I know! It's in one of the official GR groups, so I had to hold back the snark when replying, but it was tough. Can a person truly be so stupid that they think Amazon, AMAZON!!! was set up by authors for readers to post reviews on? And GoodReads? She thinks it was created by authors to get reader feedback or something? That we readers are just posting our opinions at the pleasure and by the good graces of authors who want to read our reviews. Or something. I guess.
Mind is boggled.
How dare we ungrateful readers, who have been allowed the privilege of spending our own money to buy their book, and then graciously provided a space in which to post our "feedback" for the author, then turn around and say our reviews are not author feedback, and inform them that some readers don't want authors reading their reviews and find it "creepy" (Because of course these boneheads cannot grasp how knowing an author is reading your review can be inherently at cross purposes to posting your *honest* opinion).
This is what I actually said, "I have never heard of any authors who have places where readers can post reviews. If you know of any I'd love for you to provide links so I can take a look. I'm quite fascinated, I've never heard of this before."
I bet some of those are the same authors insisting in review comments that if we do not justify our review they will see to it the review and our account is removed.
Who scream we need to prove it (presumably by providing free line edits) if review mentions grammatical or editing errors made it rough going.
Who cry that we are not qualified to read their book or that we read it wrong. Who threaten lawsuits ("slander" always cracks me up) because we are lying and they can prove it -- good luck proving someone's expressed opinion was not their opinion and getting past all those centuries of legal precedents with critics and consumer protections.
(One even said they would not ship someone a goodreads official giveaway won because the winner was the wrong age, wrong gender and wrong profession to be qualified to read their book and that the goodreads giveaway terms clearly promise to only select qualified reviewers...this back in the days goodreads giveaway terms were snarky stating depending on the phase of the moon and how they felt type of phrasing intended to mean "unpredictable, we do what we want at the time" )...
The sad thing is that this bullshit has been going on since the beginning, at least the beginning of author self-publishing and public reviews. At least 95% of these writers don't have a clue, either about writing or about dealing with reader response. They're never going to learn, and part of the fault has to lie with GR and AMZ for supporting the false dream of success and enabling these writers by protecting them from honest analysis of their writing AND THEIR BEHAVIOR in response to that analysis when it does get through the filters.
Up until about a year ago, I kind of kept an eye on a couple of the BBAs with whom I had had direct interaction on GR. I won't mention any names or books because, frankly, I don't want to give them any publicity. But even though they got detailed feedback on their books right down to those pesky line edits ;-) they adamantly refused to accept any of it. They continued to give their books away for free on Amazon and collect great reviews, and whenever someone left a 1- or 2-star review, the defenders jumped out.
They aren't going to learn. They have 100, 200, 500 reviews, mostly gushing, probably mostly coerced (though very gently), and they just can't understand the negative reviews OR why no one is actually buying their books.
So I quit paying any attention to them. I wasn't the only one who had given them detailed reviews, so I knew it wasn't just me. I knew these authors had been scolded, if that's the right word, before I read their books, and they got ripped to shreds by readers after me. It's just never going to get through to them.
Amazon doesn't care, and therefore by extension Goodreads doesn't care. People on Twitter still believe GR is "for readers" first and foremost, and that's whether they are readers or writers or both. How do you change their minds? How do you put up all the information, the lists of review swap groups, the reviewers who refuse to give anything less than 4 stars, the paid reviewers, the fiverr accounts? None of it will ever make any difference.
Most writers won't post a negative review for fear of retaliation, and yet SUCCESSFUL writers are the very people who really ought to be reviewing. Or maybe they should be critiquing the unpublished books. Or teaching the would-be writers. And yet there are legitimate reasons why they don't and indeed why they shouldn't. Ultimately, however, it comes back to the writers. It's their responsibility to learn how to write, how to build stories, how to format, and how to behave after they've put their books out there. All the information is out there. And most truly serious writers look for and find and use that information.
The others? They live in a dream world. They refuse to learn. I can't help them. No one can. And I stopped feeling sorry for them a long time ago.
You guys aren't wrong. I continue to speak out, as a voice for the consumer and to help those few authors who don't have their head up their ass and who actually can and do learn. Letting the idiots speak without challenge just allows the impression for everyone that either they are right or agreed with or no one really cares. That's not the case. It's important for consumers to not be silent.
It's important for consumers not to be silent, true, but speaking up is not likely to do much . . . to the writers. It may help the other consumers, and that's not a bad thing.
But as long as AMZ and GR protect the writers, the problems will continue.
I disagree that speaking up isn't likely to do much. Consumers actually have a lot of power when it comes to consumer products.
There is one author though that I can think of who is doing quite well, and her books are very popular, I see them going through my feed regularly. I don't know if she's wised up, but she had a very crappy attitude about readers. But, people turned a blind eye because they really like her books. So yeah, if an author's books are good enough, people are less likely to care what they think about readers.
But I agree that as long as AMZ and GR are not more proactive about consumer rights, and as long as some indie authors isolate themselves in their little echo chambers, the problem will continue.
We can't stop what they do. We can limit it's effectiveness.
A popular author can get away with much more than a nothing author, obviously. A popular author has more motivation to straighten up. They actually have something at risk.
The no-name author has nothing to lose except their dream. And in that echo chamber -- perfect description -- their all-important dream stays alive without any effort on their part. They just can't lose that.
Sometimes a little less time spent with their supporters and sympathetic fellow writers is a good idea. Get an editor. Step away from the ego stroking of we-all-must-support-each-other and I-feel-your-pain. Get an editor, Take time away from what one media site calls "writering" (doing everything -- but actually writing and editing -- online and in real life about books and with other writers and reading other writer's advice) and try to perfect the writing, to step back a bit and analyze things even get beta reader and stranger opinions to help tunnel out from you and your fellow hopeful writer opinions, join actual critique groups, take workshops and retreats. Get an editor.
Everyone can use a good support system and people to vent to. But those are, even if critical, not going to be unbiased opinions. If someone doesn't praise your book the way your BFF or mom does, that doesn't make them an evil bully or even violating the review or retail site policies.
But if they did that, they might find out that their negative reviewers are right. And that would cost them the dream, which they can't bear.
That's why a few of them will learn, but most won't. And this is nothing new in and of itself. It was true 35 years ago when I joined RWA, too. The more things change. . . . . . ;-)
Mind is boggled.
How dare we ungrateful readers, who have been allowed the privilege of spending our own money to buy their book, and then graciously provided a space in which to post our "feedback" for the author, then turn around and say our reviews are not author feedback, and inform them that some readers don't want authors reading their reviews and find it "creepy" (Because of course these boneheads cannot grasp how knowing an author is reading your review can be inherently at cross purposes to posting your *honest* opinion).
This is what I actually said, "I have never heard of any authors who have places where readers can post reviews. If you know of any I'd love for you to provide links so I can take a look. I'm quite fascinated, I've never heard of this before."
Who scream we need to prove it (presumably by providing free line edits) if review mentions grammatical or editing errors made it rough going.
Who cry that we are not qualified to read their book or that we read it wrong. Who threaten lawsuits ("slander" always cracks me up) because we are lying and they can prove it -- good luck proving someone's expressed opinion was not their opinion and getting past all those centuries of legal precedents with critics and consumer protections.
(One even said they would not ship someone a goodreads official giveaway won because the winner was the wrong age, wrong gender and wrong profession to be qualified to read their book and that the goodreads giveaway terms clearly promise to only select qualified reviewers...this back in the days goodreads giveaway terms were snarky stating depending on the phase of the moon and how they felt type of phrasing intended to mean "unpredictable, we do what we want at the time" )...
Up until about a year ago, I kind of kept an eye on a couple of the BBAs with whom I had had direct interaction on GR. I won't mention any names or books because, frankly, I don't want to give them any publicity. But even though they got detailed feedback on their books right down to those pesky line edits ;-) they adamantly refused to accept any of it. They continued to give their books away for free on Amazon and collect great reviews, and whenever someone left a 1- or 2-star review, the defenders jumped out.
They aren't going to learn. They have 100, 200, 500 reviews, mostly gushing, probably mostly coerced (though very gently), and they just can't understand the negative reviews OR why no one is actually buying their books.
So I quit paying any attention to them. I wasn't the only one who had given them detailed reviews, so I knew it wasn't just me. I knew these authors had been scolded, if that's the right word, before I read their books, and they got ripped to shreds by readers after me. It's just never going to get through to them.
Amazon doesn't care, and therefore by extension Goodreads doesn't care. People on Twitter still believe GR is "for readers" first and foremost, and that's whether they are readers or writers or both. How do you change their minds? How do you put up all the information, the lists of review swap groups, the reviewers who refuse to give anything less than 4 stars, the paid reviewers, the fiverr accounts? None of it will ever make any difference.
Most writers won't post a negative review for fear of retaliation, and yet SUCCESSFUL writers are the very people who really ought to be reviewing. Or maybe they should be critiquing the unpublished books. Or teaching the would-be writers. And yet there are legitimate reasons why they don't and indeed why they shouldn't. Ultimately, however, it comes back to the writers. It's their responsibility to learn how to write, how to build stories, how to format, and how to behave after they've put their books out there. All the information is out there. And most truly serious writers look for and find and use that information.
The others? They live in a dream world. They refuse to learn. I can't help them. No one can. And I stopped feeling sorry for them a long time ago.
(edited for really bad typo)
It's important for consumers not to be silent, true, but speaking up is not likely to do much . . . to the writers. It may help the other consumers, and that's not a bad thing.
But as long as AMZ and GR protect the writers, the problems will continue.
There is one author though that I can think of who is doing quite well, and her books are very popular, I see them going through my feed regularly. I don't know if she's wised up, but she had a very crappy attitude about readers. But, people turned a blind eye because they really like her books. So yeah, if an author's books are good enough, people are less likely to care what they think about readers.
But I agree that as long as AMZ and GR are not more proactive about consumer rights, and as long as some indie authors isolate themselves in their little echo chambers, the problem will continue.
We can't stop what they do. We can limit it's effectiveness.
A popular author can get away with much more than a nothing author, obviously. A popular author has more motivation to straighten up. They actually have something at risk.
The no-name author has nothing to lose except their dream. And in that echo chamber -- perfect description -- their all-important dream stays alive without any effort on their part. They just can't lose that.
Everyone can use a good support system and people to vent to. But those are, even if critical, not going to be unbiased opinions. If someone doesn't praise your book the way your BFF or mom does, that doesn't make them an evil bully or even violating the review or retail site policies.
But if they did that, they might find out that their negative reviewers are right. And that would cost them the dream, which they can't bear.
That's why a few of them will learn, but most won't. And this is nothing new in and of itself. It was true 35 years ago when I joined RWA, too. The more things change. . . . . . ;-)