Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
Shrug.
Nobody forces you to believe anything.
But the study includes the raw data and it will be analyzed to death in the days to come.
Those open to numerical analysis will consider the data; those that aren't will keep on denying. Doesn't matter.
In the end, we as readers aren't the target audience.
It is midlist authors and newcomers.
It will only affect us over time as authors start going indie more often or use the data to get the publishers to actually negotiate living wage royalties so they can keep on writing.
|
It was also pointed out in the article that it's possible people are more lenient in their reviews if they paid less. I'm inclined to believe it because I know I do it. Not really on purpose, but I noticed my own behavior a while back. If I pay 8 dollars for a book and it stinks...I'm MAD about the wasted time AND money. My review tends to reflect that anger. If it cost 99 cents, I might not even be mad enough to review it at all. I used to review everything I read. Nowadays I can't be bothered to review them all. It depends on time available, mood and whether or not I have anything interesting to say (this does not include review copies. I tend to review ARCS because I agreed to review them. Sometimes I am annoyed at having to review an ARC, especially if the book was a stinker. This annoyance may also show up in the review.)
My behavior changes a bit if there is a hot button issue in a book. Certain sloppiness in plotting or certain plots annoy the bajeebers out of me. I'm going to be quicker to take stars away. Example: If you have a great UF that suddenly turns into a "I am wildly attracted to anything and everything that moves" at any point during the book, the stars are going to fall so fast there won't be any left...
Of course, I am but one reviewer. Not everyone reviews like I do, but it's quite possible that the data supports a price-affects-the-review.
That said, I think there are a number of liberties taken in analyzing the data...