I'll have to go back through some of my old notes, but I have a feeling this was a scam we uncovered on GR several years ago. Let me look through "The Archives" and see what's there.
Okay, I crawled through the dust and cobwebs of The Archives and found what I was looking for.
I don't have everything -- there may be more on the other computer -- but the outfit was called "Awesome Indies" or some such, and had a similar seal. Can you see on the Reader's Favorite site if there are any members/reviewers/authors listed? I might be able to find more information by individual name than what I have in the "Awesome Indies" file.
The "awesome indies" outfit still has a website. http://awesomeindies.net/about/
I'm going to check the site you listed and cross check some names. BRB.
RF looks like a different type of scam, but a type that we covered at GR, too. They charge a fee, then give everyone who enters an award.
"Awesome Indies" was different. They were posting reviews as though the reviewers were independent, but in fact they were all friends on the same site. Tony McFadden, Tahlia Newland, etc. I don't think they ever became very popular/successful.
Many, many, many sites offer award badges to use just for membership. Makes them rsther useless (plus if not something like "Newberry Award" readers are familiar with, not sure anyone cares -- admittedly badges on tiny thumbnails aren't easy to make out).
RF after being caught up in so many scams now actually states that their reviews can only be quoted on amazon.com in the editorial descriptions.
RF, to me, is one of the truly awful ones because catch up so many authors, particularly newbies. Because their spiel to authors is to just join for free and take advantage of their free services that get their book to reviewers with promised reviews. And they can show reviews and certainly do produce reviews for authors who fall for it.
Which sounds great, perfectly innocent, all the author is doing is giving out review copies and ARCs. That's how they get sucked in.
What RF doesn't make clear is that it's not just Amazon having a problem with their reviews -- it's the FTC itself plus most U.S. consumer review sites including goodreads. Their issues: (1) RF pays reviewers (out of a pool of the fees from paid services they offer -- again many authors are innocently caught up not even thinking they are paying for reviews) which is often against site policy (both goodreads and Amazon prohibit commercial reviews) and always illegal in U.S. consumer reviews if not disclosed (2) they require a ★★★★☆ or ★★★★★ rating from reviewers else reviewer agrees to not make the review public (RF TOS allows reviewers to privately send the review to be seen by author) -- again against most site policies but also a condition of review that FTC requires be disclosed (3) getting the book free, even free for review, is also something FTC requires disclosing (RF does not prohibit so some reviewers do and send do not) which is against some site policies even if disclosed (Amazon and goodreads both allow reviewers to get book free for review but that has to be disclosed).
Bottom line: goodreads doesn't allow reviews from Reader's favorites; retail sites like Amazon and Barnes and Noble do not allow them in with customer / consumer / reader reviews (can be quoted in editorial descriptions) -- other retail and book sites in U.S. who do allow are legally required to have the RF reviews days lose the free book, that fees were paid for the review and that the review required a minimum 4-star rating.
Advice to authors looking at these sites -- make sure they can show examples of reviews on sites your efforts might need like amazon and goodreads and check the guidelines and policies not just for authors joining but for reviewers and other participants. Not too many potential readers are perusing obscure sites to read reviews that are required to be 5-star ratings.
When found or flagged, goodreads and Amazon pull RF reviews (I have no way if knowing if they also file FTC complaint). Unfair to many authors sucked in who were not intentionally seeking paid reviews or requiring at least 4-stars. Other authors are guilty of not caring so long as the reviews stay long enough to qualify them for some marketing promotion or drown out some negative reviews ...
I agree that for rewards that aren't well known and have a good reputation, such as Newbery, Nebula, Hugo, etc., I don't know that awards mean much to most readers. Although no doubt it probably sucks in some, just like the bogus "best seller!" claim can do.
RF sounds *almost* ok, if you don't really know what to look for, and don't look at both the author and reader's side info. IF they just provided editorial reviews they'd be ok - well, as far as TOS goes. IF they only charged a fee to provide review copies to readers, like Netgalley, then that could be ok. The problem is they do both AND have things like author reviews swaps and author "feedback" on reviews, and oversight to check reviewer average ratings, plus the promise reviews under 4 stars won't be posted publicly, etc.
As an author, I've been so aware of scams in general that all these outfits just bounce off me, so if no one brings them up, I just assume they're all scams and ignore them. I remembered the "Awesome Indies" thing from the GR days because the one author, Tony McFadden, ran afoul of our corps of merry vigilantes. ;-) He claimed to have "earned" their badge, until a bunch of us pointed out that his own wife was writing his Amazon reviews and he was on the "board" of AI.
As a reader, I pay no attention to awards of any kind, with few exceptions. Newbery and Caldecott seem fairly free of corruption, but anything coming out of RWA is garbage and even Hugos and Nebulas recently have been tainted. Same with "best-seller" status.
That was what I thought always made our BBA hunter group valuable -- we saved readers AND writers from the scam artists. Yay, us!
"As a reader, I pay no attention to awards of any kind, with few exceptions. Newbery and Caldecott seem fairly free of corruption, but anything coming out of RWA is garbage and even Hugos and Nebulas recently have been tainted. Same with "best-seller" status."
For me, as a reader, I also pay no attention to rewards, with a few exceptions - although even those I take with a big grain of salt. As a kid I learned very early to steer clear of anything that won the Newbery award, but that was because I was a Fantasy/Sci Fi reader and Newbery was always ignoring those genres, meaning the books that won that award were always the type I didn't like LOL. That's changed a bit over the years though. I'd agree though that Newbery and Caldecott seem pretty respectable. I've also found I've liked some that have won the Prinz award.
And yes, same for Best Seller, for a variety of reasons.
I don't have everything -- there may be more on the other computer -- but the outfit was called "Awesome Indies" or some such, and had a similar seal. Can you see on the Reader's Favorite site if there are any members/reviewers/authors listed? I might be able to find more information by individual name than what I have in the "Awesome Indies" file.
When you click on a book link you can see reviews, with the reviewer's name credited.
http://awesomeindies.net/about/
I'm going to check the site you listed and cross check some names. BRB.
RF looks like a different type of scam, but a type that we covered at GR, too. They charge a fee, then give everyone who enters an award.
"Awesome Indies" was different. They were posting reviews as though the reviewers were independent, but in fact they were all friends on the same site. Tony McFadden, Tahlia Newland, etc. I don't think they ever became very popular/successful.
https://readersfavorite.com/annual-book-award-contest.htm
They do say they had over 750 winners and finalists last year, that's...a lot and may indicate everyone who entered won something:
https://readersfavorite.com/2017-award-contest-winners.htm
RF after being caught up in so many scams now actually states that their reviews can only be quoted on amazon.com in the editorial descriptions.
RF, to me, is one of the truly awful ones because catch up so many authors, particularly newbies. Because their spiel to authors is to just join for free and take advantage of their free services that get their book to reviewers with promised reviews. And they can show reviews and certainly do produce reviews for authors who fall for it.
Which sounds great, perfectly innocent, all the author is doing is giving out review copies and ARCs. That's how they get sucked in.
What RF doesn't make clear is that it's not just Amazon having a problem with their reviews -- it's the FTC itself plus most U.S. consumer review sites including goodreads. Their issues: (1) RF pays reviewers (out of a pool of the fees from paid services they offer -- again many authors are innocently caught up not even thinking they are paying for reviews) which is often against site policy (both goodreads and Amazon prohibit commercial reviews) and always illegal in U.S. consumer reviews if not disclosed (2) they require a ★★★★☆ or ★★★★★ rating from reviewers else reviewer agrees to not make the review public (RF TOS allows reviewers to privately send the review to be seen by author) -- again against most site policies but also a condition of review that FTC requires be disclosed (3) getting the book free, even free for review, is also something FTC requires disclosing (RF does not prohibit so some reviewers do and send do not) which is against some site policies even if disclosed (Amazon and goodreads both allow reviewers to get book free for review but that has to be disclosed).
Bottom line: goodreads doesn't allow reviews from Reader's favorites; retail sites like Amazon and Barnes and Noble do not allow them in with customer / consumer / reader reviews (can be quoted in editorial descriptions) -- other retail and book sites in U.S. who do allow are legally required to have the RF reviews days lose the free book, that fees were paid for the review and that the review required a minimum 4-star rating.
Advice to authors looking at these sites -- make sure they can show examples of reviews on sites your efforts might need like amazon and goodreads and check the guidelines and policies not just for authors joining but for reviewers and other participants. Not too many potential readers are perusing obscure sites to read reviews that are required to be 5-star ratings.
When found or flagged, goodreads and Amazon pull RF reviews (I have no way if knowing if they also file FTC complaint). Unfair to many authors sucked in who were not intentionally seeking paid reviews or requiring at least 4-stars. Other authors are guilty of not caring so long as the reviews stay long enough to qualify them for some marketing promotion or drown out some negative reviews ...
I agree that for rewards that aren't well known and have a good reputation, such as Newbery, Nebula, Hugo, etc., I don't know that awards mean much to most readers. Although no doubt it probably sucks in some, just like the bogus "best seller!" claim can do.
RF sounds *almost* ok, if you don't really know what to look for, and don't look at both the author and reader's side info. IF they just provided editorial reviews they'd be ok - well, as far as TOS goes. IF they only charged a fee to provide review copies to readers, like Netgalley, then that could be ok. The problem is they do both AND have things like author reviews swaps and author "feedback" on reviews, and oversight to check reviewer average ratings, plus the promise reviews under 4 stars won't be posted publicly, etc.
As an author, I've been so aware of scams in general that all these outfits just bounce off me, so if no one brings them up, I just assume they're all scams and ignore them. I remembered the "Awesome Indies" thing from the GR days because the one author, Tony McFadden, ran afoul of our corps of merry vigilantes. ;-) He claimed to have "earned" their badge, until a bunch of us pointed out that his own wife was writing his Amazon reviews and he was on the "board" of AI.
As a reader, I pay no attention to awards of any kind, with few exceptions. Newbery and Caldecott seem fairly free of corruption, but anything coming out of RWA is garbage and even Hugos and Nebulas recently have been tainted. Same with "best-seller" status.
That was what I thought always made our BBA hunter group valuable -- we saved readers AND writers from the scam artists. Yay, us!
For me, as a reader, I also pay no attention to rewards, with a few exceptions - although even those I take with a big grain of salt. As a kid I learned very early to steer clear of anything that won the Newbery award, but that was because I was a Fantasy/Sci Fi reader and Newbery was always ignoring those genres, meaning the books that won that award were always the type I didn't like LOL. That's changed a bit over the years though. I'd agree though that Newbery and Caldecott seem pretty respectable. I've also found I've liked some that have won the Prinz award.
And yes, same for Best Seller, for a variety of reasons.