the globe to express it all, and often.


Tsk. I forget you guys don't know me yet, nor my level of inherent cynicism and humor. My comment wasn't meant to imply that it's okay for authors to bulk up each other's book reviews. I was intending to point out that it makes no sense for a reviewer to accuse indie authors of something bad, when it is apparently acceptable for traditional publishers to do exactly the same thing, just scrawled across the book's cover. Note to self: work on clarity of snark.


----------



## Joyce DeBacco (Apr 24, 2010)

I feel I have to respond to half-orc. Yes, I worried that my comment about sampling the book to Sherylb might be taken as criticism, and I didn't want it to. But nowhere was I defending a bad book. If the book stunk, then, yes, she should have and did say as much. Good for her. Maybe if more people did that we wouldn't be subjected to so many people who think they can write. Now I'm not trying to crush people's creative endeavors. I just think they should learn how to do it properly before putting it out there. And we, as fellow writers, should encourage them to strive higher and not rubber stamp their work as terrific by trading blurbs with them. You know the old "you pat my back and I pat yours" bit. I won't do that either. I want my work to stand on its own merits. Okay, enough said from this old broad.

Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to try and make a link, which probably won't turn out because I've had a bit of trouble with it in the past.

Joyce

Serendipity House(kindle)


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

tbrookside said:


> Do you think those blurbs come into existence because those authors ran into each other at a writer's convention, or are drinking buddies or something?


Well, mine did.  I met Robin Hobb (a bestselling fantasy writer, for those who aren't conversant with the genre) at Norwescon years ago, and she agreed to read the first book of the Ryel Saga, which had just come out in paperback. She liked the story, and offered to blurb the cover of the second volume, no strings attached. The fantasy community is wonderful for that kind of generosity.

CK


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I agree, I'm much pickier now with what I read than I was before I learned about writing. Redundant adverbs _*really*_ bother me now, whereas I didn't even notice them before. And overly creative dialogue tags make me want to scream.

I used to read a lot of Mary Higgins Clark books. Now her POV shifts in the middle of a section make me go nuts. I don't mind them if they are different sections.. but don't switch in the middle! Grrr! (I still read Mary Higgins Clark... I love her suspense, I just grit my teeth when she does that POV thingy.)

Vicki


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> Joyce, that almost makes it sound like it was her fault for the book being bad.
> 
> "Did you read the sample? If you had, you wouldn't have read it, hated it, and told the rest of the world it was bad."
> 
> ...


It also protects the author, not that this was the poster's intention. Good luck telling other people in anything other than the most casual, non-formal way that the sample was bad. You can't actually review that. A well-written 1 or 2 star review is gold, because most readers will ditch that book and become ineligible to review it lest they face a barrage of, "how do you know it didn't become the best book ever 2 pages later?" It's one of the _potential _benefits of Vine -- the requirement to review 75% of the items might make more people brave it out to the end.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

So, this seems like as good a thread as any to throw this up. I got a review for the second book...a 2 star, and this is by someone who gave a 5 star review to the first book. Needless to say, I was rather shocked. Let me just post it all, otherwise my later bits won't make any sense:



> After coming out of the box swinging with the first book in this series, I was quite excited to pick up book 2. About halfway into it that excitement turned to boredom, and by the end I was furious.
> 
> Let me first say what was good: the writing, characterization, and action were top notch. Tons of things happen in this book, and it takes a bit for it all to soak in. There are quite a few new characters and they're every bit as fleshed out as the ones in the first book. The story picks up literally the next morning, and doesn't slow down until about halfway through.
> 
> ...


So is this a good review? Part of me wants to think so. He liked a lot of the book, thought it was high quality, devoted near half of it to praise...but part of me is devastated. I feel like I lost a reader, one who was so thoroughly enjoying the first book. Will I lose readers with this? Will it prove an apt warning to others who think it will be an easy fun read?

Another part of me wants to comment to him, talk with him, tell him how it -wasn't- the bad guys winning in the end, or even every time. The relationship between the two brothers is horrendously damaged. Yes, a character died. Yes, it was sad. But the bad guys are just as sad, just as devastated, for under no circumstances did they want that character killed...gyah.

I think these are the reviews that people _should_ write when they dislike a book. I can so clearly see why he is upset. I think it gives every potential reader insight into what they're getting into. Perhaps this is one of those times I need to get myself some ice cream and try to shrug it off. That, and cross my fingers and hope he gives me another shot in book 3 (even though that one also has its, um, sections where the bad guys win).

A slightly depressed David Dalglish


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

The worst thing about that review is the spoiler. Thanks, reviewer!

I wouldn't feel bad at all about this. It may be the best two-star review ever. There's no plot that 100% of the readers like...

[working on new covers, waiting for Phillies game on radio.]


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I don't think it's that bad of a review, David.  I agree, he did give a lot of praise.  And frankly, there are tons of readers out there who like stories that don't have the traditional "all happy ending" thing going on, so this review might actually spark more interest in your book.

Vicki


----------



## Carolyn Kephart (Feb 23, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> So is this a good review?


It's a taste judgment. Hold to your vision, and pay it no mind.

CK


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

He praised every aspect of the story except for the route you took with it.  There will always be someone who thinks, I wish this had happened instead.  It's down to taste and personal preference.  You can't possibly please everyone.  Personally, the review made me a lot more interested in the book - it sounds like something I would like for all the reasons this reviewer didn't.  

I think there is always the fear when writing a series that the story will take a direction some fans won't be happy with but it's your book.  You wrote the story as you saw it happening.  Changing it would make it a completely different tale.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I think you guys might be right, but this is something I've never actually experienced before.

I've gained readers.
I've had readers not like my work.
I've never _lost_ a reader before.

In the grand scheme of things, I hope you're right Farrell, and that this might attract others of a different mindset, while still praising other aspects of the story. Right now, though, it feels like a Pyrrhic victory. I lost a reader. That's all the matters to me. I lost a f'in reader.

David Dalglish


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Well...you might have to get over it. Your work will not appeal to everyone. Neither will mine, Carolyn's, or John's. Stay true to your vision and take those on the journey who want to go. Some will jump off the caravan early. Oh, well!

Remember...2-stars means 'I didn't like it'. The reviewer explained why, and that wouldn't keep me from buying it. 
The only thing that probably jars you is your 'average', which will improve rapidly once a few more 4-5'ers roll in. No worries, mate!


(Only one thing keeps me from buying it, and that is the fact that I have bought it already.)


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Half-Orc said:


> I think you guys might be right, but this is something I've never actually experienced before.
> 
> I've gained readers.
> I've had readers not like my work.
> ...


Hey, no one, I don't care who you are, keeps all his or her readers. Any writer you can think of has lost readers, or never impressed them in the first place. There will always be people who think they could have done it better, or at least can tell you exactly where you went wrong. Every reader comes to a book with a life lived and with bruises. You didn't do anything other than jab a sore spot that you couldn't have known existed and as long as you write this is going to happen. It's not that you shouldn't be sorry that a reader is lost, but there is nothing you can do about it and nothing you can reasonably change.


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Wow!  This thread sure caught on fire .... and got a bit off track I think.  My original post wasn't intended to discourage readers from posting bad reviews, nor was I trying to call anyone out on a negative review they'd given me.  My main point was this: Readers should keep reviews to what's on the pages.  That's all I ask anyway.  If you hate my writing style or my characters or whatever, so be it - it's your option to say it in a review and to give me how ever few stars you choose.  Although it may make me cringe, I can accept it.  What I can't easily accept are two things: reviews that attack things that aren't in the book (personal attacks, snide speculative comments, etc.) and trollish reviews by people who clearly haven't even read the book being reviewed.  That's all - that was my only point.

-Jenn


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Speaking of reviewing, I noticed in the sample of *Reunion* that you have a blurb from Harriet Klausner. Was this a difficult decision, considering her reputation?


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Michelle - Believe it or not, I had no idea who Harriet was.  I did a Google search to scout for "chick lit reviewers."  I found her website (or was it a blog? I think it was her website), and put her on my list.  I emailed several different people, asking if they'd be interested in reviewing my book.  Harriet responded back that she would, but that she couldn't guarantee when she would get to it.  I mailed a copy off to her.  It took awhile, but she eventually posted a review to Amazon (among other places).  It wasn't until after I got the review and some people commented on it that I realized that there was a controversy.  I have no clue what she's got going on or what all the fuss is about (wasn't really interested enough to look further into it), but I assumed that she did actually read my book based on her comments and how long it took for her to get to it.  Who knows though.  In the same batch, I sent copies to ChickLitPlus, ChickLitClub, and one other that hasn't gotten to my book yet (really long time).  Needless to say, I'm far more pleased with the other two reviews, even though Harriet's was a 5-star. 

-Jenn


----------



## J.L. Penn (Mar 17, 2010)

Michelle - I just reread your post and realized that I misread it originally.  I didn't realize I still had a Harriet Klausner quote at the beginning of the book.  It was removed in the print version, simply because I just stuck to the more "major" reviews (in my mind).  But part of the same answer applies - I didn't realize there was a controversy initially.  I probably wouldn't have included her quote initially if I had.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention - will have to correct that!

-Jenn


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Ah, that makes sense. I don't think anyone knows for sure either, other than there are days that she posts dozens of reviews. I think the popular theory is there are a lot of people posting as her. I read an article that's a little over 3 years old where someone mentioned 13,531 reviews and now she has 21,658 ... so, yeah.


----------



## LCEvans (Mar 29, 2009)

David,
I know you feel bad that the reader didn't like the book, but you have the right attitude--you know the reviewer didn't attack you personally and you're glad you weren't hit by a troll. The negative part of the review stings, yet on the plus side this reviewer really likes your writing and gave you a thoughtful, honest evaluation. Reviews like this are every bit as valuable as the ones filled with praise and lots of stars. This reader didn't like certain aspects of the plot, other readers will love it. Now go get that ice cream and work on your other book.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Thanks for the comments guys, but Jenn's right, we're pretty far off track, and this is something I probably should have posted on the Author Support Thread. I am glad to hear all the support, and I feel a heck of a lot better today.

So, thread derailment over!

Okay, maybe not entirely over. Who is this Harriet Klausner person, and why is there a controversy?

David Dalglish


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

MichelleR said:


> Ah, that makes sense. I don't think anyone knows for sure either, other than there are days that she posts dozens of reviews. I think the popular theory is there are a lot of people posting as her. I read an article that's a little over 3 years old where someone mentioned 13,531 reviews and now she has 21,658 ... so, yeah.


On another forum, it was discussed that she was a 'speed reader'. Many people discount her reviews because they are 90% book summaries that could mostly be gleaned from reading the description. The other contention is that she often gets her 'book facts' wrong...way wrong. People posted examples, but I can't find the thread right now.


----------



## scottnicholson (Jan 31, 2010)

Better to be "the best" than good, I always say...

Scott


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

scottnicholson said:


> Better to be "the best" than good, I always say...
> 
> Scott


She's the #1 Reviewer on Amazon, by their classic rules. She averages a ridiculous amount of posts a day -- thinking her record was 80 -- and she posts almost every day. Even her own figure of 2 books a day doesn't mesh with the results. She has only given 3 negative reviewers ever, and that was years ago, so she has 20,000+ 4 and 5 star reviews. Most people assume there are now several people working under her name and that pubs really love "her" a lot. The reviews are often things that can be cleaned from a blurb, and there are often factual inaccuracies and outright head scratches, as if she's reading notes for the wrong book. She has 24 pages of reviews for this month.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AFVQZQ8PW0L/ref=cm_psrch_profile


----------



## DonnaFaz (Dec 5, 2009)

Harriet K. reviewed my book, Where's Stanley?, (paperback).  She posted the same review on Amazon and on BN; however, she gave one 4 stars and the other 5. Didn't make sense to me.

There was a time when she had great clout in publishing. I saw her at more than one writers conference being wooed by publishers. 

~Donna~


----------



## ray-reid (Apr 22, 2010)

Been a while since I checked in on this thread but an interesting article on another website made me think of it:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28316/Analysis_Everyone_Else_Is_Doing_It.php

In this article (it is specifically about the videogames industry, but the basics are transferable) the writer makes a good point about how vocal minorities are able to lead larger groups even when their opinion is demonstrably wrong. In this specific case the writer cites an old psychology test which I hadn't thought about for a long time. Essentially, the test groups were given a piece of card with a line on it and asked to identify the identical line projected onto a screen. Initially the test groups are able to correctly identify the line until certain members of the group (under the employ of the psychologists in charge) start to identify obviously wrong answers. In this study, the larger group begin to doubt there own ability to identify the correct line and they, too, begin to fall in line with these obviously wrong views.

I suppose this idea fits quite nicely with the discussion in so much as it suggests many customers MAY be led by very vocal critics of your work. The question of how to combat this is far more problematic (I don't believe in 'stuffing' review ballots, so to speak) but it does underline how problematic vocal critics can be


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I agree with this concept to a point... the problem with converting it to book reviews is in the study they were swayed publicly by others.  In the privacy of your own home, you may not be swayed by reading what others thought.  You may not even read them.  But I do think that if a book has a lot of negative reviews it might sway a reader away from it.

Vicki


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

MichelleR said:


> I almost always, either explicitly or implicitly, state who and I am and why I picked the book. It's usually pretty much the first line or lines.
> --
> Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
> This review is from: *Lessons From a Scarlet Lady* (Kindle Edition)
> ...


Completely off topic and I'm just catching up on this thread but hey! I commented on that very part of this review just a couple of weeks ago, because I very much appreciated you pointing that out!


----------



## madelonw1011 (Apr 23, 2009)

When I take the time to write a review, it is because the book/story I just read was either very, very good or very, very bad. The review reflects my feelings about the writing, the story, and how I felt when I finished the work.

I know many writers personally (let me drop a few names here: Douglas Clegg, Elizabeth Massie, F. Paul Wilson, Clive Barker... just to name a couple or three), and some of them I  count among my friends. The idea of saying anything about them personally while writing a review is revolting at best, yet I have no problem, however, telling any of them what I do and do not like about their works.

The back-biting review is the reason I don't generally read reviews; I find them to seldom be helpful. I read authors who have a proved track record in my brain. I read anything with a cover that says "read me, read me!!" I read stuff that Amazon gives away free. That's how I discovered China Mieville and have written several 5 star raves about "Perdido Street Station."

A poorly written review is probably worse than a poorly written book. Readers who rely on reviews have to learn to read between the lines.


----------



## Louann Carroll (Feb 24, 2010)

Thanks for sharing. F. Paul Wilson and Clive Barker are two of my favorite authors. The Keep pops into my head with a total of 4 stars on Amazon. (Which I just checked.) When my reviews come in I won't feel in bad company... 

Louann
http://www.amazon.com/Gemini-Rising-Louann-Carroll/dp/0982306598/ref=pd_rhf_p_t_1


----------



## David McAfee (Apr 15, 2010)

DonnaFaz said:


> I recently received a review that claims my book is filled with typos, grammar errors, and 'wrong word choices'. Previous reviewers have refuted the review, *but who is going to take the time to click the comments on the bad review? * I've never argued with anyone on the discussion boards. I did support Jenn on a thread recently when she was the target of nasty accusations...but I don't think that had anything to do with it, really. Sierra thinks that maybe this reviewer got my book mixed up with another he/she had read. I really don't know...but the erroneous review STILL rankles.
> 
> I'd love to have an e-mail address to complain to Amazon.
> 
> ~Donna~


I ALWAYS check for comments on bad reviews. Every single time. Just sayin'.


----------

