How major newspaper reviews help/hurt book sales

[B.R.Stateham]

I'm reading this novel which is more spy than mystery novel--and I chose to read it because of what the back cover filled with reviews from major newspapers and mags said. The praised it to high heavens, claiming the book was every accolade one can imagine.

It sucks. Hard to read. Hard to follow--frankly you need to have PhD. in psychology trying to figure out all the illusionary traps the writer is filling the pages with. But this was supposed to be a Great Book! A Modern Day Kafka! (or so the reviewers stated).

So the question is this; how effective are major reviews in selling a book? Are reviewers from Newsweek and the big city newspapers paid to give these kinds of reviews? Just how effective are these reviews in helping along a new author (or even an old author, for that matter).

[B.R.Stateham]

The way my books are published I seriously doubt a major reviewer is going to take the effort to look at'em. So I have to rely on the stranger who takes the time to give a review. And frankly, I find that immense satisfying.

[Dana King]

I understand space for reviews is diminishing faster than Amazonian rain forests. It just seems that many reviewers do all their cutting from the actual reviewing part of the review, leaving the reader with just a plot synopsis. If I want to know everything that happens in a book, I'll just read the book. I can get a plot overview from the back cover and flap notes. (Though those sometimes give away things I would have preferred to read for myself, too.)

[Neil Nyren]

As with any writing enterprise, there are those who are good at it and those who aren't. That's why I pay attention to certain reviewers, and not so much to others. Don't forget, too, that these days, review space is often a lot more truncated as the editorial hole continues to shrink; if you're one of those reviewers, it's hard to cover a lot of ground.

[Dana King]

I write quite a few reviews, but I rarely read any, unless the review itself was recommended. Too many reviews are book reports, recapping the major events of the story, with a paragraph at the end with (very) general writing comments. To me, if a book is to be praised or condemned, it's the obligation of the reviewer to show why, and to give some examples that lend weight to the criticism. Don't just leave it at, "I liked/hated it." Give the potential reader something to go on when deciding how much time and money to invest in the book.

[B.R.Stateham]

I guess what strikes me as odd are the reviews themselves. Many of'em don't come close to describing what's in the book. And those that rave how 'innovative' and 'one of a kind' this great new writer is are the most suspect of the lot.

I sent Murderous Passions off to be reviewed (by no less than one of our members here in Crimespace) and, although overall the review was nice, in the particulars about character, etc., they got so much wrong I began to wonder if they'd acutally read the book or just skimmed thru a few chapters.

[Neil Nyren]

I can say this without equivocation: publishers do not pay reviewers for their reviews, nor do they offer any sort of quid pro quo. I don't know what kind of television program on what kind of station Bob was involved with in the early 80s, but I can tell you for a fact that every book review editor I know -- and they're the ones who assign the books -- guards his diminishing turf with the ferocity of a mother bear guarding her cubs. The best we can do is plead with them to consider a book for review. Pay them? Why, if that were possible, do you think a major book would ever again get a negative review? Do you really think Newsweek or the New York Times or the Washington Post accepts money for good reviews? Please!!

As to whether good reviews affect sales, they can. Notice I said *can," not "do." I've seen the right reviews in the right places at the right time really move a book, even make it a bestseller. I've also seen books with a nice clutch of reviews laze on the shelves like a hound dog on a summer day. The important thing about good reviews is that you never know what will stick in someone's brain when they're browsing the store. Reviews can cause word of mouth. So do recommendations from friends or colleagues or family. So do media appearances, whether it's print, electronic or on-line. You're standing in the store and you say, "Hey, I heard about this book." And maybe you pick it up. And maybe you read the flapcopy or look at the quotes or the author picture, or open the book and read a few pages...and maybe all that's enough to get you to stick it under your arm and go to the cash register.

Speaking simply as a crime/suspense fan, I've bought lots of new authors because of reviews. If a critic whose opinion I've come to respect gives something a rave and it sounds like something to my taste, I'll often pick it up, maybe not right away, but eventually. And if I like that author, I keep buying his or her books every year. And sometimes I don't like it as much as the critic did, but, hey, noone likes everything someone else does 100% of the time.

[I. J. Parker]

B.R., there are readers who are very fond of Kafka. I assume the reviewer was one of them and writing for them. As for Ken Bruen, he's Irish. I think they tend to get carried away with warmth for their fellow writers. As for Ken Bruen as a writer: the Jack Taylor series is very good, in my opinion. It moves from crime genre into character novel. I like that. He does experiment with language and form, which strikes readers as a bit odd, but I like that, too. The cliches are those that people in that world would be using.

In general: good reviews in major papers are just about the best thing that can happen to me. God knows, nothing else happens. In any case, even if they don't move me into bestzsller territory, they make me feel that I haven't wasted my time completely. I'm very grateful for them.

[Jon Loomis]

My first was widely and well reviewed, and it had a visible effect on my Amazon sales--especially the weekend it was reviewed in both NYTBR and WaPo Bookworld. Those reviews (and others, like the Chicago Trib, etc.) helped to sell out the first print run and triggered SM/M's decision to bring #1 out in MM paper. #1 earned out the advance for both #1 and #2 in hardcover--so at least in my case, reviews definitely help. I can also tell you for a fact that St Martin's didn't pay a dime to promote the book, outside of the cost of a one-page layout in their catalog and whatever it cost to have their publicist send out review copies and call around to booksellers. The pro reviews were generally smart and fair, I thought. Most of the Amazon reviews were fine, too, although one "reviewer" felt compelled to express an opinion without (obviously) having read the book, and that crazy lady who reviews everything appeared to have read the book and written her review in about twenty minutes, combined. I'm inclined to take the whole business of reader reviews, particularly, with a grain of salt: pro reviewers are motivated by money and love--I'm not always sure what motivates someone to write an anonymous review on Amazon.

[B.R.Stateham]

Just what I suspected--either the best of the best. or the worst of the worst. It reconfirms a theory of mine that a total stranger who has taken the time to review your book on Amazon and Barnes&Noble is likely to be a more accurate review than found from all the 'professionals.'

[Bob]

I was cost host on a television program for three years back in the early 80's. I did the book reviews in addition to movie reviews. The reviewer is pressured by the distributor/publisher to give an honest review which points out the strong points. Harping on weakness is discouraged. In addition, the producer/editor always pushes the reviewer to be possitive. When a review is negative, the same applies, the producer/editor wants the worst of the worst. In a bad review the distributor wants ammunition to discontinue or reduce distribution volumes. Middle ground in reviews is a rare occurance. That was almost thirty years ago, and reviews had a big impact in those days.

Smiles
Bob