Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Author Resource Round Table
>
I'll give you my new book for a review
date
newest »
newest »
Careful. You cannot exchange anything of value for a review of your book, even the book itself. You can give away all the books you like, but only with the understanding that a reader can choose to review it or not. Booksirens has a list of reviewers that you can contact directly, but if they ask for money up front, move along.
Cameron wrote: "The Ghost DragonHi, I just published a book called "The Ghost Dragon." I'll give anyone who asks a copy in exchange for an honest review on Amazon.
Just contact me at camerongle..."
Cameron,
Many novice authors are unaware of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulation that requires any literary review obtained through compensation, including the offer of a free book, money, gift card, or promise of reciprocation, include a disclaimer clearly describing the type of compensation received in exchange for the review. Reviews containing such a disclaimer are often ignored or dismissed by those who do read reviews.
For whatever reason, the vast majority of avid readers choose to never post a rating or review. Those few that review books do so to express their personal, and therefore subjective, opinion with other readers, not the author.
Jim wrote: "Many novice authors are unaware of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulation that requires any literary review obtained through compensation, including the offer of a free book, money, gift card, or promise of reciprocation, include a disclaimer clearly describing the type of compensation received in exchange for the review..."I'd like to see the citation for that regulation. It keeps coming up here time and time again. However...
Have you ever -- ever -- seen a reviewer for a newspaper, magazine, literary journal, or industry website say, "I got a free book from the publisher for this review?" Because if that regulation is a real thing, every single review printed in the NYT Review of Books, or Kirkus, or any literary journal would have that disclaimer on it.
Or do you think reviewers for the NYT Review of Books or Kirkus buy their own books?
The legacy publishing industry built the existing review system on truckloads of free books and massive advertising spends over decades. If this was a real regulation, don't you think someone would've enforced it by now?
Lance wrote: "Jim wrote: "Many novice authors are unaware of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulation that requires any literary review obtained through compensation, including the offer of a free book, mon..."That’s the exact reason for the recent FTC regs - people know that in traditional journalism the reviewers get the products for free. In the murky new world of social media, blogs, ‘consumer’ reviews, etc., it’s much more difficult to tell what angle a reviewer may be working.
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/busin...
“If you’re employed by a newspaper or TV station to give reviews – whether online or offline – your audience probably understands that your job is to provide your personal opinion on behalf of the newspaper or television station. In that situation, it’s clear that you did not buy the product yourself – whether it’s a book or a car or a movie ticket. On a personal blog, a social networking page, or in similar media, the reader might not realize that the reviewer has a relationship with the company whose products are being recommended. Disclosure of that relationship helps readers decide how much weight to give the review.”
I would love it for folks who have read my books to give book reviews on Amazon or whatever, but that is up to them and I would never pay or force or cajole someone I know that has read my books to give a review. I have reviewed books I have on my Goodreads "to read" list if and only if I want to review the book, and ONLY if it is NON-Fiction! Reviewing fiction is too subjective. The only fiction I would review is if a friend of mine asks me to beta read it or just wants a review (in exchange for a review from that person, tit for tat thing). I don't know what the big deal is about reviews anyway...heck if I was dishonest enough I could create a phony account on some bogus yahoo.com email address and a phony persona and create a fake review of my own books--but I won't do that. Besides, scammers are filling my inbox everyday asking me to let them review my books provided I send them PDFs or whatever...the scam worked once (kinda, I only sent them a pre-final)...fool me once... If no one reviews my books, so be it. I will not get all upset over lack of book reviews!
Lance wrote: "I'd like to see the citation for that regulation. It keeps coming up here time and time again."The actual statute is 15 U.S.C. §45.
Advice from the FTC about product reviews HERE
Basically, any quid-pro-quo exchange for a review must be clearly disclosed in the review. Some media platforms may prohibit such reviews even if fully disclosed. All the FTC cares about is the disclosure to avoid any possible misleading endorsements.
[DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer and, as a fiction writer, I am also prone to making things up]
Jim wrote: "Lance wrote: "I'd like to see the citation for that regulation. It keeps coming up here time and time again."The actual statute is 15 U.S.C. §45.
Advice from the FTC about product reviews HERE
..."
Thank you, Jim, for posting this! I am glad the FTC actually seems to give a damned about legitimate book reviews. As with DMCA, there are some laws that actually make sense. Copyright owners need some kind of recourse.
Jim wrote: "The actual statute is 15 U.S.C. §45...."15 U.S.C. §45 is titled, "Unfair methods of competition unlawful; prevention by Commission," and is entirely concerned with the process used by the FTC to enforce its regulatory findings. It says nothing about the subject at hand.
You probably also missed this subsection:
"15 USC § 45(n) Standard of proof; public policy considerations
"The Commission shall have no authority under this section or section 57a of this title to declare unlawful an act or practice on the grounds that such act or practice is unfair unless the act or practice causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers which is not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition [emphasis added]. In determining whether an act or practice is unfair, the Commission may consider established public policies as evidence to be considered with all other evidence. Such public policy considerations may not serve as a primary basis for such determination."
I'd like to hear a cogent defense of the idea that not being told that a book-review blogger got a book for free "causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers."
Are reviewers for legacy media outlets inherently more reliable or immune to commercial pressure than reviewers on book blogs? Not at all. Professional review outlets rely on advertising by the legacy publishing industry to survive. Part of the bargain is that publishers shower these outlets with ARCs or galley proofs to make sure the reviews are in print as the books release. You think that revenue stream doesn't come to mind when they decide whether to run a negative review of an advertiser's book? I can tell you from experience it does (I used to review books for Macmillan's Criminal Element website).
Are you really concerned that book bloggers are so weak-willed that getting a free book is enough to make them hand out an unearned glowing review? If so, why aren't you similarly concerned over the reviewers at Kirkus or Publisher's Weekly or the entertainment section of your Sunday newspaper? Writers don't get rich writing reviews, no matter who they're writing for. I got $20 a review from Criminal Element. You expect me to shell out $30 for a new book, spend hours reading it, then write 800 words so I can lose $10 on the deal? You first.
Let's try this: book bloggers get free books. So do people who write reviews for money. There, now you know; you shouldn't have to be told over and over again.
And those of you who are so hard over about this subject may want to ask yourselves: why do you care so deeply about this when you apparently don't give a damn about lack of disclosure in reviews that get run in outlets that actually make a difference?
Lance wrote: "I'd like to see the citation for that regulation. It keeps coming up here time and time again."You asked for the citation and I gave it to you. I should have probably included a trigger warning as to the contents. My apologies.
Lance wrote: "You probably also missed this subsection:"
No, I read that, along with a lot of other relevant material. Did you read the FTC guidelines to which I provided a link? You may have missed this explanation that they give:
"Knowing that reviewers got the product they reviewed for free would probably affect the weight your customers give to the reviews, even if you didn’t intend for that to happen. And even assuming the reviewers in your program are unbiased, your customers have the right to know which reviewers were given products for free. It’s also possible that the reviewers may wonder whether your company would stop sending them products if they wrote several negative reviews – despite your assurances that you only want their honest opinions – and that could affect their reviews. Also, reviewers given free products might give the products higher ratings on a scale like the number of stars than reviewers who bought the products. If that’s the case, consumers may be misled if they just look at inflated average ratings rather than reading individual reviews with disclosures. Therefore, if you give free products to reviewers you should disclose next to any average or other summary rating that it includes reviewers who were given free products."
Please note that my only conclusion was that "All the FTC cares about is the disclosure to avoid any possible misleading endorsements."
Lance wrote: "And those of you who are so hard over about this subject may want to ask yourselves: why do you care so deeply about this when you apparently don't give a damn about lack of disclosure in reviews that get run in outlets that actually make a difference?"
Personally, I don't care one way or the other ... I was just responding to your request for the citation.
Lance wrote: "...do you think reviewers for the NYT Review of Books or Kirkus buy their own books?"You are confusing editorial reviews with consumer reviews. They are not the same thing. Reviews in literary magazines, Kirkus (and similar) are editorial reviews. Publishers give out copies of books to those sources hoping for a great pull quote and to generate publicity. Those reviews are published on websites or newspapers NOT on the retailer site. This is where you are getting confused between the 2 types of reviews.
ARCs is a practice where copies are given out to bloggers or general readers and there is an expectation (and some indies explicitly state as a requirement) that those reviews be posted on Amazon and/or Goodreads. Amazon is a retailer site and reviews are supposed to be organic customer reviews. It is a violation of Amazon's TOS to incentivise reviews in any way.
Cameron wrote: "The Ghost DragonHi, I just published a book called "The Ghost Dragon." I'll give anyone who asks a copy in exchange for an honest review on Amazon.
Just contact me at camerongle..."
Per Amazon TOS you cannot provide a free copy in exchange for a review.
You can provide a free copy, and request a review, but a review cannot be required as a condition...
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custom...
Lance wrote: "I'd like to see the citation for that regulation. It keeps coming up here time and time again."Lucky for you some people here are nicer than me, I would have simply told you it's not our job to do your homework.
Have you ever -- ever -- seen a reviewer for a newspaper, "
Which is a professional reviewer,
"magazine,"
Which is a professional reviewer,
"literary journal,"
Which is a professional reviewer,
or industry website"
Which is a professional reviewer,
"say, "I got a free book from the publisher for this review?""
You do understand, of course, what it means for a person to be a professional reviewer, working for a publication? It means it's understood they are being paid to write the review.
No, they don't have to disclose that, because most people are smart enough to already know and understand the complete obvious.
However, consumer reviews are NOT people working at a profession. There is no reasonable assumption each has been paid to write and post a review (which would violate TOS, and mean they were not consumer reviews at all), or has received a free copy of the product from the producer.
Professional reviews are not allowed to be posted as consumer reviews. Consumer reviews are the unbiased, uninfluenced, opinion of a consumer with presumably no ties whatsoever to anyone who has a financial interest in the product.
So yes, if they receive a free copy of that product from someone who DOES have a financial interest that must be disclosed.
And really, it doesn't matter what you think about it, it's a requirement of Amazon and GR, and in order to adhere to FTC regulations.
"Because if that regulation is a real thing, every single review printed in the NYT Review of Books, or Kirkus, or any literary journal would have that disclaimer on it."
Nope. because that regulation is a real thing, regarding consumer reviews.
"The legacy publishing industry built the existing review system on truckloads of free books and massive advertising spends over decades. If this was a real regulation, don't you think someone would've enforced it by now?"
Apples and oranges
And it IS enforced. If you've been getting away with it, and it certainly sounds like you have, then you merely haven't been caught at it...yet.
If you're posting reviews for fellow authors where you've gotten a free book from them and you don't disclose that fact, you're deceiving people intentionally. Wanting to appear unbiased, and not wanting them to be aware of the potential bias and allowing them to make up their own minds how much weight, if any, to give your review.
Lance wrote: "I'd like to hear a cogent defense of the idea that not being told that a book-review blogger got a book for free "causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers.""That would be quite easy for any unbiased consumer with more than two brain-cells to rub together, but also a waste of time to bother - bottom line - that's the rule. It doesn't matter if you don't like it or unable to understand the reasoning for it.
"Are reviewers for legacy media outlets inherently more reliable or immune to commercial pressure than reviewers on book blogs?"
It's truly mindboggling how completely dense you are. it is a known fact that professional reviews are PAID FOR. Therefore, the disclosure of potential bias is already inherent in the product of the review itself, based on the fact that we all know that reviewer is being PAID TO WRITE THE REVIEW. It is already clear they are receiving compensation for their review. They are not a consumer purchasing a product for their own use, they're performing their job. This is clear and obvious.
The vast majority of consumer reviews are NOT the result of the consumer receiving a free product from the producer. They are intended to be unbiased, independent, uninfluenced opinion from a consumer. The presumption is that they do not receive any form of compensation for their review. If you don't know what the word "consumer" means, look it up. If you don't know the difference between a professional performing their job duties, and a consumer voluntarily providing their opinion, you've got bigger issues than I can assist with.
And again, it doesn't matter what you, or anyone else, thinks of it. Consumer reviews are NOT professional reviews, and consumer reviews are required - by the FTC, Goodreads and Amazon - to have a disclosure if the consumer obtained a free copy of the product from the producer, or anyone with a financial interest in the product.
"Let's try this: book bloggers get free books. So do people who write reviews for money. There, now you know; you shouldn't have to be told over and over again."
You need to take that up with the FTC.
Meanwhile, one thing is clear - you have no intention of abiding by FTC regulations or GR or Amazon TOS. And that tells me that all of your reviews, both that you have posted and for your books, came from the book being provided for free while you refuse to include the required disclosure.
All you're really saying is "I don't understand it, and I don't like it, so I'm not gonna do it."
Noted. You're just one more on a whole pile of product sellers that doesn't like consumer rights or consumer protection laws.
All the above comments are really interesting. Glad I don't really care about book reviews. If the reader wants to post one, fine. If not, oh well. Your choice. Same for me posting reviews. Again, only for non-fiction.
Another thing that is laughable here, in a certain person's comments, is the apparently misinformed belief that somehow consumer reviews came into being due to the explosion of self-publishing and is part of that industry, when that is completely not the case in any way, shape or form.Any "author" who thinks consumer reviews exist to serve self-publishing in a similar way professional reviews serve traditional publishing, is too ignorant to be in the business.
Consumer reviews exist by and for consumers. Period. Anyone attempting to subvert consumer opinion into another form of marketing is participating in unethical behavior. And proves the wisdom of the FTC regulation.
Professional reviews and consumer reviews are two very vastly different things.
Alexandra wrote: "Another thing that is laughable here, in a certain person's comments, is the apparently misinformed belief that somehow consumer reviews came into being due to the explosion of self-publishing and ..."Good one, Alexandra. Folks, a self-publisher or indie publisher is just going to have to work at marketing. "Pay to play" does not always work and usually is not worth the money anyway, and don't expect something for nothing either.
Deborah wrote: "Alexandra wrote: "Another thing that is laughable here, in a certain person's comments, is the apparently misinformed belief that somehow consumer reviews came into being due to the explosion of se..."Right.
Plus: Consumer reviews are not product marketing.
They are consumer opinion about a product or service, the good, the bad and the ugly.
Authors looking for advertising, marketing and promotion, need to look elsewhere.
One of the things I came across in my "research" was the use of #ad in social media, such as Twitter. I thought it might be worth sharing that in this thread in case anyone cares.Here's a screenshot of a recent tweet I saw from a local radio host.
Knowing the nature of this individual's job, I already knew that it was an incentivized endorsement. However, the addition of three space-saving characters made that clear.
Old Adage: It's always good to beat a dead horse as it tenderizes the meat.
I am seeking ideas on how to promote my book and get more reviews. I would appreciate your thoughts as this appears to be a place to seek others. By the way my first book was on individual tax planning. I believe that most taxpayers substantially overpay their taxes. The book is called Fight Back: Successful Income Tax-savings Tips and Strategies to Keep More of Your Own Money.
Tim wrote: "I am seeking ideas on how to promote my book and get more reviews. I would appreciate your thoughts as this appears to be a place to seek others. By the way my first book was on individual tax plan..."Tim,
There are many sources of the information you seek and at little or no cost. They include, but are not limited to, public libraries, community college courses, literary seminars, and literary periodicals.
The vast majority of readers, for whatever reason, choose to never post a rating or review. Those that do are only expressing their personal, and therefore, subjective opinion. One reader's "Best book ever!" may very well be another's "Worst book ever!"
Actually, sales drive reviews, not the other way around. Rather than obsess over reviews, a novice author would be better served focusing upon seeking opportunities to continuously improve basic writing skills such as spelling, grammar, punctuation, syntax, and narration, as well as marketing and promotional tools and methodology.
The odds against a novice author achieving commercial success within this extremely competitive field are very slim. That said; some do. There is no reason why you could not eventually become one of them. I wish you success.
Tim wrote: "I am seeking ideas on how to promote my book and get more reviews. I would appreciate your thoughts as this appears to be a place to seek others. By the way my first book was on individual tax plan..."Hi Tim, My name is Brad Horton and I'm a new author here. I'm a CPA and - and I would be happy to review your book for you. In fact, I'm a "tax guy" myself. I just happened to see your post and would be happy to review. I'm new to this whole process, but I guess if you message me a link? I'm off for the holidays and my semester (I lecture) so I have some time to read it this week - and I'm all about people keeping more of their hard earned money! ~Brad
Brad, thanks. As a new author and fellow CPA I would love to help you if you have any questions for which I might be helpful. Thanks in advance for the review. I hope to have another book out in February about tax planning for small businesses. Hope you enjoy the book. https://www.amazon.com/Fight-Back-Suc... [email protected]
Hi Tim,It's my pleasure! I will read it this week and give you a review. I will be looking forward to your new book as well!
Brad
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
The Ghost Dragon (other topics)The Ghost Dragon (other topics)
The Ghost Dragon (other topics)
Hi, I just published a book called "The Ghost Dragon." I'll give anyone who asks a copy in exchange for an honest review on Amazon.
Just contact me at [email protected]
https://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Dragon-C...
I made a video of me reading the first chapter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qlvje...
Thanks!
Seventeen year old Calinta, and her younger sisters, Jocaylin and Audrella, are hunted by an evil queen who Calinta dared to defy. With the help of Jaslin, a rebelled Noble, and Jay Sargog, a mysterious treasure hunter, they seek to obtain the power of the Ghost Dragon in order to defeat the Queen. However, nothing is as it seems.
https://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Dragon-C...