Book reviews

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

I'm with you on this: I don't solicit reviews.

You want to write a review - Great! You don't want to write a review - Great!

I'm not going to waste my time sharing reviews. I'm going to read books - good books, bad books. Books that make me cry. Books that make me laugh. Great books and trashy books. And books that make me throw up.

Thank you for your reply,
My service is targeting authors who suffer from getting reviews for their books.

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by graycyn

The soliciting of reviews also has the potential for a "Be careful what you wish for" situation.

I read a lot. I write reviews seldom.

But, one instance, long ago, where I remember actually bothering to write a review, it was a rather scathing one. I hadn't even spent money on the book, it was a freebie.

I'd been sucked into the book because it was listed as a mystery, only to discover that the supposed "mystery" had an exceedingly lame plot that was just an excuse for porn. Graphic porn. I felt the need to warn others.

I know there are those out there that like that sort of book and that's fine by me, but the book should have been listed in the proper category.

Sorry, it looks like I didn't explain my idea clearly.
The service I built is for authors, and if you're not an author, it less likely, you'd be interested in it.
The service help authors to get reviews for their quality books.

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by gmw

I find this sort of thing (people with bad experiences being more inclined to leave negative reviews to help protect others from making the same mistake) across many products, not just books. Does anyone know if this phenomenon has a name?

In fact it is so much the case that I am sometimes sceptical of negative reviews because the bad side of the bell curve is not necessarily representative of the product: most product lines produce some failures, and most books have some people that despise them for one reason or another.

Of course, if many reviews are negative then that suggests the product line is producing a high proportion of failures, or the book is upsetting many readers. But a few negative reviews are to be expected, which feeds into...

All positive reviews can be a problem because many people, including me, don't trust them. It looks like all the friends and family have been in leaving reviews, or the publisher has perhaps paid for reviews. In Goodreads I regularly filter to score 3 because I find these fence sitters often offer the most balance in their reviews (I ignore those that don't leave a reasonably detailed review), but I'm probably not going to buy a book that is all 3s, either.

I look at my own fairly whimsical way of choosing books to read and I despair of ever finding a good way present books for sale.

Across the online reviews research done by Spiegel Research Center they found that, the purchase likelihood typically peaks at rating in the 4.0 - 4.7 range.
Then it begins to decrease as rating approaches 5.0.
The products with an average star rating in the 4.7 - 5.0 range are less likely to be purchased than those that are in the 4.2 - 4.7 range.

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by Deskisamess

One of my Amazon pet peeves is when a books has a lot of 5-star reviews, all left on a one or two day spread. Especially when those reviewers have not left any other reviews.

I would not trust reviews on such as site as you mention. I don't really trust any 5 star reviews, especially for the lite fiction I find myself reading. While a decent way to spend a couple of hours, I've rarely read that genre of book that deserves 5 stars.

If an author wants to right a forward, or recommendation for a book, that's one thing. But a site for authors to trade reviews? Nope. It happens enough under-cover.


Authors trading reviews in such a way leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Adding...to the OP...your last post here was to advertise your Instagram account to promote books, but that account has no posts, and that was 2 years ago.

Hello,
Thank you for your reply.
Nobody asks for only 5 stars review. You can give 4 or even 3 stars. Before publishing on our website, all books moderate first.
Or if you don't like a book, just skip it and review another one.

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by issybird

I find two-star book reviews the most useful. If I’m looking, it’s because I’m already interested and expect to like it, so confirmation adds nothing. With a two-star review, I’m looking for comments that identify the type of issue I also dislike.

It’s generally pretty obvious when reviews are solicited; too many four- and five-star reviews and reviewers that have reviewed little else. Hard pass. Another thing I see frequently on Goodreads while not entirely a deal-breaker, but pretty close: the author gives his/her own book a five-star rating which is meaningless in itself but skews the total upward when it’s a case of only a few. Makes me want to offset it with a lousy rating.

Hello,
Please, share your experience of getting reviews for authors who don't have followers or a solid budget and marketing skills?

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by Deskisamess

Let's not forget the "reviews" on Amazon that have nothing to do with the writing/topic etc. The ones saying, "I didn't order this" or the ones about a physical book's condition.

This is not about us, the notable authors.
We don't give reviews just like that.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Gmes

Hello, thank you for your answer.
I am not going to do anything against Amazon's policies. My goal is to make a society of noble authors who help each other. This is not a conveyor belt for books of any quality to get reviews, no. Everyone who buys/downloads a book might read it or flip through the pages; it is on everyone's conscience.
Amazon can't track it. The website is also anonymous for authors to use.

So...you're saying that all the authors put their books up there, for people to read--the authors anonymously, which is actually impossible, if you think about it--and they simply rely on the goodwill of other people, other readers, to come along and review their books?

You're talking about NetGalley II. You put up free eBooks for people to read (how do you regulate how many people download them????), and the readers may, or may not, post reviews at Amazon.

So, who benefits, here? Why would authors put their books up there, for free? What's their guarantee that they'll get reviews? Why use your site and NOT NetGalley or GoodReads or one of the others that already exist? Why would readers come there, instead of NetGalley, Goodreads or get the THOUSANDS of free books on Amazon each day?

You haven't thought this through. I can tell, because I have, and I did. The ONLY way it works is if authors are guaranteed that they'll get reviews--good, bad or indifferent--and the readers are themselves authors, putting their own books up for review. And the moment you do that, you've violated Amazon's policies. The only other way is to pay reviewers, citizens, to review and yup, that violates Amazon's policies.

Otherwise, authors have no reason to put their books up on your site for free and readers have no reason to review them. You've created no BENEFIT for either side. You either have reciprocity--forbidden by Amazon--or money--forbidden by Amazon. There's no other route.

You realize that you're asking authors to put their books up, for free, unregulated, for any Tom, Dick or Harry who comes along to read and then being dependent on The Kindness of Strangers to get reviews.

At least when they do that on Amazon, they get paid or get page reads. Surely you can't POSSIBLY argue that they'll get more foot traffic with your site than Amazon's? So, why should they put their books up on YOUR site?

You can't answer that. I already know that.

Hitch

[Gmes]

Originally Posted by graycyn

I don't know if it has a name, but I definitely think it is true, at least to an extent.

However, I do write reviews for other products on occasion, and some have been very positive. So it varies. It does seem that I am only likely to write a book review if I had a very negative experience, however.

I guess my feeling there is that tastes for writing vary so much that I don't feel that comfortable with it. I don't want to trash what may be perfectly appealing to someone else, unless, as I mentioned, I feel people need warning.




Yes, I read negative product reviews with a grain of salt. So many are left that don't even apply to the product, but are reviews of a seller or shipping or packaging or whatever. But if enough reviews are left, I do pay more attention.






Yeah, I've been there, where I see so many positives for a book that I just feel suspicious. Sometimes I'll try one, if it's not terribly expensive. If it is, I'll look to see if the library has it. Or see if the library has something else by the same author to try. And if it doesn't appeal after a chapter or two, no harm done, I just won't finish it.

Thank you for your reply,
If you are the author who is not against getting reviews for your book.
You might try it and keep your principles to write reviews for others. The website I built is not the factory for getting reviews; this is the authors' support.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Gmes

I understand that. Please share your experience of how do you usually get reviews for your books?
[...]

I don't. Well, I did try to sell some books after which I hoped I might get some reviews.

Back when I published the first one I did contact a few blogs that reviewed books in the genre - and were open to such requests - but I received my no response. (Might be they didn't like the sound it, or me, or might simply be they already had a flood.) These were blogs that had an appropriate audience rather than one size fits all. And yes, this is indeed the free-copy-for-a-review thing that I said I was not a fan of, but more targeted and not aimed at fudging Amazon and so on.

That was about the extent of my marketing efforts ... and look where I am now!

[kantecty]

I'd been sucked into the book because it was listed as a mystery
I like this book

[Pierre Lawrence]

What about Kirkus? Because its reviews are paid for, you might think they're not objective, but I don't get that impression from visiting the Kirkus website. If the review is negative, it will never see the light of day, if you so choose (even so, it could provide feedback helpful in improving your writing). If favorable, the review could be a valuable marketing tool. At $425 a pop, its cost seems high, but could be worth it in view of Kirkus' high name recognition.

[Pierre Lawrence]

More on Kirkus. I revisited the website to read sample reviews, specifically of a book or two I had read to see if Kirkus' opinion of the book's merit coincided with mine. Alas, you can't search by title, but only by genre. In the fiction category I read a review of Stephen King's If it Bleeds (I'm a fan, not necessarily of the horror genre, but of him as a writer) and a title that caught my eye, The Tatooist of Auschwitz by Heather Morris.

In each case, I estimate the review was about 300 words long, and consisted basically of a synopsis written in a breezy, eminently readable style, more like a lengthy blurb than an in-depth critique. Thus its value as criticism that could improve your writing appears to be limited (the review of the The Tatooist did however find that "The writing is merely serviceable, and one can't help but wish the author had found a way to present her material as nonfiction"), but I do think a Kirkus review could give you a good indication as to the likelihood of your book becoming a commercial success.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Pierre Lawrence

More on Kirkus. I revisited the website to read sample reviews, specifically of a book or two I had read to see if Kirkus' opinion of the book's merit coincided with mine. Alas, you can't search by title, but only by genre. In the fiction category I read a review of Stephen King's If it Bleeds (I'm a fan, not necessarily of the horror genre, but of him as a writer) and a title that caught my eye, The Tatooist of Auschwitz by Heather Morris.

In each case, I estimate the review was about 300 words long, and consisted basically of a synopsis written in a breezy, eminently readable style, more like a lengthy blurb than an in-depth critique. Thus its value as criticism that could improve your writing appears to be limited (the review of the The Tatooist did however find that "The writing is merely serviceable, and one can't help but wish the author had found a way to present her material as nonfiction"), but I do think a Kirkus review could give you a good indication as to the likelihood of your book becoming a commercial success.

You can do an awful lot of the heavy lifting on that last comment through the simple and time-honored expedient of working inside a writer's group or community or using a critique group. Some of the ones around the net, like Critters, are quite valuable, mostly because they require you to GIVE crits to GET crits.

99% of writers just starting out (or on book 3, btw) don't realize that you learn more by reading for, and giving, crits than getting them. That's the biggest value.

If the only person who's read one's book prior to publication is related by blood or marriage to you--that's the wrong person to read it and abso-freaking-lutely the wrong person to critique it.

Or, hell, there are paid critiquing and reading services, VERY good ones, that for about the same amount of money will give you a far more in-depth analysis of what's wrong--and what's right--with your book.

Hitch

[Pierre Lawrence]

I think the distinction between the type of review provided by Critter and the like and Kirkus is the review's focus - Critter's being the writer, and Kirkus' the reader. The Kirkus review accordingly is more interested in telling the reader what the story is about, and only broadly characterizing the quality of the writing, while a Critter crit offers detailed suggestions for improving the writing as such. The value of the Kirkus review seems to me to be its use as a marketing tool. With its name recognition (the company has been around for 80+ years, according to its website), and its association with best-selling authors (e. g., Stephen King), a favorable Kirkus review of your book gives the reader the impression that its author is running with the big dogs.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Pierre Lawrence

I think the distinction between the type of review provided by Critter and the like and Kirkus is the review's focus - Critter's being the writer, and Kirkus' the reader. The Kirkus review accordingly is more interested in telling the reader what the story is about, and only broadly characterizing the quality of the writing, while a Critter crit offers detailed suggestions for improving the writing as such. The value of the Kirkus review seems to me to be its use as a marketing tool. With its name recognition (the company has been around for 80+ years, according to its website), and its association with best-selling authors (e. g., Stephen King), a favorable Kirkus review of your book gives the reader the impression that its author is running with the big dogs.

Sure, IF the prospective buyer actually looks at the editorial reviews section, which, let's face it, most don't. they buy into the Clickbait, go to the sales page and then after viewing the description and the LITB, promptly jump down, with a click, to the reviews--which blows right past the Editorial Review section.

I think that the reason that Kirkus remains in biz is because a lot of new-to-it authors think it's prestigious. But now that Kirkus provides paid reviews and pretty much none of them, ever, seem to be scathing...well.

Suffice to say I had a colleague, not in the book biz, who wrote an absolutely dreadful, trite book. All tell, no show and things that make you cringe. (A traumatized woman that hasn't spoken in 6 months gets put upon a horse and of course, as the horse moves, the woman--gasp!!--comes to life again! She's SAVED!). I mean, stuff that's boggling, and his Kirkus "review" was positively appalling. Didn't say that it was only fit for toilet paper, which is what it should have said. I love my friend, don't get me wrong, but the book was about the effort level of a 6th-grader. The Kirkus review didn't have ONE negative thing to say.

My entire prior comment was in response to the sentence in your post that said:

"...a Kirkus review could give you a good indication as to the likelihood of your book becoming a commercial success."

...which I took to mean that you thought it actually was indicative of quality. I now realize you simply mean it's a paid-for advert that might sway prospective readers to attempt the book, as it was formerly perceived as an actual indicator of quality. [shrug]

Hitch