Dear Author » Ethics in Reviewing

Monday News and Deals: Publishers Glum About Digital Future

Jane — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:18:05 +0000

There are two big tech publishing conferences that take place in the spring. One is Digital Book World and the second is Tools of Change. (The latter is one that I’ve gone to for 3 years). Different companies collect data and present that data at these conferences. One such survey conducted by Forrester Research Inc. says that publishers aren’t looking forward to the rise of digital because it doesn’t appear that digital format is bringing about more book purchases. Indeed, with the adoption of tablets, reading may actually decline. Anecdotally, when I first got my Kindle Fire, I spent about a week watching video and not reading.

* Readers will be better off, 61% in 2011, down from 74% in 2010
* More people will read books than did before, 60% in 2011, down from 66% in 2010
* Readers will read a greater number of books than before, 47% in 2011, down from 66% in 2010

When asked about their own companies, the pessimism became more pronounced: Only 28% of publishing executives think their company will be better off because of the transition to digital, down from 51% a year ago.

I’m not sure why readers aren’t better off. I’d be interested in hearing how publishing executives think that readers will be worse off. I suspect it is because they believe that it will reduce the number of options that readers will have in stores? Or possibly reduce the variety or quality of book?

******

The Guardian did a nice obituary for Penny Jordan.

Penny Halsall, who has died of cancer aged 65, was a prolific writer of women’s fiction, and one of Mills & Boon‘s most popular authors, under the pen name Penny Jordan. She wrote more than 200 books in a 30-year career and was phenomenally successful, with sales of 100m worldwide. Her work was translated into 25 languages.

******

The Guardian also picks up on the flameouts between authors and reviewers arising out of negative reviews on Goodreads (and elsewhere). I think this falls under the rubric of all publicity is good publicity at this point.

Whose book is it anyway? The hardest thing a writer has to learn is that once you publish a book, it’s no longer truly yours – even though it’s got your name on the front and it lives inside you. It belongs to the readers now. All you can do is steel yourself as you push it out into the world, stay gracious, and get busy with the next one.

And if you can’t stand the heat of the blogosphere – don’t Google yourself.

******

The week discusses McDonald’s move toward offering books. A book with every Happy Meal? I’m totally down with that.

“The latest big name in books isn’t Amazon — it’s McDonald’s,”says Lindsay Goldwert in the New York Daily News. For the next month, the fast-food giant is replacing the plastic toy in every British Happy Meal with a book. The giveaway books — six installments of Michael Morpurgo’s Mudpuddle Farms series — are a tie-in with Steven Spielberg’s new film adaptation of Morpurgo’s War Horse.

As an aside, Ned took the tot to see War Horse and she cried during the entire movie. Two kids and a few horses are shot. It was pretty traumatic for her. Getting back on topic, selling books in non traditional places is something about which I am a big fan. I’m still waiting to see the Berkley Heat + Victoria Secret connection.

******

I was somewhat surprised to see an advertorial for BlueInk Review, a company that will sell review services to self published authors. The company says that many of its reviewers also review for respected literary institutions. I am wondering if the reviewers’ identities will be kept a secret like at Publishers Weekly and Kirkus?

******

There don’t appear to be any great new deals. The discounts I’ve seen are ones that I’ve posted about in the past so I’ll wait until Wednesday or Thursday and do a big post rounding up the sales. Dukes are still on sale! You can click here to see past deal postings.

Tuesday Midday Review Links: Kindle is everywhere but Canada (WTF?)

Jane — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:35:30 +0000

Copyright Licensing is a non profit copyright collective that represents publishers and authors. Yesterday (or was it Monday), CL began to digitize more than 300 of its most famous books and will be seeking the rights from publishers and authors to digitize others. These books will be made available to libraries, booksellers and educational sector.

Amazon has now announced it will ship the Kindle 2 on October 19 to over 100 countries (not Canada though) and will provide wireless access through ATT & its international partners. This announcement is accompanied by a Kindle 2 price drop from $299 to $259.00. Because the Kindle will be shipped from the U.S., international readers will have to pay a customs surcharge (usually over $50 USD) and international shipping costs. This will likely add around $100 USD to the price of the Kindle. Ironically the International Kindle will also ship with the US power adapter. The Kindle’s availability does not remove geographical restrictions. The same ebooks that are unavailable to international purchases yesterday are unavailable today. It is possible that the increased international exposure to ebooks will increase pressure on authors and publishers to grant worldwide digital rights. Maybe.

Harlequin is partnering with ABC to produce four titles based on the lives of the students at the fictional Cyprus-Rhodes University which is the basis for the TV show ‘Greek’. These sound like Sweet Valley High like. (Having said that, I have no idea what Greek is about as I’ve never, ever watched it.)

Boston Bibliophile has a FAQ with a lawyer on the new guidelines for bloggers. One thing that I think is important to remember about the FTC guidelines is that the guidelines are tied to a person and not a location. For me, because I believe the regulations, as interpreted by the FTC, require a disclaimer whenever a person makes a positive statement about a product received directly from the publisher and/or author, my book discussions will take place here at Dear Author where the disclaimer is in the sidebar.

FTC Guide re Endorsement Update

Jane — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:24:16 +0000

I spoke with Richard Cleland this morning. I shared with him my concerns. I think that the enforcement of the rules are still in the developmental stage. Cleland reiterated what he told other blogs that this is the educational period. I don’t see the FTC regulations being revised, but apparently there is some room for crafting guidelines for enforcement.

I suggested a warning and opportunity to cure and Cleland liked that idea. He said that they have used it in the past in the health product field except they are called advisory letters.

I asked about the issue of the fines. Cleland stated that this is something the AP took out of context. The FTC has no ability to levy fines. A charge must be made and taken to an administrative law judge and a cease and desist is requested and provided if the FTC fulfills its burden. If the C&D is ignored, then a civil penalty can be requested for up to $11,000.00. The full explanation of enforcement and penalties for all FTC violations can be read here.

No case would be brought in federal court unless it involved a very serious fraud else the FTC would likely be frowned upon by the court for wasting judicial time.

We discussed the issue of Twitter and whether each and every positive statement about a book that had been received for review would need to carry a disclaimer. Cleland was of the opinion that it would however we did discuss the issue of the product itself. In many other industries, the review product is nearly always returned and not kept by the reviewer. In the book industry, it is common for all reviewers, regardless of whether they review for mainstream publications or whether they review for a personal blog, to keep the books that are reviewed. I also brought up the issue of e-arcs and how any blogger could prove that the product had been deleted or kept.

I’m fairly certain that Cleland is not familiar with the book industry or the book blogging industry. He certainly was open to hearing more from us. I plan to continue to discuss this issue with him.

The FTC and the Unreasonable Case of Disclosure

Jane — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 10:00:02 +0000

see more Lolcats and funny pictures

I had a different post planned for today. Really. It was from Louisa Edwards and Tessa Dare on the topic of the unlikeable heroine. But yesterday news broke that the new revised Guide from the FTC on endorsements was going to go into effect on December 1, 2009.

Let me start off with saying that I believe in transparency. When I remember, I almost always state in a review whether the book was provided to me for free or whether I purchased it because I’ve always thought that a reader’s decision making process is interesting. To some extent, DA serves as reading journal for myself.

If you note, we have ads in the feed and it says that we are paid an affiliate fee. When we had an Amazon bookstore, we told you we received an affiliate fee from that. When we got the Sony Readers, we told you that as well. We believe in transparency. We believe that it is one of the most important parts of our relationship as bloggers with you as the readers and commenters.

However, I don’t believe that the new FTC guidelines actually help to further the goals of transparency but rather, instead, the new rules will be rife with abuse and misuse and uneven application. Here’s why:

1. Adversely affects smaller blogs. Small blogs like ours do not have editors. We don’t get paid to review and what we do is truly a labor of love. Yes, we are starting to host ads but we cannot afford a full time editor for our reviews. Blogs without editorial staffs will be subject to the new rules while blogs and mainstream publications, regardless of other issues and relationships, will not. Let me state it this way: the blogs with the highest earning capacity will likely be exempt while the blogs with the lowest earning capacity will not. I found it fascinating that Richard Cleland of the Bureau of Consumer Protection said this:

Cleland said that a disclosure was necessary when it came to an individual blogger, particularly one who is laboring for free. A paid reviewer was in the clear because money was transferred from an institution to the reviewer, and the reviewer was obligated to dispense with the product. I wondered if Cleland was aware of how many paid reviewers held onto their swag.

"I expect that when I read my local newspaper, I may expect that the reviewer got paid," said Cleland. "His job is to be paid to do reviews. Your economic model is the advertising on the side."

From Cleland’s standpoint, because the reviewer is an individual, the product becomes "compensation."

2. Uncertainty. Looking at the interview Ed Rants had with Cleland, it’s unclear who will be held to this new standard and what will be the trigger. Each situation is viewed on a case by case basis and dependent on the “degree of relationship between the advertiser and the blogger.” By having buy links at the end of the blog, we are engaged in activity that would “raise the eyebrows” of the FTC. To avoid scrutiny, Cleland suggests that we return the ARCs and, I suppose, remove the buy links.

I’m even uncertain if I buy the book post review but still hold onto the ARC whether I am in violation of the Cleland interpretation. The fact is that a) none of us keep our ARCs because we aren’t supposed to sell them. All of mine go into the recycler and b) I often buy ebook copies of paper books that I have enjoyed.

Again, the lack of clarity in the drafting is so difficult for the blogger in trying to comply.

3. Inappropriate publisher involvement. The new Guide makes advertisers (or those that provide the product so in this case either authors or publishers) liable to the FTC for any misleading statements made by the blogger. Thus, if a blogger says something misleading, then the advertiser (publisher/author) is responsible for misleading the consumer as well. The Guide, in fact, says

In order to limit its potential liability, the advertiser should ensure that the advertising service provides guidance and training to its bloggers concerning the need to ensure that statements they make are truthful and substantiated. The advertiser should also monitor bloggers who are being paid to promote its products and take steps necessary to halt the continued publication of deceptive representations when they are discovered

Like I want publishers breathing down my neck while I try to write fair and honest reviews. We’ve already turned away publishers who wanted to have oversight over our reviews. And frankly, I feel like I should be giving instruction to publishers on labeling issues.

4. Encouraging negative reviews. Sarah Weinman jokingly said that FTC guidelines would be encouraging bloggers to be snarkier and meaner. This is because the FTC equates endorsements with positive reviews. According to Cleland, publishers send product in the hopes of a positive review. In the examples in the FTC guidelines, a blogger who receives product and then gives a “positive review” will be said to have given an endorsement requiring appropriate disclaimer. Therefore, the F reviews at Dear Author will be named FTC Review (because these don’t require disclaimers). Alternatively, if we never gave another positive review or recommendation, we would probably be okay.

5. Author endorsements. Author blurbs are some of the worst offenders of the Guide in the business. Some of the authors giving endorsements haven’t even read the book. Some will give endorsements to everyone who asks. Read this piece by Jenny Crusie on author blurbs. The FTC Guides have long covered these as inappropriate but has enforced its own rules against publishers?

6. International Effect. A commenter on Mashable noted that ‘Anti-Cyber Squatting Act’ extended to Canadian bloggers

For example the ‘Anti-Cyber Squatting Act’ has seen Canadian companies suing Canadian citizens under US law because the servers that were used (to perform domain registration in this example) resided on US soil.

But the effect could be that publishers will refuse to send books to bloggers, no matter where they are located, if the blogger isn’t complying because the possibility of publisher liability.

7. Eliminating any relationships. § 255.5 requires disclosure of “material connections”.

When there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed.

I’m not sure what this pertains to. I have attended luncheons, parties with publishers. Do I need to explain each and every piece of swag I am ever given? Could I even possibly remember every pen and mint tin I picked up? I doubt it.

It’s important to note that in various interviews around the web and in the Guide itself, the FTC contemplates that any comment, tweet, post on a facebook page, participation on a message board, must be accompanied by the relevant disclosure.

As for Twitter, the FTC isn’t letting you get a pass with the excuse that 140 characters–Twitter’s famous text limit–is simply too short. “There are ways to abbreviate a disclosure that fit within 140 characters,” Cleland said. “You may have to say a little bit of something else, but if you can’t make the disclosure, you can’t make the ad.”

8. Violates the First Amendments. The reviews at Dear Author go far beyond a product description. Commercial speech is speech by a manufacturer or seller designed to sell a product. It’s pure advertising. I defy anyone to say that a review, even an A one, is pure advertising. Yes, the government can regulate commercial speech and it can regulate truthful, accurate commercial speech. I would argue, though, that Dear Author reviews are not commercial speech.

9. Potential for abuse. You might not be aware of this but there are people who not only hate Dear Author but despise me personally. There are people who enjoy posting my legal name and place of employment on the internet, I’m sure in hopes of getting me to shut up.

The FTC says that it is going to focus on advertisers and not bloggers but if the FTC gets enough complaints, there is no doubt the blog will be investigated. The fact is that this sort of thing will actually serve to chill speech instead of encourage honest dissemination of thoughtful opinions. The end effect will be that fewer discussions of books will take place. Fewer books will be reviewed.

Book bloggers’ compensation is so tiny that it’s not likely to influence a reviewer. I mean, do you really think we are for sale for $7.99? Relationships are much more likely to influence reviews. There are plenty of established review sites that don’t divulge the private breakfasts, meet and greets, email exchanges and so forth that aren’t subject to these sorts of regulations. You have to rely on those reviewers to be impartial without knowing everyone who is in the inbox. This is the reason that we have always tried to disclose these relationships because we know that you all rely on us to tell you these things.

The FTC issue is not about whether transparency is good or bad. It’s about placing an uncertain burden on those who are least able to manage the compliance. This doesn’t protect the consumer because the most insidious relationships aren’t required to be disclosed. (For example, we disclosed that Janine is critique partners with Sherry Thomas and Meredith Duran. The FTC Guide would not require this).

I would like to see the FTC Guides revised to include some kind of monetary floor. I think that there should be a warning system so that the blogger gets the opportunity to cure the defect. The Guide should require the complainant to show links, tweets, comments, that would be considered to be violative of the new regulation. There should be some qualification in the guide that reviews that are not commercial speech should be exempted. There should also be some time expiration so that a person doesn’t have to keep receipts or proof of payment for products after a significant period of time. The fine should be equal to to the value of the product. (i.e., I could live with paying a $7.99 fine, not an $11,000 fine). These are all I can think of for the moment. The problem is that the Guide is now a new Federal Regulation and short of a lawsuit, I’m not sure we’ll get more clarity.

Until the FTC regulations are more clear, I don’t feel comfortable stating my positive opinion outside of Dear Author but don’t blame me, blame the FTC.

Readers and Reviewers Online Don’ts

Jane — Fri, 29 May 2009 18:00:58 +0000

Earlier this week, we posted an author online don’t list and to be balanced, Maili suggested we do a reader/reviewer online don’t list. Brilliant idea, I said.

***

Taste is subjective.
When someone criticizes or slates one of your favorite books, they aren’t criticizing you or your taste, they are making their opinion heard. Don’t ever suppress the opinion of another. If you disagree with their view, there’s nothing to stop you explaining why it works for you and how. Vigorous disagreement can be a thing of beauty.

I love the smell of constructive criticism in the morning

Constructive criticism is always good in a book discussion, but remember this golden rule: do not make it personal. As in, do not attack a person’s IQ or personality. If a character is stupid, it doesn’t mean its creator is stupid as well. Likewise for readers you disagree with.

Don’t assume some readers are uneducated if they couldn’t build coherent responses. Don’t pick on posters’ grammatical errors during a heated debate. It’s a pointless distraction. Don’t try to intimate them by waving your college degree or your ‘I’m an Academic!’ flag. Not only it makes you look a pompous ass, it defeats the point of having a book discussion. It’s not about you. On the other hand, don’t put academic-type readers down because you don’t like them big words they were using. It’s not about you, either. A book discussion should be about a book and your reactions to it.

Just don’t assume you know what anyone is really like on the basis of their opinions and interaction during book discussions. We can guess at motivations all the time, but unless we have something concrete to back it up, it’s all just guesses.

You’re not alone
When everyone but you loved a certain novel, you’re not alone because there is always someone who feels the same as you. There’s nothing wrong with speaking up because if you did, someone out there will let you know they share your view.

When a group of readers or authors engaged in a heavy discussion, don’t feel timid or left out. The fact the discussion is out in the open means it’s an open invitation for you to join whenever you like.

You might feel what you have to say is silly, but it isn’t. We need your voice as much as everyone else’s. You’re a reader and that is the only qualification you need. Being a reader carries a lot more weight than you may believe. When in doubt, ask questions. When someone questions your view, don’t feel defensive. Rephrase or restate your view with a clarification. If someone argues you or challenges you, don’t be afraid to stick to your guns.

If you feel it’s getting too personal, walk away or lurk. Every debate online is usually forgotten within two weeks, so sit on your hands and be patient.

To be or not to be
Just because some readers like to interact heavily with other readers and authors, it doesn’t mean you have to do it as well. If being a lurker makes you feel comfortable, stay a lurker. When you want to say
something, say it. Set your own pace, your own rules and your own comfort zone and stick with it until you’re ready to change.

Authors owe you nothing.
They have a right to their lives. Be patient. If they still haven’t responded to your blog comment or email after a month or haven’t yet created a story you expected for years, let it go and move on. You are free to strike them off your to be bought list or to-be-read list, but you and the author are on two sides of the stream of commerce. You buy their books, not a right to their lives.

Such a Sad Tale of the Blind Flower Girl
Before you think of faking a sob story to obtain a free book from an author, consider this: don’t do it. Really, don’t.

You are not entitled to a free book.
Getting free books from authors is a sweet deal but remember that you are never entitled to a free book (unless you win one and then that person better follow through). It can be true that getting you a free book would generate publicity and help an author, but if the author is not smart enough to see that, then move on because you aren’t entitled to a free copy just like an author isn’t entitled to anything from you. The system works better this way, trust us.

Why did that author recommend this crappy book?
Don’t always assume that authors were pimping their author friends’ books. Authors have a different perspective of fiction. As in taking the technical side of the writing craft into account. They see invisible lines in a novel that general readers don’t usually see. That doesn’t make the author right nor does it suggest you have bad taste. After all, the mass consuming audience won’t be authors. Just keep in mind that the author who likes a crappy book might be valuing “crap” differently. (Blurbs are an entirely different matter).

Authors aren’t a bunch of writing machines
There will be days when an author flips out and rages at a reviewer. Reviewers are easy targets for authors. Authors often have a difficult time divorcing themselves from their books. (I.e., their identity and self worth can be wrapped up in the work itself). If you know that author, you might be the one to be able to reign her in. If you don’t know the author and no one said it yet, leave it for the reviewer to deal with the author alone. If the author has a reputation for flipping out at reviewers or readers, it’s your choice to express your disapproval or quietly strike her name off your shopping list. Try not to engage her in a fight for the sake of entertainment.

DON’TS FOR REVIEWERS

Soliciting a copy means reviewing a copy
When you actively solicit for a review copy from an author, have the dignity to review it within a month of receiving it.

Many authors and reviewers do view review copies as “free books”, but in truth it is not. It’s an exchange of services. A solicited review copy has an invisible condition attached: you are expected to review it. If you do not review it, do not be surprised if you are not offered another “free book.”

If you were sent a review copy that you didn’t agree to review, you’re under no obligation to review it. You may want to make sure your site has some public policy regarding how you treat solicited and unsolicited review copies.

If the author of a book you’re reviewing is a friend of yours, it’s a fine line to walk on because not only your friendship with the author is on the line, your credibility as a reviewer is on the line as well. It’s worth taking the time to disclose this information at the start of any review.

If you keep giving great grades to authors that readers know you’re good friends with, it may affect their view of your future reviews or grades that in turn will affect your credibility.

If you’ve reached the point where when you write a review, you think about how the author may react or get anxious about hurting their feelings (or affecting your friendship), don’t do the review. Always remember your audience. Recognize and respect the line you’re not willing to cross.

Ethical Reviewing: Transparency, Consistency, and Community

Jane — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:00:25 +0000

more animals

We’ve blogged about ethics and reviewing in previous articles. We’ve discussed bias. We’ve talked about the intricate relationship between the author and the reader. All of these things work together to form the fundamental basis of my philosophy of reviewing here at Dear Author. I believe that no one person is without bias. It’s virtually impossible, I think, to reach a certain age and not be predisposed toward one thing or another. How you are raised. What you believe. Where you are in life. These all converge and influence one’s outlook or the filter through which everything is viewed.

Because I operate under the premise that no person is without bias, I believe that no review is unbiased. No book is read in a vacuum. If you have certain political or personal beliefs that are in direct conflict with the thesis of the story then it is unlikely that you will respond positively. Indeed, the more talented the author, the more negative your response might be.

The antidote to bias then is threefold: transparency, consistency, and community. When the reviewer articulates any recognizable bias, it allows the reader to judge the review and weigh it appropriately. For example, a book with lawyers in it might have innumerable mistakes that make the reading experience jarring for me. Another reader will not have that same bias. A book that is replete with babies might be a joy to some, but admittedly starts off probably one step back for me. A book with an Asian main character, I’ve semi-seriously joked will always start at a B grade and move up or down from there, because there are so few books with Asian characters.

It is true that since the inception of the blog, we reviewers have developed relationships with authors. I think each one of us believes that we can be honest about our reactions to the books regardless of whether we’ve broken bread with an author, drank with an author or exchanged one or a dozen emails with authors.

There are authors whom I don’t review and others here have chosen not to review for various reasons. Janine is critique partners with Sherry Thomas and Meredith Duran. She’s chosen not to review them but their books have been reviewed here at DearAuthor by others. Duran got a full phalanx of reviews ranging from A (ã‚¸ã‚§ãƒ¼ãƒ³(JÄn)) to B- (Janet) to C (Jane). There are authors I don’t like personally and have chosen to stop reviewing and reading their books altogether. Thus, not reviewing a book can be for both reasons of personal close relationship and dislike. Or it can be neither of those reasons.

The more important question may be whether friendship or animus can influence interpretation. Unfortunately, there is no one answer and I don’t know whether the biased person can actually tell whether they are being influenced one way or another. A reader, though, should feel comfortable disregarding one person’s opinion based either on the perceived or articulated bias of the reviewer, or even of the reader herself. Which brings us to the second prong in judging the efficacy of reviews–consistency.

One way that I think readers should look at a review site is based on the whole of the reviews provided. We have hosted negative reviews of authors I have loved here at Dear Author and we have hosted positive reviews of authors I really, really dislike here at Dear Author. We have posted positive and negative reviews of the same books and the same authors. No one reader reviewer is exactly like another. We do not share the same hive mind about books, partly because of our innate biases that differ from person to person, which come from our different experiences and perspectives. The sheer variety of opinions is, ironically, perhaps, one way we remain consistent in our approach to reviewing.

Jessica of RacyRomanceReviews pointed something out on her blog the other day. Laurie Gold wrote the PW review of Jennifer Armintrout’s Blood Ties. The review stated “but if you’ve got the stomach for it, this fast, furious novel is a squirm-inducing treat.”

Sounds like a recommendation, no? At AAR, Laurie Gold cited Armintrout’s book as the worst of the year.

Though the author created a couple of interesting characters and a difficult and intriguing tentative relationship for them, any interest I had was destroyed by one intimate scene that is the stuff of a true sadist’s dream. I’ve no problem with gore in general; indeed, an oddly favorite moment in one of Anne Rice’s vampire books features a couple of vampires literally breaking people’s bones and devouring their bodies, yet a similar moment in this book nearly brought up my lunch. This was, for me, the worst book of the year.

In the comment section, Laurie Gold offered up the explanation (probably disturbing to her most of all): “The editor made some changes. Beyond that I cannot comment.”

We aren’t professional reviewers or a professional publication like PW. I think it must be pretty awful to be placed in Laurie Gold’s position, wherein an editor takes our “it’s awful” review and turns it into a “it’s a treat” review. (as an aside, I actually liked Armintrout’s first book, Blood Ties). We are never going to be embraced by the NBCC. But we can offer you one thing. If we write it, we mean it. We are offering our honest reactions to the books (sometimes too honest and too unvarnished).

This brings me to my last prong of a good review site, and that is the community. I love reading the responses of readers, and I particularly love it if they have differing opinions. I think the variety of content and opinion is what makes Dear Author so robust and I often find the comments of the readers more interesting than anything I’ve written. Commenters can affirm a reviewer’s opinion or rebut it. The commenter can challenge a way that the reviewer thinks of things and responds to them. If the reviewers/bloggers are the heart and the books are the nutrients, then the community is the lifeblood that keeps us all going. We’re all in it together, being the check and the balance to maintain the best, most balanced and diverse community possible.

I guess the question that is put to you, the reader/consumer of reviews, is what do you need to know in order to appropriately weigh the review? What’s important in terms of ethics/transparency/bias/consistency, etc.? If you were to prescribe a set of reviewing ethics, what would they be? How would you change things here at Dear Author, if you could?

Would I Lie To You?

Janet — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:00:14 +0000

more animals

Do you remember the movie "Election," with Reese Witherspoon and Matthew Broderick? In the first scene Mr. McAllister asks his high school class about the difference between ethics and morals. Ironically, of course, the one student who eagerly attempts to answer the question is also the one who proceeds to make mincemeat of both ethics and morals during the course of the movie, her ambition a veritable engine for her imagination and willingness to do almost anything to secure her class presidency. Tracy Flick sees the future open before her, dependent on winning that race, completely indignant when someone dares run against her, amazingly unself-conscious about the levels to which she’ll "stoop to conquer.’

In fact, Tracy continues to see herself as a good person, earnestly praying before bedtime for her "Dear Lord Jesus" to "go that one last mile and make sure to put me in office where I belong so that I may carry out your will on earth as it is in heaven. Amen." In this Tracy exemplifies the difference between morals and ethics: morals relate to one’s personal value system, while ethics relate to one’s conduct within a community. Ethics concern the responsibilities people within a community have toward one another and toward a larger sense of "good living" or "correct conduct," while morals are more commonly associated with beliefs about what is right or wrong in a particular society. Ethics are particularly important in professional communities where there are certain standards that each member is expected to meet, especially when someone’s life or livelihood is one the line (doctors and lawyers, for example, even teachers).

It’s easy, of course, to mix these up, and people often do. In fact, I think we see the confusion over ethics and morals every time one of these author-conduct incidents rolls out. As soon as an author is called out over some particular conduct – plagiarism, gaming reviews, re-shelving books, whatever – a lot of backlash erupts around whether or not the author is being attacked. Which leads to a lot of mashing up about whether or not the bloggers who cover these stories are, for lack of a better description, mean girls who just like to stir shit up.

Since we’ve talked a lot about the difference between the author as a person and the author’s work and online conduct, I thought it might be interesting to talk a bit about blogger conduct, and more specifically about whether bloggers need a code of ethics similar to the one we seem to assume of authors. Do we need some community standards of reporting and reviewing, even though we’re largely amateurs in this online arena and not professionals earning a living?

I don’t have an absolute answer to this question, but before I offer my view and open it up for discussion, I want to put a few things on the table to chew over:

First, do bloggers constitute a community separate and apart from the online community more generally? Since many different types of people blog, is there a special category for blogs like Dear Author, Smart Bitches Trashy Books, Teach Me Tonight, All About Romance After Hours, and the like, that sets them apart? Is it the particular activity that defines the blog community or the role of the bloggers?

If bloggers are a community unto themselves, to what standards should we be held? Should we meet more general journalistic standards or editorial standards? Does it make a difference if we attempt impartiality in our reportage and commenting, or should we be required to provide honest opinions? Should we be required to believe everything we assert? Cyberjournalist.net created a proposed Bloggers’ Code of Ethics that emphasizes three main categories: Be Honest and Fair; Minimize Harm; and Be Accountable. Some of what they focus on – "never plagiarize," for example – is relevant to anyone writing publicly, but other things – "show good taste" and avoid "pandering to lurid curiosity" is obviously a HUGE matter of judgment, not to mention valuation of a blog’s worth. Do editorialists abide by these ethics? Do journalists, for that matter?

In the specific arena of Romance-related blogging, are reviewers a special sub-community within online blogging, and should there be a special code of conduct for reviewing, regardless of the general character of the blog? Author David Louis Edelman recently posted a list of things he wants from reviews, namely that they be honest, insightful, opinionated, detailed, original accurate, independent, not anonymous, and free of spoilers. Would the institution of something like this as a reviewer standard benefit reviews, which are, by nature, individual opinions? Why, for example, should reviewers always steer clear of spoilers if a spoiler is necessary in elucidating one of the detailed points Edelman wants in reviews? And how much detail is enough in a review? Under his standards, neither Romantic Times nor Publishers Weekly would qualify, I’m afraid, and yet they continue to serve as standard benchmarks for authors.

Should bloggers who make money blogging be held to a different standard? We often talk about how authors are professionals, how they are writing for money, and as such should accept a certain amount of straightjacketing in their online conduct. Should so-called professional bloggers have similar "professional expectations?" And what about amateur bloggers whose only capital is their reputation as bloggers, who are not making money, but who may gain a certain readership based on a positive reputation, whatever that may be based on (humor, reviews, honest dialogue, whatever).

As a blog reader – whether you are author, reader, fellow blogger, whatever – do you feel that there should be minimum ethical standards of conduct to which blogs should be held? What do you expect from the blogs you frequent, and do you give more validity to blogs that proclaim some ethical standard of their own, or are you simply looking for entertainment, ethical standards be damned?

My own view – not fully considered and open to reconsideration — is that the role of blogs is to provoke discussion, and that even more than authors, bloggers are individual voices that are not part of a professional group. So while anyone who writes has to be conscious of plagiarism and copyright concerns, in terms of some collective code of behavior bloggers are merely public citizens (and I use this in the most general way, not to imply national identity), and should be held to the same basic standards of any member of society. One important caveat, though: if someone is blogging in their capacity as a professional, then they may be held to different standards, depending on their professional context and their content

Most bloggers seem to be hobbyists, though, and not inclined toward professionalization in regard to blogging. One blogger or a thousand can all talk simultaneously without any of us being in contact or affiliation, in the same way that a thousand different conversations can proceed at once without any concept of them being linked. At a basic level, blog = voice(s), regardless of the actual people behind the blog. Authors, on the other hand, do not distill down to that same level. Book = voice, but an author functions on multiple levels, as individual, as professional, as contractor with a publisher, etc. I believe, therefore, that authors have responsibilities to one another that bloggers don’t. For example, if an author engages in reshelving books, s/he is violating the policies of bookstores and publishers, as well as engaging in an unfair practice relative to other authors. Whereas bloggers, especially not-for-profit bloggers, don’t have that same kind of mutual professional reliance because our role as a blogger is synonymous with the blog itself. Blogs are more like books, in my opinion, and do we hold books to a professional code of ethics? Do we accuse them of being mean and of lying?

Essentially, I believe that blogs function as sites of public discourse, and that their popularity, value, and reliability will be determined on the basis of individual blog (and the persona of the blogger) relative to the blog’s audience. And despite the belief that bloggers can and do basically say anything they want without thought, I actually think there is a dearth of really good, really challenging, really fearless public conversation online, and that it sometimes takes a very provocative, even polarizing and sensationalistic voice to get some of these discussions going.

Professional Review Question

Jane — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:16:54 +0000

I am the first to admit I am not a professional reviewer. I didn’t go to school or take a class on it. I’m definitely an outsider to the publishing industry. What I know about it comes from reading blogs and talking to editors and authors so I generally try to not question publicity matters.

For example, a few months ago I was sent an uncorrected advanced proof. It was bound and printed on regular paper and about the size of a trade paperback. I actually don’t mind these bound, un fancy copies because I figure they are cheaper to produce and I don’t feel guilty about tossing them when I am done with a review (as I try to buy the books that I want to keep and re-read in e form).

This particular uncorrected advanced proof looked like a line edited manuscript. It had strike throughs and suggested rewrites and proofing marks. I was unable to read the book. I’ve mocked up a page from Jane Eyre to give you an example of what it looked like as I don’t want to embarrass the author or the publishing house.

When I decided the book was unreadable, I kind of laughed about it, shared it with the other DA folks and let it go. It didn’t bother me as it wasn’t a book that I was really anticipating and because I am grateful for getting free books. It wasn’t a big enough deal to me to rock the boat and lodge a complaint. What would be the purpose, I asked myself.

I mentioned it casually on the blog one day and it prompted a personal email from an author indicating that some publishing houses from the editors to the publicists have done this in the past. I wondered if it was standard and whether professional reviewers should overlook these issues in reading the book and ultimately reviewing it.

I’m debating whether to bring this up to the publicity department. I don’t want to be considered a complainer because, as I said previously, it is a privilege to receive ARCs. I understand that. However, if it is in the authors’ best interest to have these issues brought to the attention of a publicity department, I would do so. What’s your opinion on this? Should reviewers overlook the state of the ARC? Should publicity be contacted? Is it even a big deal?

Coming Out of the Closet

Janine — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:00:38 +0000

The question of whether there is a divide between authors and reader/blogger/reviewers has been discussed and debated here and elsewhere. To me it seems clear that it does, at least in some quarters. Some reader/blogger/reviewers, including some of my fellow bloggers here on Dear Author, have called out some authors for behaving badly. And some authors have called out reader/blogger/reviewers for being mean girls. Recently, Janet (Robin) blogged here about her own response to some authors’ reactions to the recent Cassie Edwards scandal, saying that “It felt to me (and still does) that there was a frighteningly easy shift into reader v. author discourse.”

But nowhere, perhaps, is the rift more evident than in the relative absence from the romance community of people who bridge the gap — those who are both writers or authors, as well as bloggers and reviewers.

I don’t mean to suggest that this hybrid is completely nonexistent in the romance genre. Authors HelenKay Dimon, Alison Kent and Stephanie Feagan all write reviews for Paperback Reader. Bam is a blogger and former reviewer who is now published. There have also been some unpublished writers who have reviewed for AAR, including Kathryn Smith, Marianne Stillings and Megan Frampton, all of whom went on to be published. And there are others as well.

Still, those are a handful of women out of a far larger number of published authors and aspiring authors. It is enlightening, too, to read Frampton’s comments on her decision to stop reviewing.

…I don’t think other writers would do anything close to an objective job in terms of reviewing their peers. I know when I was writing reviews AND fiction, an author told me I had to make a choice: either I was a reader/reviewer or a writer. If I continued to do both, I would face awkward situations and possibly snubbing, etc. in the authors’ community.

A little under two years ago, there was an interesting debate on this topic on AccessRomance All-a-Blog. In comment #43, author Leslie Kelly said:

…The romance fiction industry, despite the number authors, is an *incredibly* small community. Everybody knows everybody. Everybody talks. There’s a lot of loyalty between friends and catty backstabbing between enemies. Honestly, I think a reviewer-author can be shooting themselves in the foot if they rip apart the wrong book and offend that author and alllllll her friends. And, by the way, her editor! (Um, I have personal knowledge of this one. I know an editor who will NEVER buy a particular author because that author has publicly slammed the editor’s authors & basically said their books shouldn’t have been published. Uh, EXCUSE ME? You really think the editor who bought those books is going to buy you after that???)

If a good friend of NYT bestselling author A is ripped to shreds by author/reviewer x and someday author/reviewer x wants a cover quote, or wants to do an anthology, or a miniseries, or in any way interact with NYT bestselling author…hmm-what do you think the answer will be?

And in comment #47, author Julie Leto chimed in:

And I thought I’d mention here that unpublished writers or aspiring writers who trash published books are doing themselves a disservice. My editors read reviews…and those names stick with them if the reviewer has been unfair or cruel.

Leto went on to clarify her comments in comment #56:

I’m not talking about reviewing in general. I’m talking about TRASHING.

But since she also said (to author/reviewer HelenKay Dimon) “Maybe we’re talking apples and oranges. I don’t know…but maybe what you see as an honest review I’d see as an snarky attack,” and since author/reviewer HelenKay Dimon admitted in this same thread that “I’ve gotten hate mail, two of which I viewed as threats,” (comment #70) it is with trepidation that I make my confession here today.

Here it is: I write. I’ve been writing since elementary school, and in a variety of forms. I’ve written poems, plays, short stories, and movie reviews in the past, among other things; I currently write book reviews and the occasional letter of opinion here at Dear Author. But the reason for this post is that my current writing project outside of Dear Author is also my first attempt to write a romance.

Let me take a moment to also admit that trying to write a romance, and trying to write one well, is one of the most difficult things I’ve ever attempted. What a humbling experience it is to come up against the limits of my abilities on a regular basis. It has a way of making me appreciate the effort that’s gone into each and every book that I review, whether or not that book works for me.

And here I come to the crux of the matter: I am an unpublished writer who is also a reviewer and blogger.

How did I come to be all these things? Well, I’ve been reading romances since I was thirteen. I cut my teeth on books by Johanna Lindsey, Rosemary Rogers, Kathleen Woodiwiss and Jude Deveraux. Later I discovered Judith McNaught, and later still, Mary Jo Putney and Linda Howard. When, in my twenties, I found Laura Kinsale, I was stunned by the power of the feelings that her books evoked in me. When I discovered Patricia Gaffney a few years later with To Have and to Hold, it was electrifying.

But as much as I adored some books, I was also beginning to feel dissatisfied with many others. At thirteen, just reading about romantic and sexual love was thrilling, but by my mid to late twenties, many of the books I found in bookstores were feeling very familiar to me. I was desperately craving something new and different, something satisfying, but trying to find it by picking up books at random at the bookstore wasn’t working for me.

And so, about ten years ago, I hit the biggest romance reading slump I have ever experienced. For about a year and half, I read mainly in other genres and, except for rereading those few romances I loved and waiting for books from a handful of authors to come out, I became jaded where most of the genre was concerned.

It was around this time that I discovered the internet. For a while, I hung out in a reading community where people mostly discussed books in other genres, which is what I was reading at that time. Then, one day, I found AAR, and soon thereafter, TRR. I can’t begin to say how wonderful it was for me to find these sites: wonderful because for me, they re-opened the world of romance.

Through the recommendations of their reviewers, and in the case of AAR, of readers on their boards as well, I was once again able to find new books I loved — able to discover new-to-me authors like Mary Balogh, Carla Kelly and Connie Brockway.

If it hadn’t been for those reviews, I wouldn’t have plunged back into the romance genre, wouldn’t have realized that there were so many more good books out there than I’d been aware of before. If it hadn’t been for reviews and for the book discussions that have kept me so engaged, I would not still be an avid romance reader today, much less trying to write a romance.

As the introduction to this opinion piece makes clear, I am aware that in the romance community the majority of writers, both published and unpublished, don’t speak publicly about books that didn’t work for them or that they did not enjoy, and do not write critical reviews.

Perhaps if I had come into the romance community with the intention of being a romance writer from the beginning, I would not have done so either. But when I first discovered the romance boards, I did not intend to write a romance, and at first, I also had no awareness of the negative perceptions that some people in the community had of readers who examined in public what did and didn’t work for them in a book.

In hindsight, I wish now that over the years, I had stated some of my opinions more courteously. But I can’t, and don’t, wish that I’d never put them out there. The discussions of books with fellow readers have become a huge part of my love for the genre. And it’s partly for the readers who I’ve met and befriended that I’m now trying to write a romance as well. Because it’s in large part this ongoing internet conversation that’s seduced me and made me fall in love with this genre all over again.

When Jane and Jayne approached me about blogging for Dear Author, I was faced with a dilemma. But ultimately, I decided to join Dear Author because I liked and respected Jane and Jayne, because I wanted to see what my thoughts on books would look like in a more formal format, and because I wanted to contribute and give back in the same way that review sites had given so much to me.

I believed, and still believe, that there is a difference between thoughtful, polite criticism and bashing, and the former is what I have tried to provide here at Dear Author. I don’t know if I’ve always succeeded, but I do know that I have tried.

I know that even thoughtful, polite criticism can sometimes sting the author whose book is being examined. But I also know that one can’t publish something, be it a book, a review or an opinion piece like this one, and expect everyone who reads it to love it. Even Shakespeare didn’t get universal approbation in his time. Why then should we expect everyone to say they love a book, or else to say nothing at all? Doesn’t an open, thoughtful conversation about our differences of opinion also have something to offer us?

I believe that it does. A well thought-out review is of benefit to readers, because it can help them decide how to spend their purchasing dollars, and make them aware of books they would not have known of otherwise. It can also, of course, be a source of publicity for an author.

In addition, having had my writing workshopped in writing classes and critiqued by fellow writers, I know that the process of having your writing examined for flaws as well as strengths can be difficult, but I also know that I have grown as a writer as a result of this same process. Reviews aren’t exactly the same thing, but (at least when some thought has been put into them) they’re also not completely dissimilar.

And finally, I believe that discussions of what makes some books stronger than others can help strengthen the genre as a whole. If the best books in the genre (and I am not saying I am the arbiter of what is best — that is something that is up to the entire community to determine; my role as a reviewer is merely to help keep that discussion rolling) remain read and in print, examined and discussed, then they can only influence and inspire new writers to attempt to equal those books.

Despite all that I have said here, I reserve the right to stop reviewing if I come to some fork in the road. If I find I simply don’t have the time, or that I no longer enjoy it, or if I get published and feel that it creates a conflict of interest. I’m not saying I’ll feel that way in the future; I simply don’t know how I may feel.

For all these reasons, I do not judge anyone else who makes a different choice than the one I’ve made. But I would like to encourage writers and authors to think about what I’ve said here, and consider the possibility of putting opinions of books out in the public eye.

I know that some authors won’t even say what their favorite books are when asked to name them in an interview, and for that reason, I’m glad every time I see a writer or author pipe up to say why she loved a particular book, or explain why some aspect of another book didn’t work for her. Because it makes me feel less alone here in the blogosphere, yes, but also because I truly think that this kind of conversation is the lifeblood of a genre, and that any time writers enter into these discussions thoughtfully, they are making an important contribution to the community.

In closing, I’d like to return to last week’s topic of ethics in blogging. The reason I’m disclosing the fact that I aspire to be a romance author isn’t because I’ve suddenly become courageous. It’s because I have two friends who are about a month away from being published for the first time. Sherry Thomas and Meredith Duran aren’t just my friends, they are also my critique partners.

At one time, I thought that I could, if I disclosed my friendship with them, and if another reviewer offered a second opinion, review Meredith and Sherry’s books (The Duke of Shadows and Private Arrangements, respectively). But as their publication date has neared, I’ve become more uneasy with doing so. It could be argued, I think, that I have a conflict of interest, and I don’t want my actions to reflect badly on Dear Author.

And so, I have decided not to formally review Sherry or Meredith’s books, and to disclose my relationship with them so that if I comment on the reviews of their books in the comment sections, or mention that I think both Sherry and Meredith are immensely talented (as I do) you can all decide for yourselves whether or not to take what I say with a grain or more of salt. It seems to me that transparency is the best way to take an ethical approach to the situation.

And now, let me turn this over to all of you. What are your thoughts on the possibility of a backlash to writers and authors who choose to review? Is it real or, as a friend of mine suggests, merely imagined? What are your thoughts on the role of the ongoing conversation about books? What do you think about unpublished writers as reviewers, published authors as reviewers, authors commenting on books, reviewers reviewing their friends, or any other topic that came up in this post?

NBCC Posts Its Ethics in Reviewing Survey

Jane — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:54:31 +0000

National Book Critics Circle posted a summarization of the results of its Ethics in Book Reviewing survey. It’s okay to ignore self published authors and you shouldn’t review a book without reading the whole thing. There’s lots of other stuff, like whether it is more appropriate to eat m&m’s or hershey kisses while reviewing and whether you have to wear pants when you type since no one can see you, so go ahead and read the rest of the summarization.

(Yes, I made the latter two survey results up.)