Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

Hello,
Could we get an official stance on Graphic Audios/Dramatized Adaptations on Goodreads? These are currently being marked as invalid by some librarians, but then made public again or recreated by others.

I’ve checked the Non-Book Items section of the Librarian Manual, and I couldn’t find anything explicitly stating that dramatized adaptations are invalid. So far, I’ve only seen them mentioned in discussions here in the group.

If they are considered invalid, I believe it would be helpful to clarify this explicitly in the Librarian Manual to avoid confusion.

Thank you!

https://help.goodreads.com/s/article/...

Tami wrote: "Hello,
Could we get an official stance on Graphic Audios/Dramatized Adaptations on Goodreads? These are currently being marked as invalid by some librarians, but then made public again or recreated..."
From rivka (after she had a behind the scenes discussion)
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I actually asked support for a clarification last week or the week before.
They only said that they are not valid and when I asked if they could add it or clarify it in the non-book item list they just sent me the links to the Audible Original part of the manual and the non-book item list stating it's already there.

Hoping you have better luck with this post.

Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂ wrote: "From rivka (after she had a behind the scenes discussion)
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/..."

Thank you for your response, but it seems like the comment is specifically addressing Audible Originals, and not all dramatized adaptations fall under that category.

The issue remains unclear because the Librarian Manual doesn’t mention dramatized adaptations or graphic audios explicitly. There seems to be some confusion, especially given the number of librarians who’ve added dramatized adaptations, sometimes in response to requests posted here in the group.

I would have expected that other librarians would kindly inform them if these adaptations were invalid. Personally, I have never added these types of items, but I was under the impression that they were valid, especially since many experienced librarians have added them.

Sarah wrote: "I actually asked support for a clarification last week or the week before.
They only said that they are not valid and when I asked if they could add it or clarify it in the non-book item list they ..."

Thank you for sharing that update.

It’s helpful to know that support clarified their stance regarding Dramatized Adaptations. However, it still seems there’s some ambiguity when it comes to dramatized adaptations and graphic audios, as they’re not specifically mentioned in the non-book item list. Given the number of librarians adding these items, it seems there’s some uncertainty about whether they’re valid or not.

I appreciate you hoping for better luck with this post, and I’m hoping that by bringing attention to this, we can get some more concrete clarification on the matter.

The Graphic audios are all from printed works in the database, as far as I'm aware. Basically, an audio edition just using many voices & sound affects, but using the books' words, or sometimes slightly adapted.

Interested to see what happens with these.

@Tami, see my response here ->
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Tal wrote: "@Tami, see my response here ->
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/..."

I provided support a graphic audio example and mentioned it's adapted by a printed book in my conversation with them. They still insisted it's not valid according to them.

I see that Tami added Jaclyn to the subject so I hope she sees this soon.

Sarah wrote: "I provided support a graphic audio example and mentioned it's adapted by a printed book in my conversation with them. They still insisted it's not valid according to them."

mkay...bear in mind support has also said books without an isbn cannot be added to the database. *wink*

The litmus test has always been "is it based on a book?" then yes it's okay to add. In the past what failed to meet the standard were audio recordings of live performances, written transcriptions of audio recordings and original (no existing non-audio edition) recordings. The latter changed with the Audible Originals policy update to allow audio only works if they were structured like a written book.

Tal wrote: "@Tami, see my response here ->
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/..."

I agree with you, and thanks for commenting. I thought they were valid audiobooks, but now I’m hearing they’re not. I hope we get an official response and an update to the librarian manual.

Sarah wrote: "I provided support a graphic audio example and mentioned it's adapted by a printed book in my conversation with them. They still insisted it's not valid according to them."

Staff has made some dramatized adaptations public again. This one here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... Check the log for the explanation provided. I'm confused as to why some staff members are saying these adaptations are invalid, and have marked them as such, while others are saying they are valid. The Empyrean Dramatized Adaptations are quite popular so there has been some back and forth in the logs. The explanation also cites the manual as the reason why these adaptations are valid. It seems clear that this is confusing because the same source is being used to argue both that they are valid and invalid.

They are also making podcasts valid. I don't think we can count on support for anything. I just received a ridiculous response to a request I sent in that had nothing to do with what I asked. I continue to suspect that we are not dealing with real people, at least not all of the time.

Tami wrote: "Sarah wrote: "I provided support a graphic audio example and mentioned it's adapted by a printed book in my conversation with them. They still insisted it's not valid according to them."

Staff has..."

I'm so confused.
They tell me they're Invalid but then mark it Public themselves. It's not the same staff member but still..

Thanks for the heads up.
I really hope Jaclyn gets involved soon. I mean, one of the staff members even said Jaclyn said my example wasn't valid.

I personally think they should count as audiobooks.
And it kind of sucks when I do what supposedly is the right thing and then they just change it back. -.-

Sarah wrote: "I personally think they should count as audiobooks.
And it kind of sucks when I do what supposedly is the right thing and then they just change it back. -.-"

+100

Hi all. Thanks for the discussion here.

I'm going to discuss this further with the larger team and I'll report back with a decision on whether Graphic Audios/Dramatized Adaptations are permitted on Goodreads.

Until we have a decision, I'd recommend not taking any action on those records.

Hi!

I'm not a librarian, but I found this post:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
after an improperly placed request, where one person told me where to locate it and another suggested that my book wasn't valid:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I'm a disabled reader, who reads tons of audiobooks and added this information that I hoped would be helpful:

There are two different types of dramatized audiobooks.

There are the adaptations that have an additional author, who writes a script using the original book as inspiration, as if it were a movie like the 1984 dramatized adaptation that was listed as a nominee in the new audiobook section of the goodreads choice awards last year:

https://www.goodreads.com/choiceaward...

This is one of the original books: 1984

This is the adaptation with the additional author, Joe White, who adapted George Orwell's masterpiece of a book: George Orwell’s 1984: An Audible Original adaptation

Then there are the dramatized versions that are the original books with no additional author that are scored with a full cast narration. GraphicAudio has been doing a lot of these with existing books with single narrators, but the content of the audiobook is not changed for the original, such as the newly adapted Brandon Sanderson books like Tress of the Emerald Sea which was originally narrated by Michael Kramer, but is also now available with a full cast Tress of the Emerald Sea: A Cosmere Novel Dramatized Adaptation : Secret Projects 1. The GraphicAudio dramatized version does not have an additional author, just Brandon Sanderson.

While I can understand that a book that has been changed from it's original and is put on as a production, sometimes significantly shorter than the original book, would not be considered the same as the original book, are we also saying that one of Brandon Sanderson's books is no longer considered a book because they added music and multiple narrators?

In one of the examples used in this thread, Iron Flame:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
It's broken into two parts. This tends to happen with books that are longer, as it's much more expensive to produce an audiobook of over 20 hours long than it is for one 15 hours or less. At some point it is cost prohibitive, so they split it.
It is, however, the same book as the original 28 hour long version:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

The time is going to be a bit different due to the scoring (music and sound effects) and full cast narration negating having to say things like 'it was difficult to hear Sally over the angry yells and honking of horns' or 'Sally struggled to answer through her tears. She slowed her breathing, and whispered' or you know, descriptive things that they act out or insert noises and music instead of. If actual changes are made to the book, there will always be a second author, like in the example I gave above. Otherwise it's kind of the same as the difference between a hard cover, a paperback or kindle. Kindle being the most different, but still being the same book with the same content as the hard cover.

I apologize if I am being overly wordy. I want to be thorough and hope I am not coming across negative in any way. I am just a user of the platform and in the end whatever decision is made, if it's a change, I would respectfully ask for some sort of announcement or email so that we (the users) understand if things start moving or disappearing off of the platform, especially so we can preserve our reviews if we choose to do so, for our own records.

Not to confuse the subject, but it's sometimes difficult to locate books when some are put in the Audible category when they are not Audible Only recordings.

Audible Original (aka Audible Only) audiobooks are sometimes regular audiobooks, other times dramatized, or can be podcasts or even plays. The thing with Audible Originals is that they cannot be found in a library, so someone looking up book information on goodreads who sees that the audiobook is listed under Audible may incorrectly think that they have to purchase it, unless they look further and see that there's a secondary publisher listed, like Macmillan Audio. A book recorded by Macmillan Audio won't be Audible exclusive, but can be sold on Audible.

Audible both has exclusive content that is only available through them that should be listed under the Audible tag. They also act as a retailer with a wide variety of audiobooks by various publishers that they have available to sell in their catalog for members that wish to purchase more than just Audible exclusive content.

It might not seem like a big deal, but to someone like me, it can be quite confusing as, like I stated, Audible Originals audiobooks are not sold to libraries, so using goodreads as a source for what audiobooks are coming out and where they are available is difficult.

Of course, you can catalog and list things as you please. I wanted to add a few words from a user's perspective, that may not be widely known, especially if you generally consume books in print.

I want to thank you all for your time, dedication, and hard work that you do on the site. It is very much appreciated.

Having a place to go to with people behind the scenes who care so much as to have discussions and try to figure things out, is flippin awesome. /jazzhands (because sometimes I'm silly).

Thank you for your time.

Panda wrote: "full cast narration negating having to say things like 'it was difficult to hear Sally over the angry yells and honking of horns' or 'Sally struggled to answer through her tears. She slowed her breathing, and whispered' "

See, that is what keeps it from being the book to me, and pushes it into the realm of theatre.

Interesting discussion, Panda. As I rarely listen to audio books, I didn't have enough information to make an informed decision. I appreciate your explaining things so clearly from your perspective.

Where do audio versions of plays fit in? I hope we aren’t saying they are not valid? We have audio versions of books and poetry and I’ve always assumed audio recordings of plays are ok.

Scott wrote: "Panda wrote: "full cast narration negating having to say things like...
See, that is what keeps it from being the book to me, and pushes it into the realm of theatre. "

Sure, I can see your point and appreciate your perspective.

For those of us who have trouble, or cannot, read full print editions of books the added scoring is sometimes intrusive and sometimes appreciated as an enhancement.

In truth all GraphicAudio is doing, is replacing some text with sound.

Sometimes, especially with very descriptive authors it gets tiring and sometimes sounds droning. Having the option to choose between a single narrator and something with a bit more umph allows those of us who aren't selecting an audiobook out of choice, more enjoyable. For those who get to choose, some people who don't enjoy reading get to participate in the fun, and others read the first version that drops and then get in on the action for the upgraded edition as well.

The difference between a GraphicAudio adaptation (and I agree that the word is a poor and confusing word choice) and a theatrical production is that a 28 hour book is still going to be in that ballpark, maybe 25 or 26 hours, with one person hearing a scream and the other reading the word scream, whereas a re-write is likely going to be in the 90 minute area, much like book to movie productions, and in all actuality may be a completely different animal with large portions left on the cutting room floor, if introduced at all.

Dobby wrote: "Interesting discussion, Panda. As I rarely listen to audio books, I didn't have enough information to make an informed decision. I appreciate your explaining things so clearly from your perspective."

Thank you, Dobby.

All the socks for you! 🧦

Hi everyone. Thanks for your patience here. After some discussion, we've decided that dramatized adaptations (e.g., audiobooks released by GraphicAudio) will be permitted in the catalog. Theatrical productions are still not permitted. We can further refine these guidelines as examples arise.

I've posted an update in the Group, and updated the Librarian Manual.

Jaclyn wrote: "Hi everyone. Thanks for your patience here. After some discussion, we've decided that dramatized adaptations (e.g., audiobooks released by GraphicAudio) will be permitted in the catalog. Theatrical..."

Thank you, Jaclyn! I really appreciate the update and the time taken to discuss this. Now that we know for sure these are permitted, I have one more question for clarification. Should GraphicAudio/dramatized adaptations be treated like standard audiobooks and combined with the main work, or should they be considered separate adaptations? This has been a long-standing source of edit wars in the logs, with works repeatedly being combined and separated, so I was hoping for guidance on the best approach moving forward.

Tami wrote: "Jaclyn wrote: "Hi everyone. Thanks for your patience here. After some discussion, we've decided that dramatized adaptations (e.g., audiobooks released by GraphicAudio) will be permitted in the cata..."

+1

Tami wrote: "Should GraphicAudio/dramatized adaptations be treated like standard audiobooks and combined with the main work, or should they be considered separate adaptations?"

Great question. Something to consider with this question is the fact that dramatized adaptations by GraphicAudio are often split into two parts depending on the length of the original book.

I would combine them with the main work. If the audiobook is in two parts, I think they should remain separate. Experienced Librarians should feel welcome to comment here with differing opinions - open to discussion.

Jaclyn wrote: "I would merge them with the main work. If the audiobook is in two parts, I think they should remain separate. Experienced Librarians should feel welcome to comment here with differing opinions - op..."

I personally feel they shouldn't be combined with their main work. Especially since they are adaptations and they don't follow their main work word for word.
I just think it's better and easier to keep them separated from the main work, having separated series for the dramatized adaptations etc.

Jaclyn wrote: "I would merge them with the main work."

I think you mean 'combine'.

https://help.goodreads.com/s/article/...

While combine and merge are generally considered synonymous, Goodreads Librarians often use the two words to mean distinctly different things.

Jaclyn I have never understood why we are supposed to combine editions of non-fiction works. A while back I did an author who (with his publishing partner) is on the 20th edition of their book which is used world-wide. Every edition is different. Medical procedures have changed in that time.

Another time I did a request for someone that sent me down a rabbit hole of maps and photography. That book was on its 16th edition. Again each book is different that the proceeding one.

I started to read the very oldest posts on the site and saw where it used to be the standard to have the edition stated in the title. I feel like that is the better way, especially when all of the editions are combined under one title. Those medical books had at least 4 different versions for each edition. Until doing those I never realized that Canada would have books that were only valid there. The international editions also stated they could not be used in the US or Canada. A few stated they could were only valid in India. Yes, some of that was purchasing, but these were textbooks. This are not for random people to read in their leisure.

Sarah wrote: "I personally feel they shouldn't be combined with their main work. Especially since they are adaptations and they don't follow their main work word for word."

I agree. Other adaptations are not combined with their primary works.

Megan Riverina Romantics wrote: "Great question. Something to consider with this question is the fact that dramatized adaptations by GraphicAudio are often split into two parts depending on the length of the original book."

Yes, split parts are kept separate from the full edition, but many main works are also released in both a full edition and a split edition. My question is whether GraphicAudio/dramatized adaptations should be combined with the main work at all, regardless of whether it's a full or split edition.

Arenda wrote: "Jaclyn wrote: "I would merge them with the main work."

I think you mean 'combine'.

Goodness me, I do. My brain has failed me. Updated my original comment.

Dobby wrote: "Other adaptations are not combined with their primary works."

I'm not very familiar with adaptations; if this is the case, then I'm happy to concur that these should not be combined.

Jaclyn wrote: "I'm not very familiar with adaptations; if this is the case, then I'm happy to concur that these should not be combined."

From the Librarian Manual:
don't combine:
Adaptations. The book should remain separated from its parent work, with the adaptor listed as primary author.

https://help.goodreads.com/s/article/...

Tawnya wrote: "Jaclyn I have never understood why we are supposed to combine editions of non-fiction works. A while back I did an author who (with his publishing partner) is on the 20th edition of their book whic..."

I think this should be a separate discussion to this thread. 😊