Review-Bombing and Goodreads

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

You've said this before, but I think a DNF book with a review that explains why it was a stinker is both valid and useful. Moreover, there's no reading oversight police to make sure a book marked read actually was read. Unless you're advocating a KU-type experience where read pages would have to be logged in order to post a review? Rather Big Brotherish, wouldn't you say?

Then GR should allow DNF. And i would be read or DNF to be able to rate/review. On Storygraph, you cannot rate/review if you've not read or DNF the book.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That's exactly what I (and many others do on Goodreads). Cultivating "friends" and gaining appreciation for their tastes is exactly what makes their opinions valuable to me. Did you think you think everyone just blindly accepts the opinions of strangers with no contextual history whatsoever on Goodreads?

Exactly. And it becomes the more valuable in terms of discovery to the extent that your tastes aren't mainstream of the best seller or genre type.

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by issybird

Exactly. And it becomes the more valuable in terms of discovery to the extent that your tastes aren't mainstream of the best seller or genre type.

Goodness someone else who looks to others goodreads opinions. I appreciate you've also said you read opinions published in the media, and that makes more sense to me.

Meanwhile, it just seems that experienced readers (like yourself) can work it out for themselves.

It may sound like I'm criticising you and @diapdealer, I'm not, just surprised that people with your reading experience require the opinions of others regarding a book you may want to read.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

So you hang around with people on goodreads in order to get rhwir opinions on books you may or may not want to read

You seem to be overly hung up on the "social" part of social networking. I can learn people's tastes without "hanging out." Their reading/review histories tell me all about what they like and dislike. Those likes and dislikes have unions and intersections with my own that can be used when considering what I might want to read next. Meaning someone's likes that I'm familiar with might tell me to stay away from a particular book. And someone dislikes that I'm familiar with could cause me to snatch one up.

I'm often looking to get out of my own head when choosing a book to read. I've come to learn that I'm not always the ultimate expert on deciding what I might like. So I'm happy to use others (who are fairly consistent in their tastes) as springboards into "...and now for something completely different." I don't ever intend to limit my reading influences to my own predilections and/or inclinations.

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

It may sound like I'm criticising you and @diapdealer, I'm not, just surprised that people with your reading experience require the opinions of others regarding a book you may want to read.

"Require" is not really the right word. For me it would be "prefer the opinions of others..." And you may still have it a bit backwards. I'm very rarely looking for opinions regarding a book I'm already thinking about reading. I've already got plenty of books I may want to read. When looking at the reviews of others, I'm most often looking for books it probably never would have occurred to me to read (left to my own devices).

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Goodness someone else who looks to others goodreads opinions. I appreciate you've also said you read opinions published in the media, and that makes more sense to me.

Meanwhile, it just seems that experienced readers (like yourself) can work it out for themselves.

It may sound like I'm criticising you and @diapdealer, I'm not, just surprised that people with your reading experience require the opinions of others regarding a book you may want to read.

Rather patronizing, don't you think? Where did we say "require" as opposed to finding them useful? And you misunderstood or chose to ignore where I mentioned "discovery" and books outside the mainstream, even though you quoted it. Aside from seeing if people with similar tastes to mine have liked or disliked a book and why, I find out titles of interest from what they're reading that I had not heard of and might never hear of otherwise.

[John F]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Goodness someone else who looks to others goodreads opinions. I appreciate you've also said you read opinions published in the media, and that makes more sense to me.

Meanwhile, it just seems that experienced readers (like yourself) can work it out for themselves.

It may sound like I'm criticising you and @diapdealer, I'm not, just surprised that people with your reading experience require the opinions of others regarding a book you may want to read.

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

I don't need to read a review to work out if I want to read a book. For an author I haven't read before I use goodreads to establish their nationality, because that has relevance to me, I rarely read US authors for example.

I read the book's description, what other books the author may have written, and series info, all of which goodreads usually provides.

I don't log into goodreads, and don't converse with anyone on goodreads, or leave my own opinion on anything I've read.

Maybe that makes me more unusual, than usual

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, that seems weird. How do you know if the writing is any good? To me, it makes a lot more sense to rely on people you know with similar tastes.

But then we are all different.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by issybird

I'm in the "let the chips fall where they may" camp myself, but I can see where that would come across as facile to an author who feels that Goodreads has ruined their chances.

It goes beyond authors' hurt feelings when books are being cancelled before they are published.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

It goes beyond authors' hurt feelings when books are being cancelled before they are published.

Surely I implied an economic hit and not just "hurt feelings"?

As for books being canceled, each story is different but it comes down to business. If an author or a publisher thinks bad premature reviews on Goodreads are a bellwether of poor sales and presumably has the data to support it, so it goes. They're under no obligation to throw good money after bad, presumably; certainly they can't do anything they're not contractually allowed to do. It's easy but of little utility to file all the instances under a loaded word like "canceled."

[ZodWallop]

Often I read these stories and look up the reviews a few months after release and really, the whole story is a tempest in a teapot. For the most part, authors would do best to just ignore Goodreads and Twitter and believe in the work they thought was good enough to publish.

I still do think that is the best course to follow. But looking at Everything's Fine a month after release, it only has 114 reviews, which does feel low for a book one of the big 5 publishing houses was trying to push. I also note that it is 4 stars at Amazon and only 3.3 at Goodreads.

I wonder how much of that is Goodreads and how much is mismarketing by the publisher?

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by 305869

I can't think of a single good reason to allow reviews on a book before it's been published.

They are called Advance Readers Copies. There's a single good reason.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

They are called Advance Readers Copies. There's a single good reason.

But Goodreads isn't the place for those or any review other than regular bought/borrowed copy after release. I've abandoned Goodreads. It's not even accurate on fact.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

They are called Advance Readers Copies. There's a single good reason.

But the problem is that a review for an ARC copy can be incorrect if it's placed in the listing for the review version as the book can be changed between being an ARC and being released.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Quoth

But Goodreads isn't the place for those or any review other than regular bought/borrowed copy after release.

When were you elected the mayor of Goodreads?

Goodreads does giveaways of ARCs, so clearly it IS (a) place for those reviews.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But the problem is that a review for an ARC copy can be incorrect if it's placed in the listing for the review version as the book can be changed between being an ARC and being released.

1. You are blowing it up into a way bigger issue than it is
2. These books are given out by publishers to generate buzz on forthcoming books. So take it up with the publishing industry in general, rather than any particular website.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

1. You are blowing it up into a way bigger issue than it is
2. These books are given out by publishers to generate buzz on forthcoming books. So take it up with the publishing industry in general, rather than any particular website.

IMHO, for an ARC review, the listing should be for the ARC copy.