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

[Jessica Strider]

In the past I wouldn't post negative reviews for the following reasons:

1) I knew too many authors and industry insiders to feel comfortable doing it. And I know how much work writing a novel can be, so ripping a book apart didn't appeal to me. (Not to say you have to be 'mean' when posting a negative review.)
2) If I didn't like a book I'd stop reading it.

I've recently started reviewing books I didn't particularly like, but for me to finish the book it has to have qualities that I feel make the book worth reading regardless (or, more accurately, just because I didn't like the book doesn't mean others won't and so I explain WHY I didn't like it). So now I try to balance my reviews. I won't trash a book but I will say what I did and didn't like about books that don't rate a 5. Over time it seemed wrong to only blog about books I really loved (not to mention hard to consistently find books I could rave about). People wanting to know if it's worth their time to read a book need the chance to see negative reviews as well. Negative reviews can also makes you more creditable so long as you do your reviews with consideration.

[Amy @ Just Book Reading]

I tend to be picky about my books and find that if I don't like a book, in most cases, I'll just stop reading. So far, and it's only been a few weeks, what has made it to my blog have been books I like and wanted to share. Who knows, in the coming weeks I may come across something I don't like and will write about. I think a negative review has it's place - if no one says anything, how will anyone improve - but I also don't feel the need to say anything if I can't find something nice/encouraging to say. This is a great discussion and it's interesting to see what everyone has to say about the topic.

[Jason Kurtz]

Who really reads "bad" reviews? Why waste your time writing, or reading them? I always read good reviews, and always skip the ones that are basically a rant about how a book is terrible. I usually don't finish books I don't like, and definitely wouldn't want to spend time writing more about them online. That being said, it is a rare book that I find so deplorable that I can't finish, or can't find something good to say about it. I think the "job" of the book blogger/reviewer is share with others your thoughts on a book, basically free promotion. I want others to read GOOD books, and so want to tell people about the ones that are worth investing the money to buy it.

[Victoria Neely]

You'd be surprised. Some people seem to enjoy reading and responding to bad reviews ("How dare you say bad things about my favorite book, why you !@#$%^!!"). Bad reviews can also be entertaining, depending on how they're written.

I like reading a mix of positive and negative reviews about books just to feel like I'm getting a balanced perspective. Besides, a well-written "bad" review may convince me to read the book anyway, because that reviewer may hate the book for the same reasons that would make me love it.

[Anysia]

I've seen "bad" reviews written by people who love the book. Unfortunately they don't give the reader anything to go on. Well-written negative reviews have saved me money.

[Nicola O.]

To be perfectly honest, a snarky review can be awfully entertaining if it's done well. So yeah, people do read negative reviews.

[Jason Kurtz]

Ha! I guess I forgot about the entertainment factor. Now that you say that Victoria, I have to retract my statement a bit. I often read negative reviews of authors I traditionally enjoy, then write off the crank that left the bad review and buy the book anyway. Often this includes my wife, who often disagrees with my reading tastes! :)

[dani624]

I read "bad" reviews because I want opinions from both sides of the spectrum. I write them because whats the point of only expressing positive opinions. How boring that must be. You also want to voice what books the reader of your blog should avoid. What is an amazing book to you could be horrible for me..varying opinions are important.

[M.D. Griffith]

I think there's a way to be tactful in reviewing a book. You dont have to be Conan the Barbarian....jmo

[Sandy]

I respect bloggers who can stay true to their opinions. I have come across quite a lot of reviews in which it is obvious that reviewer did not enjoy the book but he/she tried hard to come up with good thing to say about the book. It is pretty painful to read a review like that. After all, the reason we write reviews is so that we book lovers can all share our views on different types of books. What's the point of sharing if all opinions are one-sided? It defeats the purpose of blogging and purpose of having this book blogging community.

[Melissa Conatser]

I own a book blog/romance book review site. We post reviews, regardless of the rating. We try to always mention the positives in a book, even if the book is rated a one, and we always strive to be constructive. We have had comments from authors and readers who do not like that we have posted a bad review, but it is our policy to be honest and post all reviews.

Although I can understand why some sites do not post negative reviews, I don't agree with it. If I read a review on a site that only gives good reviews, I tend to look elsewhere for more reviews, just to make sure that I am getting the whole picture.

[dani624]

I think it is silly not to post negative review. Reviews should be well rounded. I read reviews for honest opinions. I read the ARC for Hush Hush and hated the book. Everyone else gushes over it. I didn't get negative backlash but people tried to tell me I should have expected that from a young adult novel..Hello there are numerous young adult novels that are extremely well written. Some were happy to hear a varying opinion.