I've heard this, but I don't think it's true. I've never seen evidence of 'facile praise' and I've seen plenty of negative reviews at online review sites. It is the case that sometimes, online reviews are a little brief and provide too much plot (just a book overview) and not enough analysis about the book's value. Sometimes there isn't any substantiation (example quotes) to go along with the reviewer's statements. That may be because of the perception that online readers have a short attention span — something that isn't true in my experience. I think, however, that most reviewers tend to be critical, and will review honestly — not shying from indicating where a book falters.
I certainly encourage my own reviewers to be honest, and am more than happy to publish negative reviews as long as they are well written and the reviewer provides specific examples of instances where the book doesn't work. That said, there are sometimes instances where a book is so badly written and unprofessional — first time author, maybe self-published and poorly edited — that publishing a negative review would be like kicking a kitten. In those instances, we'll just refuse to do the review, and if it really is self-published or produced by a small house, we'll offer to send the book back. If, on the other hand, a book is awful in every respect, but written by a well-known author at a big house with good sales, I won't hestitate to publish a well written negative review. Sometimes there's a case of "The Emperor's New Clothes" operating with book reviews, and I'm always happy to buck the trend!
What defines a "legitimate" reviewer?
I think that the term "legitimate" is full of emotion and fraught with danger! A reviewer who writes well and does a thoughtful, in-depth analysis of a book is certainly providing as valuable a service as say, Michiko Kakutani of the NYTimes. There are all kinds of blogs and not all of them have been designed to provide professional quality reviews. Some are just casual opinions and aren't presenting themselves as anything else. Some are focused around discussion about books rather than reviews. It's sometimes easy to blur those distinctions online because everything happens very quickly, and sometimes the editing step is skipped. A well written, well-edited review is a well written, well-edited review whether it published online or in print. The only difference is the medium (and speed of publication!).
What is your stand on paid reviews?
I don't think they're ethical! I understand why an author would be tempted to pay for a review. Some publications like Foreword or Publishers Weekly are incredibly difficult to get reviewed in if you're an 'unknown', but if you are paying for your review, you're effectively becoming a customer, and that muddies the waters of objectivity. I like the idea that reviewers tend to be working for the readers. I love giving an author publicity, but I see my 'customers' as those who are hoping to gain information on books so they can decide where to spend their hard earned money and time. So I'm not working for the author, I'm working for the reader, and that's where my allegiance lies and who I'm writing for. If someone pays me to do a review, I'm writing for them, and it's a lot harder to maintain objectivity.
Article comments
1 - Donna McDine
Mayra & Magdalena...what a wonderful insightful interview. The questions and answers truly gives great indepth insight into the reviewing world.
Thanks!
Donna
2 - Aaron Paul Lazar
Hello, Maggie and Mayra! This is a delightful glimpse into Maggie's world. I truly enjoyed it and must say I do cherish the longer, more analytic reviews highly (whether my own books are being reviewed, or I'm reading to determine my next book purchase!), and aim for the same quality with the reviews I write. Thanks for posting this, Mayra. Great information!
3 - Beverly McClure
Thanks for this great interview. I was especially interested in the mistakes amateur reviewers (like me) make. Also, whether the interview influences a person's choice to purchase the book.
I enjoyed reading your advice and comments.
Beverly
4 - Linda Austin
Maggie gave wonderfully detailed and indepth answers to good questions, and I also love how her site is another champion for new and lesser-known authors. This interview has been a learning experience.
5 - A. F. Stewart
The world of reviews and reviewers is far more complicated than I imagined. A wonderful interview, and some great insights.
6 - Joy Delgado
Thanks once again Mayra for an exceptional interview. Magdalena your answers to Mayra's questions gave me a better look into the world of reviewing. Thanks
Joy
7 - Carolyn Howard-Johnson
When Mayra interviewed me(coming June 8), she asked me if reviews are influential. Some are far more influential than others. Magadalena's reviews are so thoughtful and complete I use her reviews of my book, The Frugal Editor, in my media kit. Maggie also names her top ten reads on her site at the end of the year. My chapbook of poetry, Tracings, was so-named and that is very nearly like winning a contest. I've used it to great advantage in my promotion campaign. And believe me, poetry needs to be promoted! (-:
Best,
Carolyn Howard-Johnson
Award-winning author of the HowToDoItFrugally series of books for writers
8 - Shari Lyle-Soffe
Mayra
Another terrific interview. Thanks.
9 - c hoare
These interviews are a great resource, and a couple of things occurred to me --
Are these interviews in the published copy of The Slippery Art of Book Reviewing, or will there always be a link where we can find them again? I'm beginning to suspect the first and will definitely buy a copy -- they're valuable for writers as well as potential reviewers.
Chris.
10 - Margay
Magdalena, I love The Compulsive Reader! It is one of my favorite feeds and I have a lot because, well, I am a compulsive reader. This was a fantastic interview, one of the best I've read in awhile. You are so well-informed and you inform others well. That is a gift. Thank you for sharing it with us.
Margay