Authors & Reviewers: What Do You Think of Reviewers Who Don't Post Negative Reviews?

[Stacy-Deanne (Novelist)]

Hi All,

Due to the behavior of certain authors lately, some reviewers only post positive book reviews. Do you agree with this? Do you think it's fair?

I must be honest, I read a lot of review blogs and I have a lot of respect for reviewers who have the guts to post honest reviews, no matter how negative they are. As long as they are respectful, I don't have a problem with that. I think reviewers should post negative and positive reviews of the books they receive. It's fine if they want to give the author an option whether they want the review posted if it's negative. I just don't think reviewers should flat out say, "I don't post negative reviews." Some reviewers say that if they don't like a book, they won't post a review. But since when does being a reviewer require you to like something? I thought reviewers were supposed to review books they've agreed to review whether they liked the book or not?

I hope this isn't the new way of reviewing. When I go to a reviewer's site and see a mixture of positives and negatives, I trust that reviewer a little more than a reviewer who only posts reviews of books they enjoyed. To me that's not really reviewing if you don't display a variety in the type of reviews you offer. I'd skip a review site in a minute if all I'm going to get are five-starred, "glowing eyed" reviews of books. How can readers take that seriously if the reviewer doesn't appear to not like anything? That's why I like sites like Dear Author. They are honest with their reviews and give you a sample of very good book reviews and very negative ones. That's how it should be if you're gonna review books fairly.

I remember one reviewer who said, "I post all reviews. If the authors don't like what I post, they shouldn't have sent me the book." Now that's a reviewer with some balls, LOL.

Just my opinion. What's yours?

Best Wishes!

http://www.stacy-deanne.net

[Pam Reynolds-Klocke]

Only posting positive reviews is a disservice to the literary community. Every book is going to have a different effect on different readers. Not posting a negative review when you really didn't like the book may prevent someone from getting a unique and valuable perspective on that book, and won't necessarily turn people off to reading it. People need to remember that bad reviews aren't attacks. They're opinions. If you take the time in your busy life to read a book, and for whatever reason don't enjoy it, isn't it almost a sin of omission not to put your thoughts out there??

[Rebecca J Vickery]

HI All,
I'm an author and I want an honest review. Without honesty I can't improve my work. I truly appreciate the job that most reviewers do.
But I also prefer to read reviews that are constructive rather than destructive. The snarky reviews with all negatives and no positives saying things like, "I don't know where this person got the idea they are an author," doesn't help an author to improve and it sure doesn't make a reviewer look good. Plus the reader does not get any help on deciding if they should read the book or not.
I love to see a reviewer who lists the good points of a book and the bad points. And most books have some of both. Then I can decide for myself if I want to read it. It also helps me a lot if a reviewer will honestly say if they are reviewing outside their preferred genre. Reading Historicals or Regencies for someone who prefers Mysteries and Thrillers can make a big difference to how the reviewer perceives the book.
Interesting discussion and thanks to all of you reviewers for the hard work and long hours you put into reviewing our books.
Rebecca

[Anysia]

There is a distinct difference between a bad review and a negative review though the terms are often used interchangeably. I give negative reviews when I don't feel that a book lived up to the expectations set by the marketing or it suffers from technical issues. I try never to give bad reviews (the ones that are ad hominem attacks and snark) because not only are they not helpful to the reader, but they also make the reviewer look bad.

[Nicola O.]

I don't post many negative reviews because I rarely read a book I absolutely hate. And if I finish a book that I was kind of meh about, well, I'd rather spend my blogging time writing about something I really liked.

That said, I have posted lukewarm and negative reviews. I like to think that they are kind, respectful, and possibly constructive, although I don't really kid myself that an author is going to take writing advice from me.

Since I started blogging I have received two books that I thought were utter crap, to the extent that I couldn't find anything good to say about them. In those cases I wrote back to the person who sent them to me (one publisher, one author) and politely explained that I didn't like the book, and gave them the choice of my not writing a review at all or writing a negative one, and offered to return the book. (I don't really know how true that saying about "any publicity being good publicity" is for books). Both opted out.

Here's one post where the author and I had a very nice discussion about the elements that didn't work for me. She defended her work without being defensive, I thought. Mistress of Pleasure review

[Joana]

I had one author, not long ago, flat out tell me that if I was going to give her less than 4 stars not to bother posting the review because all of her reviews on Amazon are 4 or 5 stars already. Ha! That was fun sorting out. I haven't even touched the book yet but we'll see soon enough what it earns. To be honest, no mater what rating I give it, it will be posted. Why? Because the promise of my blog (and the tagline to boot) is "Get Ready for a Brutal Dose of Honesty".

I've also once had two authors beg me to remove a review from my site because I had given them a low rating. One had been sent to me for review (and had previously been grateful for the review so no idea what happened there) and the other was out of my own pocket. Both reviews are still up because, to me, taking them down would have been like lying.

I try not to go out of my way and be cruel in my reviews, but I will be blunt and I will tell it like it is. If I think the book is bad I'll tell you and I'll tell you why I thought so. To me a reviewer should always be honest and their reviews should reflect that. We're not going to all read books we'll love completely. That said, I expect to see reviews that run the gambit on a blog, from the lowest rating to the highest. When I don't I tend to think they're either afraid to post what they really think (especially if they do a lot of book tours and receive ARCs) or they only post the reviews for things they liked. In both cases I'm not likely to return because I honestly feel like I can't trust them to give me a good feel for a book.

[Charity Gamble]

I haven't posted any negative reviews simply because I haven't found a book I didn't like. If I did, I would still post the review and I would still place negative comments. People who read the reviews are there to see how the reviewer liked it, not what the author or publisher of the book want people to think of the book. In my opinion, authors who can't take a negative review might want to look into a career that won't provide negative reviews of their performance in their area!

[Crystal]

I review everything I read, plain and simple. I agree with you, I don't feel it's fair to anyone who is reading my reviews if everything is great. I'm even one of those *crazy* people who didn't like Twilight and wrote as much on my blog!

[Joana]

Oh I bet you got interesting comments for that review! I remember my review on Eclipse got quite a bit of feedback on it. And even though I liked it, there were still parts I disliked. I got quite a bit of *cough* not so nice responses from fans on that one. Same thing happened with Breaking Dawn. The difference was, with B.D. I had to close comments early because instead of "I disagree..." comments I got "You #$@*! *#($&@)!!!" ones instead. lol

[Stacy-Deanne (Novelist)]

Wow, I am loving the responses. I am also glad to see others appreciate fair reviews.

For those who've said you only read what you like and post reviews for those books, no one's saying this is wrong. I understand the difference between a person with a personal blog that they do just for themselves than a person whose blog is a review blog where they purposely review for the public.

If you have a personal blog and your audience already knows you're not reviewing professionally, or to be taken that way, that is fine if you only choose books you like.

And for those reviewers who said they haven't gotten a book they didn't like or hate yet...keep reviewing. Believe me you will, LOL.

But a professional reviewer or professional blogger (ones who get books from pubs, authors, hold contests and know they are giving reviews for the value of readers and the authors publicity) should be honest at all times. They should be respectful even when giving a not-so-flattering review. As long as they don't personally attack the author and focus on the book, it's something that needs to be done.

Some books are just plain BAD. Some books are so bad that I feel sorry for reviewers when they got to read them, LOL! I've read many sites when a poor reviewer has sat miserably through some horrible book then they pitty pat around in the review trying to find something positive to say. If the book is that bad, the author needs to know it. If my book sucks, tell me what you think. First off, I know it's just "your" opinion and I can respect it. Am I saying it won't hurt? No. I'm human and it probably will hurt a little bit but it's part of the game. If I sent a reviewer my book, I want them to be honest.

I agree with the author who said they've learned from negative reviews. I have learned from things reviewers pointed out about my book and it helped me be a better writer. The funny thing is that it is only one person's opinion. Some people will love your book and some will not. But if you are getting nothing but negative responses from reviewers, then you just wrote a bad book, LOL!

We all must remember that reviews are for the readers, even though a lot of authors don't realize that. The readers deserve honesty. I'm a reader as well as an author. When I'm looking into new books to buy, I want honest reviews. I don't want a bunch of glowing reviews then I go spend twenty dollars on a book and the book sucks, LOL! True it still comes down to my opinion, but I still want the reviewers to be honest.

I am so glad the majority of reviewers are fair and honest here!

Best Wishes!

http://www.stacy-deanne.net

[Marian]

All-positive reviews, especially if they're all "five stars" or "highly recommended" make me think of Harriet Klausner. I hardly even read anything with her name on it, much less trust her opinion on a book.

I've found some online review sites which give any book a glowing but ultimately meaningless review - if a reviewer loves everything, there's no discernment or yardstick of quality. Whereas with sites like All About Romance, the opinions come off as much more honest and well-informed (seriously, I've come across one gushing review which praised the author for having chapters from the points of view of different characters and said this was "unique").

On my blog - http://marianperera.blogspot.com/ - I try to have a balance. Even if I loved a book or film, I'll try to find something about it which could be improved, though I don't always succeed at this. And even if I disliked the book or film very much, I try to include one good point. It's all about being fair.

[Nishita Kumar]

I don't give glowing reviews if I don't like a book. Mostly, I review books that I buy or borrow, so I don't feel pressurized to give positive reviews all the time. My reviews are pretty much based on my reading experiences...political correctness just does not play a part.

I wouldn't trust another book blogger's opinions either if the reviews were good all the time.

[Dave Rosenthal]

I'm with those who feel compelled to post both good and bad reviews, and not pull punches. I think we always worry about hurting the feelings (and wallets) of authors and publishers. But as Stacy-Deanne said, we have to remember that the reviews are for the readers, not ourselves. I don't read as much as others bloggers, so I'm pretty selective, and maybe that limits my exposure to truly bad books. But even when I review a book favorably, I'll try point out that it might appeal to some folks and not to others.