What Is Ethical when Reviewing A Book?

[Mari Sloan]

It has come to my attention lately that many of the magazines, on-line commentaries, etc. charge for reviewing books, either directly or indirectly by linking the review with the purchase of advertising in the publication. In each case, when challenged, each publication insists it has done nothing wrong. Most of them also will take 'free reviews", but these are, understandably, placed at the end of the list and never surface to be reviewed. What are your thoughts on this practice?

Have you ever paid for a review?

If you know a publication charges the author or publisher for writing its reviews, does it change the way you evaluate the review?

What IS ethical?

[I. J. Parker]

No, I have never paid for a review. I think this is an unfortunate development due to the drastic cutting of books review pages in the newspapers everywhere. Still, in this instance, it takes two to tango. The author has to be willing to enter into this dubious relationship, and the reviewer will have to be prepared to lie -- or the system will soon collapse.

[Dan Coleman]

I think it's "ethical" to charge someone for something like this, but I also think it's stupid to pay it. It's just another way for someone to make a buck by appealing to those who have no other legitimate market for their work; the struggling reviewer/writer, et al. It's just an advertising sheet and no one is likely to take it seriously, much less read it. Vanity reviewing. This happens when there are too many contributors and not enough outlets.

[I. J. Parker]

Yes, but the fact is that the reading public does not know that. They will most likely accept such a review as legitimate. There is an equally hazy understanding about publishing houses: which are advance-paying and which are vanity presses?

[Dan Coleman]

Yeah, you're right about that, but I don't believe the ones that charge the writer/reviewer will get big enough to have an impact on the reading public to any appreciable degree, especially when so much bad writing will show up. But it would be interesting to see if one of these e-rags can make it that far.

[Mari Sloan]

There is a very interesting discussion going on right now concerning this issue, which prompted me to ask these questions here. Several publications are displaying what I consider unethical behavior and at least one of them is supposed to be sold on news stands and sells subscriptions, so it is not just an E-mag. Read through the Blog and you will find where a lack of ethics in one area of publishing reaches into other areas as well.

http://accrispin.blogspot.com/2008/07/victoria-strauss-more-small-p...

How does the reader know how the reviews were obtained? How many people are ever going to look up the magazine's rules and regulations and find out when they come upon a review? The main magazine discussed in part of this Blog doesn't pay its reviewers and has a very convoluted way of looking at how "its reviews are really free". I googled it and read its advertising page.

It seems fairly obvious that ethics may be being breached here, to me, but what about openly paid for reviews? What sites do you believe when deciding what to buy (other than the New York Times)?

I've been very personally involved in the issue of ethics in my entire publishing experience and I hang out with other new authors, some of whom are very good. Reviews are crucial to book sales and are very hard to get for new authors, and we are very tempted to purchase them. My personal feeling is that it's a slippery slope and the purchase of a review predisposes it to being favorable, hence renders it expensive and useless. Not that I want anyone to review MY book unfavorably, of course. But what is right?

[Dan Coleman]

The picture here is of a writer and a reviewer, both unknowns, bobbing in the same ocean, trying to find something concrete to grab on to, mostly one another.

The bottom line and the central issue here is that the struggling, unknown writer is hungry for attention for her work. The reaction in the marketplace is to supply a need. It might be the same as when established publishers buy into P.O.D. because, well, it's there and others are already doing it, so ,"Let's sell it." So you have to be careful.

Kind of like selling cars; a new make hits the market and we don't know if it's good or bad. But the seller is going to keep on selling as long as someone is buying. Only time or experience will tell if it's worth it. But you have to know the field is loaded with sharks.

The problem for the struggling writer is get an honest appraisal and to get exposure for it, two different things. If you want to influence the outcome of a review, then you're as bad as the the shyster hawking it. And without a reputable publisher, you're not likely to get the exposure. But you can get the reviews. You can go to clubs who specialize in your genre, or ask folks who belong to crimespace or similar sites, offer a free read without paying for it, insist on a blunt appraisal, then see what happens. You'll have to conduct your own PR program for the exposure, using the better of the reviews, with permission, of course.

The question regarding the unknown review service is: what if it charges me but is still a darn good, honest review? How do I tell. You don't, unless it's corroborated by several other free similar reviews, so you don't approach them unless you've already acquired favorable reviews and have the confidence it'll be good. By that time you might not need them.

But you're not likely to get the best, least biased critiques except from people who are avid fans of the genre, and readers only. Not writers. Not agents. Not editors, etc. ONLY READERS. They are the only ones who regularly buy and check out books with no dream of writing, selling or publishing one. The others are over-read, jaded, knee-jerk, extremely biased, and have motivations you can only imagine. If you ask a hundred of them for an honest opinion, you'll get a hundred different ones. The reader is the bottom line and you've got to find a way to mine that resource. Then you market yourself.

I guess.

[I. J. Parker]

Well, getting an agent (make that a member of AAR) guards against the wrong publisher.
As for new authors: In reality it's easier for an author to get reviewed for his first book than for future books.
The publisher generally sends ARCs. And the publisher's publicist knows the legitimate venues. You may of course send your own books out for review, but surely then you'll do some research first.

[Dan Coleman]

Sure, if you have an agent and a publisher. I think what she might be up against is doing all this without either, maybe on her own, self-published or whatever. After all, if you have an established traditional publishing releasing your book, will there be difficulty getting reviews, good or bad? I don't know, so I'm just asking.

[John Dishon]

That's what makes Amazon.com reader reviews so valuable for me when I'm thinking about buying a book. Sure, sometimes there's reviews that are out to get the writer, but you can tell which ones those are. But if there's twenty people saying it's a good book, it just might be, and these are people like me, not industry insiders who might have other motivations.

[Dan Coleman]

Yeah, I think Amazon.com can be a good review source for both traditional and self-published authors, as long as there are a lot of reviews to gauge the book or, if just a few, done by known reviewers. But is Amazon used by a lot of readers and regarded with the same respect as other sources? I'd be interested in knowing that.

The thing I've noticed about Amazon is you hardly ever, if ever, see the publisher's name listed for a book, for the obvious reason, of course. So how would one tell, except for a review, that it's been vetted, edited, etc., by a pro. Some of the reviews I've read there are by reviewers who suffer poor writing. That doesn't mean they don't know what they like or don't like when they read a story, but it makes you wonder who wrote it, if it might be the author's brother-in-law. The others seem written very well.

Just wondering about that.

[I. J. Parker]

Amazon lists the publisher. The prime sources fro reviews are Publisher's Weekly, Kirkus, Library Journal, Booklist, The New York Times, and a few other big city newspapers. The problem is that the papers can only review a few books and most papers are cutting out weekly book reviews altogether.
I have been lucky with amazon reviews (except in one instance when a couple of people reacted to a Booklist review).

[Christine Duncan]

I assume you are talking about Romantic Times a magazine that requires that authors buy ads. They say if you don't buy an ad you will still be considered for a review--but I know of authors who have participated in group ads who were not given a review because there were too many in the group. RT claims that all of their reviews are impartial.
I had my first book reviewed there (and yes, I participated in a group ad) for a number of reasons. They are one of the few magazines that considers e-books for one and although that book was also out in print, I wanted to promote the e format too. The review was not a five star review but it was decent. I know other authors who got much worse from them. Would I do it again? You got me. Probably not. But I do see authors with names much bigger than mine reviewed and presumably advertised in there.
Is it immoral? I admit to being scandalized at first but since then I realized that even the best seller lists are up for grabs--money wise. Sigh. Writing IS a business and I believe the authors are the only ones NOT making (much) money off of it.