Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan
Considering the end result is seller-solicited promotion specifically designed to encourage sales, I fail to see the effective difference, or why one is acceptable over the other. If, as you say, you don't write negative endorsements, that makes your positive endorsements automatically biased, which sounds at least as bad (to me) as soliciting reviews of any nature, good or bad.
This, to me, just sounds like someone who'd figured out how to game the new system in much the same way that big publishers and established authors have gamed the old system for decades.
How does not giving a negative endorsement make me biased? You are not making sense. Aside from the issue that an endorsement cannot be negative, (endorse means to show approval) to simply relate that you like or approve of something - if you genuinely do - can hardly be considered bias.
If he truly got both good and bad reviews it would be less dishonest, but as the system was biased toward positive reviews that issue doesn't come into it regardless of his claims.
As for publishers and authors gaming the print media system, why do so many well established authors, including people like King and Patterson get reviews that point out that their work is degenerating - not as good as their earlier work?