When you’re an author, you expect that you’re going to get bad reviews. You expect that you may even get extremely bad, unfair reviews. But there is a segment of Goodreads that has gotten completely, utterly out of hand.
I recently read Bennett Madison’s terrific YA novel September Girls, and when I marked it as read I took a peek at the Goodreads reviews to see what others had to say. I was utterly horrified at some of the “reviews” I saw. (And for the record, I do not know Madison or anyone connected with the book. I’m just speaking as a reader here).
Sure. Not everyone is going to like a book. The point of Goodreads is telling the world what you think. But reviews that are over the top serve no purpose. They are not funny. They are not constructive. They are just plain mean. (UPDATE: I removed links to specific posts because some were concerned that these people could be targeted. Those reviews are online if you want to search).
Reviews like these demean and dehumanize authors, and in fact the only way someone could write reviews like these is if they pretend the author and everyone connected with the book are some dispassionate robots who have no feelings. (Or they pretend the author isn’t going to see it, but come on).
Everyone knows that it takes a thick skin to be an author. But no one who writes a book deserves to be subjected to online abuse. It’s one of the strange aspects of online life that it feels like nothing to attack someone through a computer screen, but the recipient of that attack feels as acutely as if it happened in “real” life. Make no mistake: These aren’t reviews, they’re personal attacks.
And this is just the tip of one very dark iceberg. Author Lauren Howard noticed bad reviews when review copies weren’t even out yet, and when she complained she saw people putting her book on shelves like ‘author should be sodomized’ and ‘should be raped in prison.’ She ended up pulling her book. (There are some questions about what exactly transpired here. Porter Anderson has a very good summary).
It’s an axiom among authors that you can’t complain about your bad reviews. You never win.
But some authors are saying enough is enough.
A blog has been launched called STGRB (for Stop Goodreads Bullies), to share horror stories and to press Goodreads to help change the culture. (UPDATE: There have been some questions about this site’s tactics raised on the comments section that I was unaware of. Please read for more. The allegations are serious enough I have removed the links to the site.)
It’s terrifying to stand up to online bullies, who can quickly make your life a nightmare, but also because many aspiring writers feel as if published writers somehow have it made and have forfeited their right to complain about anything.
The truth is that it’s hard enough to write and publish a novel without having to worry that the result of that immense effort will result in getting unfairly slimed and harassed by a pack of online bullies. It’s not hyperbole to say that there are talented authors out there looking at this landscape who will conclude it’s not worth it, and great books that won’t be published as a result of this culture if it continues.
This really has gone too far, and the tide needs to turn back. People writing these reviews need to wake up and recognize the humanity of the authors they’re trashing and think of the people they’re hurting. It’s eminently possible to write a negative review without abusing the person who wrote the book.
UPDATE: I also want to stress that I am not advocating censorship, nor do I think people leaving bad reviews are bad people. I’m just advocating a culture shift. Let’s acknowledge each other’s humanity.
Also, for the record I LOVE GOODREADS.
All well and good Anonymous@11:59 AM. Now why not a post about the truly disgusting things reviewers have spouted about people on Goodreads they disagree with and catch in their sites. No? Don't want to go there? I've seen many remarks there that are much, much worse that the examples you posted.
99% of the reviews left on Goodreads are respectful and professional, whether rating a book and the reading experience good, bad or indifferent.
The 1% that I believe you're talking about is more about the need for attention than outright bullying, although I've seen that too.
For the folks getting upset over the post linking to specific reviews: These weren't screenshots of emails or private conversations. These reviews were posted publicly for ALL to see. A public post is a public post, whether it's a review on Goodreads or a blog. Once you put it out there, people can and will reference it, talk about it, name the author of said post, etc. If you can't handle people discussing what you wrote, be it a book or a review, you should't publish those words for all to see.
And just to be clear: I'm not saying that anyone should have to 'handle' personal attacks, threats, slander (or anything else illegal) That is never okay.
But in this case, the author was referencing reviews posted in a public space that he believed backed up his point. Nowhere in this post was he threatening anyone or encouraging people to harass these reviewers. It is your right not to agree that these particular reviews were examples of bullying, but it's not really anyone's place to demand he remove the links. Because–again–these reviews are posted for all to see. That's kind of like saying all negative book reviews should be banned because they might encourage other readers to leave negative reviews.
Or am I just not getting something here?
Forget about authors for a minute here.
What about other readers?
I AM SICK AS HELL OF READING FAKE ONE STAR REVIEWS ALL BECAUSE YOU GOT YOUR PANTIES IN A TWIST BECAUSE THE AUTHOR SAID SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T LIKE.
If you don't like the book, that's one thing, but I'm tired of wading through BS BOOK reviews about you thinking the AUTHOR is a racist rapist.
Easy to tell me not to look at them, right? But it sucks that now when I want to know if a book is good, I can't give ANY credence to reviews because half of them are from people who never read the book and the reviews have nothing to do with the book. Or reviews pretending to be about the book, but clearly the person is just making crap up. You do realize there comes a point when people don't believe that's honestly how you "interpreted" the story. If a book is about penguins and you say it's a sucky book about light bulbs, and there are no light bulbs int he book, it's pretty clear you are just making shit up to leave a negative review.
Maybe you don't give a crap about readers but it'd be nice to show a little respect for your peers.
Do you have the RIGHT to be a dick? Yeah, sure. But why do you want to be? Also, some of this DOES cross the line into slander as others have pointed out.
The bullies keep ignoring everyone's points and making excuses, but the fact remains, they are giving us all a bad name with their petty behavior.
There's a lot of them, but they are NOT the majority. They are just LOUD. You have the right to be a dick, and I have the right to tell you you are being one.
And the things you are attacking Nathan for? Not only is he NOT doing what he is being accused of, but the people accusing him are the ones actually guilty of those very things! It's honestly aggravating.
Really, it needs to stop. Stop making excuses. The behavior is wrong. You don't even have to apologize for it, okay? JUST STOP. Pretend like you were never this much of a scumbag and move on with your life and we'll all be so happy for this to end that we'll look the other way and pretend you didn't just spend the last five years throwing your toys out of the pram and screaming at the top of your lungs.
"Pot meet Kettle"
Exactly. Call me Kettle.
Sometimes the only way to fight a fire is with fire.
I love the claim they aren't bullying Nathan.
Check out the latest shelves on his book:
https://www.goodreads.com/work/shelves/13362662
"ego-precedes-him-her"
"total-asshole-author"
"authors-behaving-badly"
"wouldratherchokeonmotoroilspooge"
"abusive-attention-whore-authors"
You are all making our point at the same time as denying these things happen…and then calling OTHER people the liars…
Sooo this blurg of comments has shown me: We all agree that reviewers directly attacking/threatening an author is wrong. And an author directly attacking/threatening a reviewer is wrong. Excellent.
The big divide is really whether people think negative reviews of books should be short and polite (or entirely nonexistent), or whether they can be snarky MST3K-style extravaganzas (with or without bonus curse words, with or without bonus social justice commentary).
Oh, and if you were a fan of Mysterious Science Theater 3000, but think a gif-laden book review is wrong, you might want to think about why one type of popular media is exempt.
Research, research, research if you are going to blog about an issue like this.
Please go back and do some research on this, look at the blogs, look at the comments.
Wow. I guess I shouldn't be shocked, but I am. And Nathan, I am so sorry I emailed you about this. I love this blog, and your sense of decency, and I failed to imagine what would happen if you said anything.
For the record, I think valid negative reviews of books are fine, even constructive. No book is perfect, and when I get negative feedback, I try to (eventually) learn from it. But attacks on the author are never ok. The author is not the product.
I don't think the reviews are the problem, though, it's the strategic attempt to kill the book/author's career by turning off potential readers and hounding the author across public platforms. That's not expressing disappointment, that's abuse.
Maybe something good can come from this, if you can be attacked in this way (shelved as "total-asshole-author" really? That's hilarious.) GR needs to start enforcing its TOS.
Sorry. I was naive. This too, will pass.
@daniel t. radke, repeat after me "a book is not a baby." Again. "A book is not a baby." One more time. "A BOOK is NOT a BABY!"
Shiloh Walker said it best: https://www.shilohwalker.com/website/2012/03/puh-leeze-stop-it-books-are-not-babies/
GR reviews aren't for authors. I'm firmly of the mindset that authors should have nothing to do with their GR reviews. Professional reviews, yes, certainly, those are our business.
But not forums like GR. It's as much of the culture of reading as the actual reading. Absolutely no different than gathering with friends around a table to snark about a book or a movie or TV show. No different than MSTK3.
Do some of them go overboard and say terrible things? Yes. But the same thing happens in sports, video games, tv, movies, music, etc.
It sucks and it's stupid, but it's also not a place where authors are supposed to be. Leave the readers to be readers and stay out of it.
Oh, that's been decided and the argument's over? My bad. I should really be more on top of these things!
Hey guys, I feel like this discussion is starting to go in circles and am weighing closing the comments section. Anyone want to weigh in yea or nay?
To Kate Bond regarding your comment: "Nathan and the authors who agree with him here are behaving like the lady from Amy's Baking Company, ***who we were ALL mocking a while back***"
This says it all, doesn't it?
Mocking does not = rational discussion or disagreement.
@Nathan I guess we've all had enough internet drama over the past 24 hours. It's been informative!
LOL, Daniel Radke. Great and hilarious analogy. If you're an author, I'll buy your books.
I loved Daniel's schoolyard bully post. Spot on.
@Nathan
Your site, your rules. 😉
Megan Derr–Goodreads disagrees with you. The CEO stated that it's a place for both authors and readers. Your statement that authors shouldn't go there goes against the site's whole purpose, as laid out by the CEO. The main question is, if it's indeed a site for both authors and readers, why has it become such a hostile place for authors? Because the readers have authors over a barrel. They can ruin careers, and some do, by banding together into little bully groups and going on destruction campaigns. I've seen it happen time and again. This contributes to a silencing of the author for fear of retribution–of the author having no voice. If that isn't bullying, I don't know what is. The solution is not having authors leave the site as you propose (and letting the bullies win) but in asking Goodreads to enforce their own policies and stand by their mission statement. Simple as that.
Well said, JSanders. Regular readers are tired of wading through all the middle-school b.s. on Goodreads in order to find out if a book is worth reading or not. Goodreads is being damaged by this kind of behavior. No one wins in the end… except the middle-school bullies, of course. Why are they being allowed to rule the roost when there are decent readers, writers, and reviewers out there with something valuable to contribute? Instead, the small-minded middle-school mentality is creating the predominant atmosphere over there. Insanity reigns at Goodreads…
Nathan, at 280 comments, I'd say it's time to close up shop.
Thank you for posting your article and bringing attention to major problem within the Goodreads community!
Update: When I posted earlier, I'd not been to the Goodreads site to read the reviews. My comments were pertaining to the foul-mouthed and irrational responses on Youtube and Twitter. Now I have visited, I perceive that the worst comments/reviews on Goodread are more vitriolic than unbalanced. But I still heartily agree with your post, Nathan.
I was pleased to see, when I did visit Goodreads, that the review above the one you linked to in your post was amended/edited to state that the review did not intend to criticize the author personally, only the subject matter of the book.
Perhaps this addition to the original review wasn't just written in defense of the issues that you raised in your post. Perhaps your post has made some reviewers think more deeply about the power of the written word, the fragile nature of humanity, and the importance of showing respect. Often, more is revealed about ourselves than the object of whatever is being demeaned or trashed.
Wendy-
No, to be perfectly fair to the reviewer that disclaimer was already there before I posted.
I think this is a point where not everyone is going to agree. I still feel like over-the-top attack can cross the line into a hostile environment, even if the writer's character is not ostensibly attacked. But I also acknowledge that we need to have a space for people to express their unvarnished opinion and would never advocate censorship.
What I hope happens is that people pull back from a race to the bottom to write the most over-the-top nastiest review whenever someone dislikes a book, because that kind of culture, while superficially entertaining, puts a whole lot of negativity into a fishbowl authors are actively encouraged to swim in.
I think there's a way to be negative while still being constructive. To be perfectly honest I'm not sure that I 100% lived up to that promise with this post, and I wish I had done better with it. All I can hope is that the gist of the message comes through to most people in the end.
That seems like a natural wrapping up point, so i'm going to go ahead and close comments. Anyone who wishes to communicate with me directly is more than welcome to do so at https://nbrans.wpengine.com/contact
I have reached this blog, because of my curiosity on “The Selection”, I want to know if I should purchase it or not, however when I see the reviews on Goodreads, it affected my decision. I agree book reviews can make or break an author’s book, career or reputation. I think the #1 thing that authors do, should they received foul feedback is to never engage the reviewer. Why? It will backfire. I get that some of us want to stand and stop the bullies, and ignoring it will do no good to the author and his/her business/career. I think Goodreads, Amazon or any other sites should protect both the reviewer and the author.
Let’s talk about how Goodreads IS the bully.
When doing a google search with my name – I discovered my book had somehow been imported to this site called “Goodreads.”
That wasn’t the issue. The issue was that there was a 1-star rating that blaringly appeared under my name. The simple solution – delete the book from the source.
When contacting Goodreads to do this here is the answer I got:
Thanks for your email. Unfortunately, we have a strict policy against deleting books from the database. Goodreads is striving to be a complete database of all published works, including works that are out-of-print. We like our members to be able to add the exact edition of their books to their virtual shelves. Just as a library would not remove a record from its catalog, so we do not remove books from our database. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
If there’s anything else I can help you with, please let me know. Have a good weekend!
Best,
Alta
—
Alta dP.
Goodreads Expert
Goodreads.com
1. Who is “Alta”?
2. That policy analogy is week and untrue – libraries do remove books from their catalog.
3. When asked to simply delete the rating, I got NO RESPONSE.
THIS IS A TERRIBLE COMPANY WITH TERRIBLE POLICIES AND CUSTOMER SERVICE. DO NOT SUPPORT THEM.
The mean, abusive and offensive reviews as well as the personal attacks turned me off to writing and i have not written anything ever since.
I absolutely agree that Goodreads is horrible. Not only is their site un-intelligible, it allows defamatory reviews to stay up, even when they are absolutely untruthful. This affects the author, especially an Indie author who’s already had to do everything themselves (because the traditional Big 5 publishers are only interested in what sells. So we have a plethora of dragon and wizard books and romances). Writing. Editing. Designing a cover. Publishing. Marketing. But these reviewers are relentless anyway.
And GR’s “Strict Policy” about not allowing a writing to be removed because a library wouldn’t remove a book is stupid to say the least. Libraries do remove old versions of books all the time. I know, I worked for one. That’s one reason for library book sales (or big trash cans out back). Authors regularly edit their books and only want the latest version available. Were libraries to keep every revision they would soon look pretty ridiculous. Imagine 10 or 20 versions of one book. What? But that’s what GR does. It’s confusing to readers and does a disservice to authors. I mean, why edit then??? Hmm, maybe they actually work for traditional publishers cause they sure do harm the little guy with these reviews.
According to Wikipedia more than 2,000,000 books are published each year. Most of them are garbage pulp stuff with typos made only to capture all the dollars and pennies they can. There should be a way to let honest reviews know that. But books that were written carefully but are Indie (because again, the Big 5 aren’t interested) are lumped into the same category as garbage. It’s an uphill battle. So there needs to be a way to separate the junk from the well written, but self-published work. If some of the classics were published today, with these horrible troll reviews I doubt they would ever see the light of day.
I just use it for myself really. I don’t care about the jerks on there. They’re assholes who need a life.