Amazon: Authors Can't Review Books

[ctg]

In an effort to step up its fight against astroturfers, Amazon has barred authors from reviewing books. It's not simply that authors can't review their own books — they can't review any book in a similar genre to something they've published. "This means that thriller writers are prevented from commenting on works by other authors who write similar books. Critics suggest this system is flawed because many authors are impartial and are experts on novels." British author Joanne Harris had a simpler solution in mind: "To be honest I would just rather Amazon delete all their reviews as it... has caused so much trouble. It is a pity. Originally it was a good idea but it is has become such an issue now. The star rating has become how people view if a book is a success and it has become inherently corrupt."

How would you improve the online review system?

http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/12/26/1914249/amazon-authors-cant-review-books

 

[alchemist]

Interesting, but I don't see how this helps. The problem is with "anonymous" people giving false (good or bad) reviews. Any author willing to review a book under their real name is likely to be honest, I'd imagine.

 

[Warren_Paul]

Yeah, it won't change anything, just make it worse. The fake reviews will still happen because it was never the authors giving them in the first place but 'friends' of theirs.

 

[Vertigo]

Yeah, it won't change anything, just make it worse. The fake reviews will still happen because it was never the authors giving them in the first place but 'friends' of theirs.

You're right, that is exactly why it won't work. That said, if I saw a review of an unknown or relatively unknown author 'signed' by a famous author, I think I'd be very sceptical of that review's authenticity. I rather suspect that most authors, whose names mean anything, are probably careful to refrain from leaving Amazon reviews. And if I'm right in this (and I certainly haven't seen many reviews on Amazon by the likes of Hamilton, Weber, Asher, Banks, Mieville, etc.) then it really isn't going to achieve very much at all (except maybe to get everyone talking about buyer reviews again).

Bottom line, I'm always a bit skeptical about buyer reivews. I have worked for a long time in an industry that always gets its customers to review their experience (computer training). These reviews always have an area to leave comments as well as scores for various aspects. In my experience 90% of those comments will be negative. The people who are happy are generally satisfied that they have given a good score (stars or whatever) and mostly don't bother leaving comments; it is the ones who give a bad score who then take the time to give a ranting review. Consequently I am a little suspicious of too many glowing reviews.

 

[Montero]

I wonder if that counts as an infringement of human rights? Authors being treated differently from other customers.

Mind you, if an author does feel moved to review books, they can do it on their own blog/website/forums like these to their hearts content anyway.

 

[Brian G Turner]

The problem isn't the authors, it's the sock puppets they bring with them. It's too easy to create fake accounts on Amazon, or else encourage friends/family/hordes to review your own work.

 

[Null_Zone]

Can't say I blame them, even if they have removed some of my reviews for books because of the ruling. The Kindle self publishing forums have been packed full of people swapping 5* reviews (and complaining that someone only gave them a 4*) or authors going odd and trashing their rivals. Makes a complete joke of the review system.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

I understand the reasoning behind the move - though I have to say having lost four reviews in the last month or so, I'm not crazy about it. I don't even know who's an author and who isn't among them. But I do wonder if maybe they're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Maybe a better system would have simply been to have put a tag beside the reviewer, simply saying, this person is an author, and then letting the public decide.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I think you're right - baby, bathwater...

 

[tinkerdan]

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning about this.

It won't solve the sock-puppet syndrome it will only stop an author from using his or her own name on a review and I'm not sure how many of them do independent reviews that way. I'm not sure they would do a bad review in their name anyway.

I suppose the next question to arising is what happens with authors who post a few kind words from another author in the section provided for just that ?Will they remove that also?

Just how far have they thought this whole thing out to?

 

[Null_Zone]

It's not authors reviewing there own books.

It's authors published in a similar genre and non verified reviews where Amazon have suspicions about the review.

Jusr spend a couple minutes on self publishing sites and you can see the reason why.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

They haven't removed any of the reviews from Goblin Moon (I'm feeling too lazy to look at anything else) even though some of the reviews came from writers and some from reviewers not marked as verified customers. I wonder how retroactive this is?

I must admit that some reviews of books I am familiar with leave me scratching my head, as the plots they describe bear little resemblance to the books I read.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

I thought it was a blanket ban, perhaps sorted into genres. I can't imagine anything else. If it was reviews they were suspicious about, that'd be far too much work. I can't imagine Amazon actually paying their staff to read millions of reviews.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[JoanDrake]

I wonder if that counts as an infringement of human rights? Authors being treated differently from other customers.

Mind you, if an author does feel moved to review books, they can do it on their own blog/website/forums like these to their hearts content anyway.

As far as a human rights violation, I don't think so. People discriminate all the time or we would see 90lb cheerleaders suing for not being hired as NFL quarterbacks, (I've seen some damned skillful plays in the lingerie league) discrimination must be generally arbitrary and/or based on illegal differences, such as race, ancestry, ethnicity etc

In any case I don't believe in reviews of almost any type. Unless criticism is constructive it's all based on taste and just because one's different doesn't mean it's better. (This, of course, is why we all try to write critiques, which are meant to help, instead of reviews, which are meant to give other readers the opinion of someone whose taste is known.)

 

[tinkerdan]

I see where there might be complaints about certain people giving 5 star reviews all the time and questions about low star reviews that seem to have content that belies the reviewer having read the book.

They might keep the reviews without the stars but overall probably no reviews would be best.

The authors have a spot where they can list parts of reviews- I recall one stating that Andre Norton had given the review- that was before she passed.

I don't go by reviews because the discourse in many strikes me as bit odd.

Overall I don't think the self-publishers are getting any benefit from those reviews even if they are writing them themselves. They'd have a better chance if they bought a million copies of their own book and put themselves on the best seller list.

If there is a free sampling of pages that's what I look at.

 

[MattC]

One of my friends is affected by this. She's a published author but also happens to be a VINE voice and has written some highly regarded reviews on her peers' books. However one author took offence from one of her reviews (she couldn't take valid criticism is my guess) and began a campaign of undermining both my friend's reviews and then her books leading to both of them with a suspension on their reviewing privileges.

And it doesn't just effect the reviewers either. My own book on Amazon had all reviews suspended because two rival reviewers and their friends used it as the battleground to wage a flame-war. So due to no fault on my part all future reviews were embargoed for my novel and as far as I know, still are. I tried getting this lifted but was given the company-policy line and was refused.

The way I see it, Amazon's review system will never work unless all reviews come from verified purchases and reviewers names are lifted from their credit card details (so there will be no more "Blood-nut the hungry" or "Book-eater"'s out there to hide behind).

Of course, Amazon won't do this - not because they can't, because it's easily done - but because it will reduce the volume of reviews on their site and they use this mechanism to increase popularity of their products and services.

Yes, the system is broken for authors (and readers, not that most of them realise this), but not for Amazon, wherein lies the problem.

 

[Boneman]

Sorry to hear of your experience, caught up in an unregulated behemoth that just doesn't care about anything except profit. Amazon's credibility in the market is fast approaching one aspect only: cheap. Their attitude as a monopoly is bullying towards sellers and arrogant towards buyers, all in the name of selling cheap. With the demise (probably) of HMV today, they will no doubt benefit further. A slow groundswell of opinion is growing, ignored by them because of their monopoly, but hopefully, more people will say 'enough is enough' and stop buying on Amazon. The internet can be a powerful force, as they know, and when it turns against them, some sanity will be forced upon them. As more articles like this one appear, more people will become aware...

 

[Warren_Paul]

hopefully, more people will say 'enough is enough' and stop buying on Amazon. The internet can be a powerful force, as they know, and when it turns against them, some sanity will be forced upon them. As more articles like this one appear, more people will become aware...

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. In this situation there is likely way more people happy with Amazon than the minority us who have issues with their review system.

I imagine Amazon's customer base is massive, yet only a handful of people would stop buying from them over this. The rest wouldn't care one bit. Quite sad, but that's the reality of it. You see the same thing with Microsoft. Heaps of people complain about Windows, write bad reviews about it and bash Microsoft to no end, yet for every one person who complains about Microsoft, tens of thousands more continue on buying Microsoft products, which ensures their continued monopoly in the PC industry.

 

[Boneman]

Unfortunately you're right, Warren. But in the books section, there is sufficient criticism and 'unrest' for Amazon to be taking some notice, hence their draconian rules which, let's face it, they wouldn't be implementing if they didn't think it affected their profits. (I think.) One can but hope... I wonder if the monopolies and mergers commission should look at them?