Comments on: Why Romantic Times Reviews Are Not Credible

By: terry

terry — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:37:26 +0000

Falk is the biggest Phoney there is

By: Deb Kinnard

Deb Kinnard — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 16:35:03 +0000

Hey, the woman has a right to her opinion. And I give her kudos for taking the plunge and posting them in a public forum knowing full well everyone would rip her apart.

Not exactly. We all have a right to our opinion, but none of us has the right to falsify. If the original poster felt so very passionate about her position, she should have had the decency to use her real name and not “borrow” (read: steal) someone else’s. Particularly someone with so high a profile.

By: Lilith Saintcrow » Blog Archive » Kerfluffle! And Stories!

Lilith Saintcrow » Blog Archive » Kerfluffle! And Stories! — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:34:38 +0000

[...] llama is so very drama all other llamas go home. There’s death threats from cover models, accusations from magazine editors, and [...]

By: Lilith Saintcrow » Blog Archive » Early in the morning, rising to the street, light me up a cigarette and I slap shoes on my feet…

Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:34:16 +0000

[...] big flap in emails this morning is all about someone claiming to be Kathryn Falk (of RT fame) and taking bloggers to task for being vituperative. I’m not sure if this is Ms. Falk, and Dear Author has the scoop on it (plus an update here [...]

By: Jaden

Jaden — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 14:33:22 +0000

It’s not only Romantic Times with this crap going on! There are many other on line groups and online ezines that are doing the same thing! Further, I’m sick and tired of reading reviews written by the authors themselves. I can name a few.
Jade

By: emdee

emdee — Fri, 04 May 2007 16:00:07 +0000

Sarah at Smart Bitches called Ms Falk and had an interesting conversation where she claimed that someone hacked into her computer and wrote that rambling mess at Karen’s. It just gets weirder…

By: Rashenbo

Rashenbo — Thu, 03 May 2007 18:37:59 +0000

Oh man… What a ridiculous string of comments. I have no idea if the commenter was truly who she claimed to be… but good grief. What a nut.

By: Why the romance community dissing RT is bad for black romance authors | the way there

Thu, 03 May 2007 13:12:19 +0000

[...] May 3, 2007Why the romance community dissing RT is bad for black romance authors RT’s integrity is being questioned and far worse, the integrity of their reviews. Why Romantic Times reviews are not credible. [...]

By: Kate R

Kate R — Wed, 02 May 2007 23:16:52 +0000

Now that I know the reviews are for me, me, me, I want some kind of compensation. Summer books keep getting three stars from RT and it bums me out big time. Can I send my therapy bill to RT?

By: Bev(BB)

Bev(BB) — Wed, 02 May 2007 19:30:19 +0000

Ya know, maybe there really are people who can’t tell fantasy from reality and need to be protected from the harshness of life . . . cue the twilight zone theme here, people. Because even if she didn’t write that, somebody did and somebody just needs to get a clue. And if it was really posted by her, whoa, what a hugh PR misstep because I’ll never buy that magazine again in this lifetime nor visit the site. Considering the fact that I’m spending most of this week shuttling back and forth with my father in the hospital, I’m just so happy to know I’m one of those women who spend all my time posting from the quiet of my home.

Sheesh. Give me a break.

By: S.K.

S.K. — Wed, 02 May 2007 18:53:03 +0000

Oh my God, are we STILL beating this dead (and by now devoured) horse???

I agree with Charlene. Tina Engler didn’t build her company by being a simpering, fragile female. She’s laughing all the way to the bank. And more power to her, I say.

Can we move on? Pretty please? Anyone read any good books lately?

By: stephanie feagan

stephanie feagan — Wed, 02 May 2007 18:06:24 +0000

Hmm, I posted late last night, clearly tired. In an effort to point out I’m not a complete nimrod, only a partial one, my question of who was contemplating suicide, whether the author or the reviwer, didn’t mean Karen Scott. In the ramblings of the post from Ms. Falk, or her mysterious clone, I thought perhaps she meant whomever reviewed the book in RT was upset. Now I think on it, that makes zero sense – why would a reviewer be that upset that another reader disagreed with her? I was either too tired to understand, or the post made me cross-eyed.

Oh. Wait.

I’ve had a full night’s sleep, and it’s still making me cross-eyed.

Wonder how this book fared in RT reviews? Anyone know?

By: Emmatyville » Blog Archive » Where’s My Popcorn?

Emmatyville » Blog Archive » Where’s My Popcorn? — Wed, 02 May 2007 17:32:20 +0000

[...] Blog The Shot Heard ‘Round The Convention Dear Author Exhibit A Dear Author Exhibit B Dear Author Exhibit [...]

By: Jules Jones

Jules Jones — Wed, 02 May 2007 17:11:09 +0000

Annie, RT has a history of prejudice against m/m writers. I’ll say right now that I have a bias here — at one point RT was giving authors to understand that taking paid ad space in the magazine would get you a review. During that period, my publisher took out a three page spread in RT to advertise the launch of their new print line. The launch lineup included one m/m romance — mine. It was not reviewed, and will not be reviewed.

I’m not a member of the Manlove group, but I am an m/m romance author with personal experience of RT being somewhat selective with their support of romance authors.

Note that Mrs Giggles shredded one of my books — and in doing so gave me far more respect and support than I’ve ever had from RT, for she was willing to read the book, and explain clearly why she didn’t like it, for reasons to do with whether she thought it was well written.

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:44:26 +0000

There are plenty of us old guard who respect and appreciate the new. I hope KF won't be considered the voice or the image of those of us who've been around for a couple of decades.

Good point. I didn’t mean to imply that there was no overlap, simply that there are some members of each side who can’t see the merits of the other position and who see a polarization where there need be none, IMO.

By: Nora Roberts

Nora Roberts — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:36:20 +0000

I understand where you’re coming from, Robin, but I’d have to qualify as a member of the old guard. And I’m not threatened by the current blogasphere. In fact, I like it a lot. I’m also in such complete disagreement with Falk’s post that I don’t have enough words to describe my thoughts. I’ll just stick with appalled and pissed off. That covers enough.

I broke off any contact and connection to RT about a decade ago, for my own reasons. if I hadn’t then, I would now.

There are plenty of us old guard who respect and appreciate the new. I hope KF won’t be considered the voice or the image of those of us who’ve been around for a couple of decades.

By: janice

janice — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:22:46 +0000

There was a new york times article today about how book reviews are losing print coverage – http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/books/02revi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
“”To some authors and critics, these moves amount to yet one more nail in the coffin of literary culture. But some publishers and literary bloggers -’ not surprisingly -’ see it as an inevitable transition toward a new, more democratic literary landscape where anyone can comment on books…” I wonder that situation has something to do with this targeting of a blogger?

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:19:39 +0000

Oh, and one more thing: I realize that there are authors out there who just don’t want to talk about stuff like theme and style and motif and character, etc., especially with gasp! readers. And that’s fine. Just turn away, turn away, turn away. I find it somewhat ironic, if not exactly surprising, that some of the issues readers argue about in Romance are essentially the same issues we tend to argue about regarding community dynamics. Are virgin heroines morally superior? Are “nice girl” readers and authors morally superior? Should heroines have to give up everything for the hero? Should women readers have to suppress their views so as not to rock the boat? Personally, I see this kind of moralizing as both a prison and as philosophically untenable (how far can you push it before becoming a hypocrite?), but for whatever reasons, it’s running through our fiction and our other interactions. Isn’t it time we claimed our own agency as independent and intelligent women and freed ourselves from these constraints, which, at this point in history, seem to be more of our own making than anyone else’s? If some don’t think it is, just turn away, turn away, turn away.

By: Tara Marie

Tara Marie — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:13:46 +0000

If it wasn't, then Falk is a hypocrite of the first water when she starts going on about women needing to support each other, and the horrors of male-run businesses. Because at the Romantic Times convention, one group of women had their promo material confiscated by the hotel customer services manager, with no attempt by the con staff to stop him -’ supposedly because it had given offence to a businessman.

I’m not really surprised by this. The June 2007 issue of RT has a letter of complaint about an ad for a m/m romance…

From their answer:

We’re sorry that the ad offended you,… While we do monitor the covers that go into each section, including the erotic, RT’s policy is that we will not review meale/male or female/female books in the magazine–but we do allow them to be advertised….

As the romance genre has expanded so have we, and in an effort to be as fair as posible, we feel that advertising the books provides a service. The erotica section, in general, is not for everyone, just like the inspirational section is not for everyone, but our goal is to let readers know what’s out there to give them choices and intgroduce them to genres, books and authors they may never have picked up….

It seems to me they’re walking a fine line and having a problem doing it.

By: raine

raine — Wed, 02 May 2007 16:12:11 +0000

I’ve followed this thread on Karen’s from the beginning, and can’t believe how it’s developing!

Karen’s blog is a reader’s blog. Readers have the right to voice their opinion on books and on publishers. All the name calling aside, there’s nothing wrong about the voicing of honest opinions.

But nothing there left me as open-mouthed as Ms. Falk’s post (if, indeed, it was her).
Stunned.