| Author |
Message |
    
Int
Newbie Poster
Username: Int
Post Number: 2
Registered: 10-2004
Rating: 
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 11:28 pm: | 
|
An Honest Book Review From Kirkus? Only $350
October 5, 2004
By EDWARD WYATT
Kirkus Reviews has long prided itself on being a sort of Consumer Reports for the book publishing industry, proclaiming its independence by steadfastly refusing to accept advertising and producing early, plain-spoken reviews that can amplify or smother a new book's early buzz.
Now, however, Kirkus is embracing a new spirit of commercialism. This fall, it is starting two new online publications with the Kirkus name: for $350 Kirkus Discoveries will review a new book from any publisher; for $95, Kirkus Reports will recommend a selected lifestyle title in a listing. And for the first time in its 71 years, the company is considering selling advertising in its flagship publication.
Kirkus executives say the changes are intended to increase revenues and visibility for Kirkus, which has the smallest circulation of several specialty magazines that provide early pre-publication reviews of new books. The program has the added benefit, they say, of potentially bringing more books to the public's attention - books that would otherwise go unreviewed and ignored.
"At a moment when more and more books are being published, there clearly is a gap in getting enough information out there," said Jerome Kramer, managing director and editor in chief of the VNU U.S. Literary Group, the publisher of Kirkus Reviews. "We want to see Kirkus become more visible across the board, and we want to serve a wider spectrum of the publishing community."
Kirkus, known for its often-tart reviews, can heavily
influence what books are bought for public libraries and
how many copies show up in bookstores. But some readers of Kirkus Reviews question whether Kirkus can objectively review books with one arm while, with the other, taking money from the same publishers for other reviews. Essentially, Kirkus Discoveries gives those paying customers veto power, since they could have a review killed if they didn't like it.
"I'm really troubled by that," said Rivkah Sass, executive director of the Omaha Public Library, which uses Kirkus Reviews to help it decide which books to add to its collection. "Publishers Lunch," a daily industry newsletter, first reported about the new publications last week.
"I understand from a business perspective where it's coming from," Ms. Sass said. But when a review is paid for, she asked, "is it a review or is it an ad?"
But Fran Rabinowitz, who oversees the ordering of new books
for branches of the New York Public Library, said the new publications "might be helpful,'' especially in bringing to her attention books from small publishers with few resources.
Mr. Kramer said he believed that the paid-for reviews and listings in the new publications would not taint the reputation for objectivity of the company's flagship. "Kirkus Reviews remains as it has always been," he said, providing early reviews, sometimes the earliest, up to four months before publication of literary fiction and nonfiction books.
Those reviews are often used by publishers as advance
publicity for a book, shown to bookstore executives to
persuade them to carry a new title and excerpted on a
book's back cover. The twice-monthly publication reviews
about 5,000 titles per year, less than 3 percent of the
175,000 books that were published last year.
With a circulation of just 3,000, Kirkus Reviews is seen by
far fewer people than some of its main rivals that provide advance reviews and is considered by many people in book publishing to be less influential. Library Journal, for example, has a circulation of 19,000 , and Publishers Weekly goes to about 25,000 people. (Publishers Weekly and Library Journal take advertisements.)
But in part because of its reputation for sometimes being
too tough, Kirkus can have an outsized influence when it
likes a book. Sally Kramer, collection development
coordinator at the Public Library of Cincinnati and
Hamilton County in Ohio, who is not related to Mr. Kramer
of Kirkus, said if a book got a very favorable review in Kirkus, "we're very likely to purchase it just because of that."
Bookstores, too, pay attention. Bob Wietrack, vice
president for merchandising at Barnes & Noble, said Kirkus Reviews "is very helpful in giving us a prepublication read on a book."
Mr. Kramer said editors at Kirkus Reports would select new specialty books - dealing in subjects like cooking, fitness, parenting or personal finance - for inclusion in one of five monthly newsletters, which would be e-mailed to book reviewers at magazines and newspapers, librarians and others. If their book is selected by the editors, publishers must pay $95 to have their title included.
General-interest books, poetry, academic studies and
reference books, including self-published volumes, can be reviewed in Kirkus Discoveries, the second new product, for $350 each, so long as they are in English and not covered in the main publication or in Kirkus Reports. The reviews will be posted on the Kirkus Discoveries Web site, with the best of those reviews also included in a monthly e-mailed newsletter.
This product is intended mainly for small publishing
houses, which often do not have the marketing heft to
attract the attention of reviewers at mainstream
publications. Both publications will be circulated to
people who sign up on the company's Web site
(www.kirkusreviews.com) to receive them.
Just because a review is paid for does not mean that it is certain to be positive, Mr. Kramer said. "I can see why someone would want a guaranteed positive review from Kirkus, but I'm not making that available to them," he said. "We're going to do an honest review."
But he acknowledged that publishers were likely to see the reviews as they were posted for the Web site or online newsletter and could request that a bad review be withheld.
"If someone is desperately unhappy with the review and
wanted it to be removed from KirkusDiscoveries.com, I
imagine we would do that," Mr. Kramer said.
The new publications have to be honest, he said, because to
do otherwise would harm the reputation of the flagship publication. "I'm launching quite a number of new initiatives built on the back of a really respected review journal," he said. "If I don't maintain the kind of honesty I'm talking about, I think the whole thing will come crashing down rather quickly."
A handful of other options are available to publishers that want to commission a book review, including Bookwire, an online publication from R. R. Bowker, which also collects and sells industry statistics, and ForeWordreviews.com, which charges $295 for an online book review.
Many publishing executives said they wanted to wait and see
the publications before they drew a conclusion. Ellie
McGrath, president of McWitty Press, a small New York publishing company, said she didn't know whether Kirkus Discoveries would appeal to her. "I'd be very interested in seeing it, but it depends on who the readership is," she said.
Another of the new initiatives involves advertising in
Kirkus Reviews, something the magazine has never done but
which Mr. Kramer said he is considering, perhaps in the
form of special inserts or promotional introductions to
books. The Bookseller, a sister publication circulated in Britain, carries advertising, as do most of the other magazines sold by VNU, a Dutch publisher whose titles include specialty publications like Progressive Grocer and National Jeweler and better-known titles like Adweek and The Hollywood Reporter.
"I've never had a problem maintaining editorial integrity
at a magazine that includes advertising," he said. Before joining Kirkus in May, Mr. Kramer was the founding editor of Book magazine, which has closed, and he also worked at other trade publications.
When Mr. Kramer was recruited to the company, "the feeling
was that Kirkus had been too quiet," he said. "I think part
of my charge was to bring up the volume."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/05/books/05kirk.html?ex=1097978684&ei=1&en=60bdda fe5b564f3a
|
Michael_t_owens
Newbie Poster
Username: Michael_t_owens
Post Number: 6
Registered: 07-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 12:28 am: |
|
With the nature of this business, this was inevitable.
Michael T. Owens
http://www.michaeltowens.com |
Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 704
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 10:15 am: |
|
Do you think it could be worth it? |
Sisg
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Sisg
Post Number: 108
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 10:40 am: |
|
I think it's a crapshoot, but probably worth it. Especially if you are an author on a small budget, with very little to market with..i would take my chances on such a review, be it positive or negative. The thing about reviews, whether they are free or paid for, you get the same thing, advertisement. I have found it very hard for a self-published book to get into library systems and bookstores, so if by some chance the Kirkus reports help in that endeavor, for a small sum, it's worth it. I have in the past spent more, gotten less, and still didn't land in any bookstores or libraries, as MT says it may be inevitable.
BTW Chris...it's my birthday, It's my birthday! |
Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden
Post Number: 705
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:42 am: |
|
Sisg:
Happy Birthday. When we meet we'll have a drink--or three.
I wonder if it would be worth it if everybody knows you bought the review--I think by telegraphing this information they are destroying the value of such a review--ie, everybody reading it knows it was bought that it, in effect, you are just taking out an ad.
If you gotta pay for it they ought to guarentee that a certain number of people will see it--and they ought to let the author write it. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1561
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 01:15 pm: |
|
Foks,
How can you reasonably expect a reader to consider and embrace what is suppose to be an objective review if the author has in fact paid for the opinion? It seems to me that by doing such authors are intentionally sabotaging the credibility of their work.
|
Linda
Veteran Poster
Username: Linda
Post Number: 74
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 02:27 pm: |
|
Chris
I am curious. What worth would the review be if it came/was written by the author? Don't all authors love their work and toot their horn that it is all that? I, myself see no problem with paying for a review if the reviewer is being objective about the work in question. It takes a lot of time to read and the books are not always good. So should it continue to be free? The question should be who is an honest reviewer and who is not? There are many who claim to be a reviewer and when I read the review it is nothing more than a synopsis of the book. That in my opinion is not a review. That is what I would ask before submitting anything to anybody for review. Reputation of the reviewer and publication should both be questioned. I think reviewers should be paid and that it is long over due. |
Michael_t_owens
Newbie Poster
Username: Michael_t_owens
Post Number: 7
Registered: 07-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 03:04 pm: |
|
It seems like a plausible option for writers/small publishers with a low advertising budget. Whether the review is good or bad, one things is certain: EXPOSURE. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1567
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 03:13 pm: |
|
Linda,
I agree reviewers should be paid. The issues is WHO should do the compensating. I think if a publisher can't afford to compensate the reviewer, I have to question the worth of the publication and/or the review to begin with.
And I don't care what the rep of the reviewer may be. If the author is paying them, she or he potentially taints how others view them and their work much in the way that Enron's paying the Arthur Andersen CPA's tainted Andersen's assessment of Enron's financials. |
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 77
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 03:40 pm: |
|
But don't reviewers get a free book in exchange for a review? All review copies aren't paperback ARCS. Should those advance copies be seen as payment? Admittedly, $450 is a ways from $24.95.
Also, what about authors who review other authors' books -- should they also be read with a raised eyebrow? Nearly all that I've read, praises their peers' books to high heavens.
|
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 78
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 03:42 pm: |
|
Linda wrote:
There are many who claim to be a reviewer and when I read the review it is nothing more than a synopsis of the book. That in my opinion is not a review.
Lidna, I agree. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1568
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 03:44 pm: |
|
Jmho,
I suppose it depends on one's individual perceptions. But I would consider both of what you offer to be professional courtesies, not cold-hard compensation. |
Thumper
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Thumper
Post Number: 277
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 04:25 pm: |
|
Hello All,
I can't blame Kirkus for this move. As someone stated earlier, it was inevitable. There are some reviews in which I get paid. It use to bother me to write a bad paid review. So much so, I would often had Troy the money back. But, that was then, this is now. I have written negative reviews and have gotten paid for it. Shouldn't a reviewer be compensated for his work and his time. Authors get paid for writing books, why shouldn't reviewers get paid for writing reviews? I shutter to think, over the years, just how many books have been sold or read just by people reading my reviews, while I never got a dime from any of these sales.
And no, receiving ARCs won't exactly pay my light bill. Besides that publishers are not printing ARCs like they use to, even though its cheaper printing an ARC than it is a first edition. Some years have to pass before any given title is worth any serious money that would make it worthwhile to hold.
Second, there is no such thing as "bad" publicity when it comes to reviews. It is still advertisement. And authors no matter if they are with a large publishing house or self published need as much advertisement as they can get. So, a smart author will budget for this as a necessary expense.
A reviewer being financially compensated for writing a review does not have to jeopardize that reviewer's objectivity. Listen, quiet as its kept, many of the reviewers you read are working some sort of angle and still to benefit from their reviews in some form or fashion. Some are using reviews to launch writing careers. Others are writing reviews because they fail to make any head way as a real (read as making money at it) writer, or as favors, bylines, etc. Rarely, almost non existently are their reviewers who do nothing but reviews and have no other aspirations to write nothing else. I've been in this business for a couple of years now and I have not met or know more than a few people who write nothing but reviews. Including myself, there's between 4 and 10, who are regularly published. From my standpoint ABM, being financially compensated can't hurt.
In all honesty, reviewers are taken for granted. Times are too hard to just be giving stuff away. Right now, my office is exploding with books, sent to me in hopes that AALBC will do a review. Only one has paid for the priviledge. Now I ask you, which one do you think will be reviewed and which ones won't? *eyebrow raised* |
Philly_bbw
Newbie Poster
Username: Philly_bbw
Post Number: 18
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 04:40 pm: |
|
Do you think it would turn people away to pay that kind of money and then get a negative review that everyone will read? I personally wouldn't like paying $350 to have someone tell me my book sucks... |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1573
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 04:49 pm: |
|
Thumper,
Again. I am not suggesting that a reviewer shouldn't be compensated. OF COURSE he or she should be paid. AGAIN, I just don't think the AUTHOR should be doing the paying.
And what is the relative quality of a publication that can't afford to compensate someone who writes copy (even a book review) for them? |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1574
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 04:53 pm: |
|
Philly_bbw says: "I personally wouldn't like paying $350 to have someone tell me my book sucks..."
ABM says: And THAT, My Dear, is the reason WHY a savvy reader might look upon such reviews with a jaundiced eye. |
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 64
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 07:24 pm: |
|
Since I'm an author and a reviewer, I thought I'd chime in on this one.
As an author, I would surely pay for a book review if I could be guaranteed a good review. But I wouldn't want the public to know the review was paid for because it would become suspect. Otherwise, I think $350.00 could probably be spent more wisely on a traditional ad or by using other ways to promote your book.
As a reviewer, I would feel very obligated to write a glowing review if the publisher or author has paid for it. Since most reviewers get paid through the publication they work for or work as volunteer reviewers, it's not that big of a problem now.
Even though I've been working as a volunteer reviewer, I've still given myself ethical rules that I try to abide by like never reviewing books written by friends, family members, or by authors from my own publisher. When I break the rules, my reviews become suspect to corruption. Some authors have sent me gifts like coffee, T-shirts, and bookmarks when they wanted me to review their books. I have to admit that their books did get read first, even though the reviews stayed honest. Just imagine if I was paid for them.
Can you really trust a review that was paid for by the author or publisher? I don't think I could.
BTW, I am in total agreement on those reviews that read like summaries. I hate them. But when I was reviewing for another site, we were required to write summary reviews instead of critical reviews because we were not suppose to damage the author's ego. To me, a review should be written with the consumer in mind. After I read a review, I want to know if I should buy a book or not. A summary just doesn't do it.
Personally, I think Roger Ebert is on J.Lo's payroll. He likes every movie she's in; and we all know she's been in some flops.
Later,
Emanuel Carpenter
|
Thumper
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Thumper
Post Number: 278
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 08:09 pm: |
|
Hello All,
ABM: You wrote, "Again. I am not suggesting that a reviewer shouldn't be compensated. OF COURSE he or she should be paid. AGAIN, I just don't think the AUTHOR should be doing the paying."
If not the author then who should be paying it then. The author can pay, as someone suggested, by buying advertisement from the publication. I mean, the author is relying on people seeing that publication when a review of their book MIGHT be printed in it, surely that same publication is worth buying an ad in it. Am I right or wrong?
Now as far as not paying for a review unless the review will be a good review. Now what you people want is an ad, not a review. I've always been of a mind that a review is not written for the benefit of the author. A review is written for the public. Because like it or not, for many books, its the review of those books that serves as their introduction to the book buying public. If that book sounds interesting to anyone from reading that review, be it negative or positive, that person will buy and read that book.
Emanuel: You wrote, "As a reviewer, I would feel very obligated to write a glowing review if the publisher or author has paid for it. Since most reviewers get paid through the publication they work for or work as volunteer reviewers, it's not that big of a problem now."
Let me tell you sumpin', if a reviewer's game is TIGHT, being paid won't affect your opinion or your review. This is where a reviewer's reputation comes into play. I'm not saying that I'm the best reviewer or even the most famous one, but dagnabit, if I say I love the book *eyebrow raised* I love the book. You can stop me at work, cleaning my house, or wake me up from a dead sleep (I wouldn't advise that though you'll be called everything but a child of God) I will still love that book. Whether people agree or disagree with my opinion, they know that I meant what I said. Because that's is the true worth of a reviewer, is his/her reputation and the public's ability to believe what he/she says about the book. There's a few reviewers who writes nothing but positive reviews, no matter the quality of the books. While the publishing companies will use quotes from the reviews in the book's press packet or on the back cover, I don't trust a blooming word they say about any book. I am not alone. If the public don't respect or heed any word a reviewer say, then what good is the reviewer? *eyebrow raised*
|
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 65
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:00 pm: |
|
Thumper wrote:
>>Some are using reviews to launch writing careers. Others are writing reviews because they fail to make any head way as a real (read as making money at it) writer, or as favors, bylines, etc. Rarely, almost non existently are their reviewers who do nothing but reviews and have no other aspirations to write nothing else.<<
I am guilty as charged on this one. I've been writing book reviews since the beginning of the year. My main reason for writing them was for the byline, establishing contacts within the industry, and the free books. I haven't purchased a book all year; and it's been great. Since the job doesn't offer financial compensation, you have to get something out of it. I used it for publicity, contacts, and writing credits. Most authors who are also volunteer reviewers think the same way. It works too. It got me more paying writing gigs, better contacts, more sales of my first book, and a credit that got me a literary agent for the next book. Considering the hours it takes to read a book, I think it's an even exchange.
This is my last month writing reviews for a while because it has been very time-consuming. Plus it takes time away from writing my own original work.
Emanuel |
Philly_bbw
Newbie Poster
Username: Philly_bbw
Post Number: 19
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:00 pm: |
|
I'm a published author also, and if the book does suck then let me find out about it on the DL... |
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 66
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:06 pm: |
|
That's the thing Philly_bbw. A lot of authors don't want an objective review. They want someone to tell them how great their book is. Not me. I want to know how I can improve my craft. That's the chance any author takes when he or she sends a book in for review.
Emanuel |
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 305
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 07:26 am: |
|
Okay, it's my turn to jump in. As I've mentioned before, I've read all of Thump's reviews and I must say he's true to the game. We've talked about his spin or reasons to write a review or his reasons to pass. Having read all his reviews I know when he truely loves a book and when he's being "polite". Having said that, he will never compromise himself by telling the reader that a book is good when in fact it is not. I think everyone should have a reviewer that they can trust and that has similar taste. Because let's face it, just because a reviewer says a book is a must read, his "fulfillment" could come from slow wordy prose or sex dialog. So for the most part one has to know the reviewer.
Someone mentioned the fat cat Ebert from "Two Thumbs Up". I sat next to him in a primere of a movie. We talked about the movie while we were watching it and afterwards. When I saw his written review I couldn't believe what I was reading. I'm not going to bust him out but let's just say........it was different than what I heard him say to me. Is he being paid? YEAH, he's getting paid. Is his reviews slanted towards the bankroll, yep. So when it's all said and done, money is the king, if not only because some reviewers will not write a review unless they are paid to do so or they are paid to write a glowing review. |
Philly_bbw
Newbie Poster
Username: Philly_bbw
Post Number: 21
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 07:35 pm: |
|
I hear you on that. All I'm saying is I know my book won't appeal to everyone, but paying $350 to find out is not it. I welcome the good and the bad so that I no what to improve on the next time. You can never satisfy everyone so... |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1617
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: 
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 10:25 pm: |
|
I don't know.
But it seems to me that paying someone to give you an objective review of your book is akin to paying a callgirl to give you an honest opinion about your sexual performance.
She MAY tell you the truth. But any hooker worth her G-string is smart enough to know the more fake moaning/signing she does, the more inclined her 'John' will be to pay to 'cum' back for more. |
Troy
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Troy
Post Number: 148
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 09, 2004 - 07:38 pm: |
|
First some important ground rules:
- Book reviews are written for the benefit of the reader – not the author. Sure the author does benefit from the publicity, but that is a consequence of a review not the purpose.
- Given point #1, the reader has to trust that the reviewer will give an honest opinion of the book, otherwise the review is worthless.
- Reviews have a cost. The cost of the review is not borne by author, but by the publisher of the review. The book review publisher’s goal is to recover the cost associated with publishing reviews.
The Book Review Process Today:
An author sends a book to a publisher of book reviews (example AALBC.com, QBR, BIBR, Rawsistaz, etc). Usually the author’s primary motivation to reap the benefit of the increased publicity that the book review will generate.
The publisher of the review, whether it is a web site, or print publication, is interested in having people read the reviews they publish. The more people that read the reviews, the more money the publisher of the review can recoup, through subscriptions or advertising, for performing the review. Hopefully when it is all said and done, there is a surplus (profit). Otherwise the publisher can not continue to publish reviews.
When funds are tight there are only two places to cut costs. The cost associated with paying the reviewer or the cost of the publication or web site. Of course, if the publication does not exist there is really no point of having the review. As a result, many reviewers review for, astonishingly little or, no compensation. Of course this only works because reviewers may find the experience, by-line, love of literature, fame or free books sufficient motivation to perform the review. No one supports themselves by only writing book reviews.
Back to the process; upon receipt of the book, the book review publisher will make a decision of whether, or not, the book will be reviewed. No publication (web based or print) reviews every book that is submitted for review consideration. This process of deciding which book gets reviewed varies from publication to publication. Some of the factors considered;
- Is the author self published or published by a major house?
- Is the author popular or is the author a relative or complete unknown?
- Is the book likely to get a positive review?
- Is the book likely to have a broad appeal?
- Has the book been released, if so how long?
- Is there an available reviewer with an interest in the genre?
- Are there funds or a volunteer to perform the review?
- Is the book controversial?
Again the motivation of the review publisher is to get more people to read reviews. So given this fact, which book is mostly like to get reviewed; (1) a new book, by a popular author, from a major house, whose book is likely to appeal to a large number of readers, or (2) a book by an unknown, self-published author, that has been out a year or longer and has no distribution and can not be found in book stores? The answer (#1) should be obvious.
Today the majority of books received for review consideration, are ultimately not chosen to be reviewed. The loss to the author is typically the wholesale price of a book and postage. The publisher’s, reviewer’s and reader’s cost is either; (A) the missed opportunity of experiencing and spreading the word about a wonderful book or (B) the avoidance of wasting time and energy on reviewing a poor book. The hope is that the book review publisher has enough experience and knowledge to make (B) the most common scenario. However we all know there are good books that will not get reviewed – and in this case we all loose,
If the book is reviewed the review will be considered either favorable or unfavorable.
Favorable Review
If the review is favorable everybody is happy. The author has quotes for the jacket and promotional material, the reviewer had an enjoyable reading experience and the publisher can soak up the praise the heaped upon them for publishing such a wonder review and having such a good web site, or magazine.
Unfavorable Review
However, if the book review is unfavorable; almost everyone loses. The reviewer suffered through a book they did not like, the publisher of the review bears the brunt of the authors anger, and the author feels as if their first their baby was brutally murdered. The only one who makes out is the reader – they, if they respect and understand the reviewer’s perspective can make an more informed book buying decision.
The Reader Always Benefits
Notice that the reader always benefits from this process. Given ground rule #1, “Book reviews are written for the benefit of the reader – not the author”; this whole process works wonderfully. And authors should not have to pay for a service not rendered explicitly for their benefit.
A New Business Model: Authors or Publishers Pay to Have Books Reviewed.
Of Course the Ground Rules Must Change…
- Book reviews are written for the benefit of the author – not the reader. Sure the reader does benefit from the reviewer’s opinion of the book, but that is a consequence of a review not the purpose.
- Given point #1, the author has to trust that the reviewer will give an honest opinion of the book, otherwise the review is worthless. Authors are paying for the service of the having the book review written, not the outcome of the review.
- Reviews have a cost. The cost of the review is borne by the author.
This fairly dramatic change in business model does pose several interesting advantages over the current process:
- Authors who traditionally could not get their books reviewed, will now have the ability to guarantee a book review will be written.
- Authors, since they are paying for the service of having the review written, will be allowed to decide if they want the completed review published.
- Authors no longer waste time and money mailing books to book review publishers, that will never be reviewed
- Book Review Publishers longer have to expend energy and resources examining books to determine if they will be reviewed
- Book Review Publishers can afford to review more books as the cost of the review is covered by the reviewer.
- Book Review Publishers, because of the new business model, can get more reviewers to write reviews. This will ultimately raise the quality of the reviews due to writers competing for the opportunity to write reviews.
- Reviewers are more adequately compensated for the reviews they perform.
- Readers are less likely to be subjected to unfavorable reviews. Since the author has an opportunity to opt-out of having their review published. There is a natural, self-selection, of book reviews that reach final publication.
Of course there are some potential problems:
- Authors stand to lose more by paying for a review that they decide not to have published. However this disadvantage can be countered by continuing to give the author the options of submitting their books for “free” review consideration. Although the reallocation of resources to paid reviews may make the performance of free reviews less likely.
- Book Review Publishers still have to contend with the authors who have paid for, what they perceive is an unfavorable review. Again, remember Ground Rule #2 “…. Authors are paying for the service of the having the book review written, not the outcome of the review”.
- Readers are less likely to be subjected to unfavorable reviews. Since the author has an opportunity to opt-out of having their review published. However, there is a chance for a reader, unfamiliar with the process, or untrusting of the publication or reviewer, to assume the reviewer is biased toward the author because the author has paid for the review, or assume AALBC.com like every book they review. The best one can do to counter this potential problem is to inform the reader of the process and develop a trust over time.
AALBC.com Announces New Service
As a result of the above, AALBC.com has decided to offer authors the service of fee based book reviews. We are currently working on the pricing structure and associated new procedures.
This service, in reality, is not unprecedented for AALBC.com. Consider the following scenario:
An author pays for an Author’s Profile (http://aalbc.com/authorprofiles.htm). The author also decides to submit their book for review consideration (http://reviews.aalbc.com/reviewer_guidlines.htm). AALBC.com then pays the reviewer to review this author’s book. While the author is not directly paying for the book review service, the money paid to the reviews comes from AALBC.com revenue. So in essence, the author is in fact subsidizing all book reviews. Book reviews on AALBC.com do not directly generate income – it is a direct expense that is recovered through other forms of revenue, or out of AALBC.com founder’s pocket. There have been several authors, who paid for profiles but were displeased with an AALBC.com book review. None of these authors ever questioned the issue of paying for a profile and getting an unfavorable book review. Rarely is the honestly of an AALBC.com review questioned.
Also consider the following scenario: Dwayne S. Joseph, author of the “The Womanizers” (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0974363685/aalbccom-20) requested that Thumper review his book. Joseph said; he realized that Thumper may not like his book, but he wanted Thumper’s honest opinion. What I found compelling was that he trusted, implicitly, that Thumper would indeed give him an honest opinion.
However, in order to fulfill Josephs simply request a lot of things that require time, money and energy have to happen. Thumper has agreed to review the book and he will be paid for the review. The real issue how is the cost of this review going to be recovered? The decision to perform Josephs reviews was based partly upon the manner in which the request was made. However another factor in the decision is the fact that Carl Weber the publisher of the Urban Books imprint (Joseph’s Publisher) is a supporter of AALBC.com. If Thumper “Hates” this book the review will be published nonetheless. However if he “Loves” it we will provide additional promotion for the title. With this new service an author does not need a connection or a compelling case to guarantee an AALBC.com book review.
I trust this long a-- post will answer some of the questions posed and address some of the issues raised. Feedback requested.
|
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 82
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 12:45 am: |
|
LOL Troy, that's a long a-- post, but does provide a lot of insight. I had planned to stay away from this topic, but since you mentioned RAWSISTAZ, I'd like to correct a few things, as it pertains to my group and team of reviewers (The RAWSISTAZ Reviewers) who I'll show as TRR from this point on.
Ground Rules
First, I agree with your ground rules, with the exception of #3 (as it applies to TRR). You said:
Reviews have a cost. The cost of the review is not borne by author, but by the publisher of the review. The book review publisher’s goal is to recover the cost associated with publishing reviews.
While I do agree with the first portion of this, my goal (as the publisher) is not to recover costs associated with publishing reviews, it is simply to provide a service, to promote and share information about books that are on the market. In the 4 years I've been doing this, it has never been about money and it never will. I wouldn't even consider throwing money in the mix as Kirkus is doing even though I've been approached by quite a few people to do it. This is perhaps one of the "weaknesses" I have in this publishing industry, especially as my husband sees it, but it's just not about the money.
TRR Book Review Process
Also, our Book Review process varies a lot from what you have listed above with the primary thing being that we assign, read, and attempt to review every single title we receive. In our history, there have only been a handful of books that were not reviewed either a) because the book was too technical of a subject (it was an actual textbook) and none of our reviewers were qualified to assess it or b) the book was written so bad that after sending it to two reviewers, it was listed as "could not finish." While I do realize that to review every single title seems daunting (and believe me it is), this is one of the things that helps us stand out and is what I'm hoping readers, writers, and publishers will see as a bonus when sending their book into us. That, coupled with knowing that our reviews are honest goes a long way. No, most are not the long drawn out type of critical analysis, but the end goal is to show (1) what the book is about, (2) how we felt about it , and (3) what our rating is based on our reading preferences. We're by no means "Kirkus" or one of the "big boys" but we are providing a service; one that isn't limited to an author based on who they or, how many books they've sold, or anything of the likes.
Personally, I don't care if an author is mainstream, self-published, unknown, top of the line, whatever...when I get the book in my mailbox, they're all prioritized the same. (Well, I do glance harder at the ARCs since I'm a collector, but I've even learned to let those go too seeing I can only review 8-10 books max per month. <grin> This year alone, we've reviewed 517 titles (up through September 30th). We've received about 570 and the missing number have been received and are in the queue. And about 15 are sitting here waiting to be logged in.
But ummm Troy, feel free to re-route those you guys don't review to us...we'd be glad to do them. I'll even pay for shipping. <wink>
TRR Process Broken down
- Author, Publisher, Publicist, Partner (newspaper, magazine, etc. we review for) ships book to P.O. Box
- I pick up, log, and list books in a poll
- Reviewers select books they want to review
- I package and ship them out
- Reviewer receives and reviews within a 3-4 week period, sooner if it's a blurb request
- We go through peer reviews (editing/critiquing each other)
- Review is final
Final Thoughts
I'll bring this to a close by saying that I don't agree with the whole "Paying for a book review" service, it just seems to make the actual review suspect to me and takes away from the credibility. While I'm probably fortunate in that I have readers who share the same goal as I do on the staff of TRR and aren't worried about being compensated for their reviews (we view the book as payment), I do see how a publisher of reviews could go this route, especially if they're a business, set on making money. I just don't agree with it. That's what advertising and special features and things are for. Use that money to route back into the business. Yes, that money may in the end go back to the reviewer, but that's just like having a job, getting paid, and then giving your children an allowance. Your boss isn't paying your children to mow the yard, but you've re-routed the funds coming into your house as you see fit. (Note: That was the first thing that came to my mind...lol. I don't think reviewers are children, but I do wish I could give them all an allowance or even a small token of what they've given to TRR and the literary industry.)
Anywho, as a member of TRR, I have the advantage of getting books before they are released, receiving books I would've otherwise bought anyway, books that I may have wanted to read anyway, and on top of that, I'm part of a "family" who really believes in providing a service to the literary community. It's a lot of work, but I love what I do. And yep, I still buy books, actually more than I review. LOL, but that's another post.
Shoot, the hardest thing for me is wanting to add additional reviewers and knowing that I can't afford to. While it is costly to buy shipping supplies, reroute these books, maintain a website, buy software, and we won't even talk about the TIME issue...I believe in what I'm doing and that it's the foundation for something I hope to build upon years from now. Idealistic and unrealistic?? Maybe, but I believe in it and I'm sure others do and have (or will) benefit from the service. Perhaps some big grant will fall in my lap or some author who we've helped when they weren't "big time" will come back and offer a donation. Idealistic and unrealist?? Maybe. LOL. But a sista can dream.
Because of the cost of things, I've recently implemented Advertising on the site. Through that advertising, I hope to recoup some money (to get hubby off my back) and also to be able to compensate my reviewers. I'm not in the "book review" business to make money. They'll be other projects down the road that may serve as money makers.
-Tee
|
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 67
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 12:58 am: |
|
This will be an interesting endeavor. I wish you the best of luck. Here are a few issues that may also come up:
Those with the money to pay for book reviews will. This means that once again major publishers and authors with deep pockets will have the advantage of obtaining a review versus those who may use non-traditional publishing tactics. (For the reader, this may mean less exposure to diamonds in the rough.)
On the other hand, some major publishers and authors may take a back seat to a lesser known author who pays for a review. If the author truly believes that there is no such thing as bad publicity, they will ask for the review to be published regardless of if it is favorable. This could mean that well-known authors with new books who generally assume their books will be reviewed may take a back seat to the authors who gathered up enough money to pay for a review. (For the reader, this could mean less exposure to a higher quality of books.)
I can also imagine that publications that review books will be flooded with book review requests (and checks). Either they will fall behind on timely book reviews or they will have to hire new staff to meet the demand.
I still feel that this leads to the potential for corruption. If a major publisher like HarperCollins or Random House is paying for reviews, best believe the majority of reviews will be positive in order to keep the money flowing.
One last point. I've been writing reviews for about a year now. I'm a published author. I have several publishing credits and a new book due out next fall. If you're paying reviewers to review books, can a brotha have a job?  If so, e-mail me at emanuelcarpenter@yahoo.com.
Later,
Emanuel Carpenter
|
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 79
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 09:34 am: |
|
Troy wrote:
Readers are less likely to be subjected to unfavorable reviews
I don't see how this is automatically seen as an advantage. I wouldn't trust any reviewer who only gave favorable reviews. Granted, the reviewer may chose to not publish any unfavorable reviews but then no one enjoys every book they select to read whether they will receive money to write a review or not. |
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 80
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 09:39 am: |
|
Emanuel wrote:
I still feel that this leads to the potential for corruption. If a major publisher like HarperCollins or Random House is paying for reviews, best believe the majority of reviews will be positive in order to keep the money flowing.
I agree which is also what I meant getting free books as payment -- even in exchange for a favorable review, as well as, dibs on an advance copy of the author's next book release. I've seen how overwhelming favorable reviews has already tainted this issue, as I've also heard that many say that won't comment on a book that they deem as not good especially if they "know" the author. So, as you say, if money is thrown into the mix, then we've speeded up that express to hell -- with a hand basket full of books, no less. All of this reminds me of how record companies are paying radio stations to play their artists songs on the radio over and over and over and the hyping by the DJs. Then will claim, this was the most requested song of the day. |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 84
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 10:39 am: |
|
JMHO/Emanuel, I agree with this stance. Publishers and authors should know that when they submit a book, they are doing so for an honest review. If it's not liked, or rated low, I'm sorry and I'll even give them advance notice, but it is still posted, just as the favorable ones are. There is no favoritism or special treatment.
One of the worst experiences I had was with an author who disagreed with her rating (but loved the review) and who demanded I not post it. She bad-mouthed me (and I didn't even write the review), the group, and the whole nine yards. It was a mess, but we stood our ground, the review was posted and because of her, I changed our policy of reviewing books more than once. While I don't necessarily agree with ratings of books that some of my team members like (that I didn't like), I stand behind them and their review and feel that yes, it's honestly how they felt about the book.
I recently read and reviewed a book by an author who I really like. She's nice, she's always been supportive of our group, and she's professional. Unfortunately, I simply didn't like her book. I outlined my issues with it in a way I thought was constructive (that's important to me), and though I'm sure she didn't want the review posted anywhere, she replied back in a manner that was professional and open to criticism. And, yep, the review was posted and yep, I'd read her next book.
I know of reviewers who only post favorable reviews, and I just think this takes away from their credibility. I think the key is being able to write a review for a book that you didn't like, while at the same time making a reader want to read the book anyway, to find out for themselves.
The fact remains, reviewing is subjective. I may love a book that everyone else hates or vice versa, but I just don't think I would ever throw money in the mix. Money or not, how I feel about a book is how I feel about a book, but it's just too much room for speculation. And Troy this is not to say I don't think your new endeavor (or Kirkus') for paid reviews will work, I wish you the best with it. I'm simply saying it's not for me.
-Tee |
Thumper
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Thumper
Post Number: 282
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 10:44 am: |
|
Hello All,
Emanuel and Jmho: I see what you're saying but I disagree. Any reviewer who gives nothing but positive reviews are not reviewers, they're advertisement! The only reviewer that stands to lose any future revenue from the pay-for-review deal is those of us who won't lie and say that a book is good when it is not.
I'm not sure that I like the one portion of Troy's statement about if the paid review is negative the author has the right to pull it. It implies that the author/publisher is really paying for an ad and not a review.
Be it good or bad, it's time for a change in the industry. If the reviewer is not to be paid directly from the author/publisher, he still has to be supported in some fashion. |
Troy
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Troy
Post Number: 153
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 02:21 pm: |
|
Everyone thanks for sharing your ideas and thoughts
Here is another long a— post.
Jmho Regarding your comment ”Readers are less likely to be subjected to unfavorable reviews” If you look carefully you’ll notice I listed this as both an advantage and disadvantage. I believe, in the final mix, less than favorable reviews will make it through the entire process.
Tee, perhaps hubby is on your back ‘cause he is in effect subsidizing the writing of TRR reviews. Somebody has to pay. Ask him to read this post, tell me what he thinks.
Were any of your reviewers the ones that asked you to consider charging? I hope some of the advertising money does filter back to your reviewers – they deserve it, as do you. Please read my point about More About Advertising below I think you will find it useful. Yeah you are probably right in feeling it is idealistic waiting for authors who have made it big, to provide meaning financial support. Despite their good intentions, even if they come through, you can not run a business waiting for donations.
Emanuel, I’ll let you in on a secret. We will still publish “free” reviews. We build “free’ Author Profile we provide “free” advertising. So hopefully between the paid and free reviews we will uncover more diamonds n the rough. Emanuel, your second point (regarding paid reviews pushing out authors from major houses causing less exposure to higher quality books). This thought occurred to me and I wrestle with in on a number of levels. I’ll explain in the more general comments below.
Thumper The purchaser of the fee based review should have an option to refuse having the review published. They commissioned and paid for the review, they should have the right to prevent it’s publication. The reviews where we bear the cost (free to the author) will absolutely be published. Bottom line, from the author/publisher’s perspective reviews (even unfavorable reviews) ones are a form of promotion. They are looking for someone to talk about their book and hopefully praise it. This is the case whether the review is “free” nor fee based. The consumer, or reader of the review, wants to know what you think of the review good or bad. While the perspectives of the author/publisher and reader are different. This does not change the book reviewer’s job of writing the review.
ABM A couple of points. Don’t confuse “quality” with revenue generation ability. BET generates a lot more revenue that CSPAN could ever dream think about generating. There are a lot of quality magazines with quality content supported by not-for-profits because they are unsustainable as a for profit business. There are many entites you may consider “quality” that are unable to pay reviewers.
Next, why would a ”savvy reader might look upon such reviews with a jaundiced eye.” Think about this: The reviewer is typically oblivious, to the source of their review payment. Take the Thumper’s review of Dwayne Joseph’s book for example: Does the fact that I’m paying him out of pocket change the outcome of the review? Supposed I said I was redirecting funds received from Urban Books advertising or Electa Rome’s author profile? This does not factor at all into the outcome of the review. Does this make sense? The professional reviewer’s job is to write the review and ensure they are compensated fairly.
In my last post I attempted to group all for profit book review publishers in a generic light and have may have unintentionally obscured some distinctions between the various publishers of book reviews. While Kirkus, TRR, AALBC.com and may others publish reviews. The final product of the review will be completely different. The differences may be length, style, target audience, reach, and even quality. While AALBC.com has published reviews written by writers who have also written for various other sources including RRW, BIBR, QBR, PW, etc (y’all following me with these acronyms); ultimately, we want to develop a team of reviewers perhaps 10 to 20 with distinct and compelling voices that readers can identify with, disagree with, love, and in the final analysis respect. Reviewers like Thumper, for example, have become a brand on to themselves. Creating more “Thumper’s” can’t happen, easily, if reviewers are not being paid.
We all know you get what you pay for.
Sometime ago AALBC.com set out to develop that core stable for reviewers. AALBC.com paid for virtually every review that was written. In addition, an editor was paid, Thumper was paid to manage the process and during that period we published a lot of reviews. This effort was funded primarily by advertising. However given the unpredictable nature of advertising revenue relative to the growing demand for book reviews this model was unsustainable over the long haul. Charging a fee for the service of writing a book review could make our this aspect of our business model sustainable.
Another distinction of AALBC.com is that we are by no means attempting to review every book. Frankly, not every book justifies the money, time and energy required to be reviewed (at least in our current business model). However, by charging, we are in effect making it possible for these books to be reviewed. And yes we may run into the problem, Emanuel raised, but I think the price of the book review will server as a natural filter for the books that are submitted. Giving the author the option to opt-out of having his review published will also provide another form of filtering. As a result, we expect to uncover more diamonds simply because we will be reviewing more books.
Two Additional Ground Rules specific to AALBC.com
- AALBC.com is a for profit business
- AALBC.com is not solely motivated by money
As business, the goal, at a minimum, is to generate revenue that exceed expenses. These expenses include everything from internet hosting to paying reviewer for writing reviews. If this is not your goal then you are not running a business with the proper mindset. Your efforts would better described, as a charity, hobby or just something you do out the goodness of your heart. I'm not making a value judgment here, just a clarification. By extension, book reviewers, or other professional writers are often business entities themselves and as a result expect to be paid for the services they render. It is hard to make a living as a professional writer. The writer who gives away all of their content for free will never make a living at writing. Sure free books and getting your name out there may be enough for some writers of reviews. But this usually appeals to the hobbyist or newbie. Rarely does it appeal to an experienced professional writer; unless they donating their time which is cool too..
Of course money is not the only motivation. I feel very fortunate to be running AALBC.com. It is a lot of work but I love doing it. However it would be naïve to ignore the money factor. If I were struggling financially there would be no AALBC.com. If I were better off Reviewer would be paid. There is a minimum amount of money that is required to run AALBC.com or any other entity that publishes of reviews. Clearly, that money must come from somewhere. If the reviewer is not being paid then, at some level, the money is coming out of the reviewer’s pocket.
They say, for the internet that “content is king”. However; “content is not free” even if the price we pay for it gives the mistaken impress that it is. If the reviewers are not paid directly, then something else must subsidize the effort; whether it is a “Hubby” with deep pockets or advertising; the cost can’t be avoided. Now if you plan to use advertising as a source to subsidize reviews you have to contend with a few dynamics to consider.
More About Advertising
If you publish reviews you are in effect providing “free” advertising for the publisher and author. I keep placing “free” in quotes because nothing is “free”. Just because the price you pay for a product is $0, that does not mean the cost of that product is $0. Working under the assumption that $0 price is the same as $0 cost will lead to faulty conclusions.. To clarify further, consider the following:
A book review is published for a specific author/publisher. The review is emailed to your entire mailing list and proudly displayed on your web site or magazine. Hey you might even be super aggressive and post the reviews on Amazon.com and give permission to other entities to publish the review. The well written and insightful review generates a lot of buzz and results in more copies of the book being sold. A good thing, right? Well it depends upon your point of view: For the publisher/author and reading community, the answer is yes. Total price to the publisher: less than $5 (unit cost of the book plus postage), total price to the reader: $0. Total cost to the book reviewer publisher: – a lot more than 5 bucks --especially if the reviewer is being paid (which is why they often are not).
Now given the above, why would the same author/publisher spend money to advertise with the same source that just published the review – everything the book review publisher could do, for the publisher has already been done for free! If there is any additional potential added value that could be provided by the book review publisher; the author/publisher may not consider it worth the additional expense – especially for a midlist author. Major house already take it for granted we are going to talk up their A-list authors. Advertising is a tricky. The goal is to provide a beneficial service to the client without cannibalizing the same service through “free” book reviews and at the same time maintaining content that is good enough to drive a consistently high level of traffic to the site or subscribers to the magazine.
That is why of the millions of web site an infinitesimal number are dedicated to reviewing black books. That is also why there are similarly few magazines dedicated to reviewing black books as well. All of the principals in these operations are smart enough to dedicate their time to something that is more lucrative. However, we are all not solely motivated by the dollar.
|
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 83
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 02:51 pm: |
|
Troy wrote:
I believe, in the final mix, less than favorable reviews will make it through the entire process.
Time will tell. But, I really believe they will be minuscule in numbers compared to those favorable paid (payment by cash or in free books) reviews. |
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 68
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 03:21 pm: |
|
Here are some things to think about:
Let's assume a review site can only review a certain amount of books, let's say 20, in a given time period. Then they receive 20 self-published books with 20 checks enclosed. They also receive 5 books by A-list authors from major publishing houses without checks. Who's going to get the review? What will this mean for the reader who is looking to learn about the hottest authors or what books to purchase? Will subscriptions for decrease when this occurs? Will review sites and publications lose money on advertising as a result of less readers? Can a publication continue to exist if the readers and advertisers disappear?
I have nothing against books that are not traditionally published. But it's been my experience that books that do not come from traditional publishing houses tend to have many more flaws than the traditional ones. This has more to do with grammar and punctuation problems than issues such as content and plot. But with paid reviews, the reader will be exposed to more of these types of books.
Also, I believe a lot of authors and publisher seek reviews because it is a cheap way to gain publicity. When that avenue is no longer cheap, they may choose to spend that money on a traditional ad, where they at least get to control the message. Personally, I would prefer to pay for the ad versus the review.
Finally, it'll be interesting to see if the paid for reviews include a disclaimer stating that it is paid for. If so, I think the review will definitely become more suspect. If it doesn't include a disclaimer, it will only be a matter of time before the media and general public learn that the reviews are paid for. Trust me. They will become suspicious. And the publication, website, and/or the reviewer will lose credibility. There's a difference between wondering if a few reviews are paid for versus knowing for sure that they are.
-Emanuel Carpenter |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 86
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 04:12 pm: |
|
Thanks for the further dialogue Troy, but to clarify, hubby on my back has more to do with a time issue and how much I spend doing RAW-related items. He doesn't fund RAWSISTAZ, I do, with the support of the team members. The only exception is if he gives me a monetary gift for a birthday or holiday that I choose to put back into the group.
And to answer your questions, no, the people wanting to charge for reviews weren't even RAWSISTAZ members. They were people on the outside looking for an opportunity to make money IMO, by partnering with us and taking part of the profits.
You are perhaps right in that TRR is not run in the normal mindset of a business whose ultimate goal is to make money. As I've already said, that's not my goal. So, perhaps I need to look more into the whole charity and not-for-profit type of structures as it pertains to TRR as this would be a better fit.
While your whole thought process on this topic is interesting and seems well thought out, plus you have some very valid points, I simply don't agree with the "review for a price service," or being selective on who gets a review and who doesn't, no matter how you preface it. I will however keep a lot of those advertising thoughts in mind when future business endeavors (to make a profit) for RAWSISTAZ are put into place.
My intent for even replying to this post was to shed light on how other reviewing entities looked at the situation when I saw your post. There is not always just one way to do something. While AALBC is a wonderful organization doing great things for the literary world, and you are to be commended on your contributions, there is a possibility that others can also contribute as well...in their own way.
-Tee |
Thumper
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Thumper
Post Number: 284
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 05:08 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Emanuel: You wrote, "I have nothing against books that are not traditionally published. But it's been my experience that books that do not come from traditional publishing houses tend to have many more flaws than the traditional ones. This has more to do with grammar and punctuation problems than issues such as content and plot. But with paid reviews, the reader will be exposed to more of these types of books."
Again, if the reviewer is true to the game and HIS game is tight, he won't deceive his readers into believing that a book is fine when its not. The people are buying a review, not the reviewer's integrity. If a reviewer's integrity can be bought by a mere (let's say) $350, he's not a reviewer--he's a cheap ho. I have always noted grammar and punctuation errors in books. Really, why would somebody in they right mind put out a book when they can't run a damn spell check through their stuff before sending it out to the printers? Anyone who does that needs to get talked about like they stole something...and usually they have. |
Troy
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Troy
Post Number: 154
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 05:32 pm: |
|
Tee There is more than one way to do everything. I wish there were more of us trying. Thanks for the compliments. You know I feel the same for your efforts as well.
Emanuel Try to decouple, in your mind, the money recieved for the review fees from the actual reviewer. This should be easy because there is no connection.
You are a reviewer, I just googled you. Impressive resume. So I really appreciate you insights and opinions . Supposed I said,
"Emanuel I like your writing and respect you opinion. I'd like you to review Jane Doe's book for me"
Then I give you a check for $200.
Would you say to yourself,
"Hey, Jane Doe paid to have this review done. I better make sure it comes out good"?
Of course not, why would you? You have been paid to write a review. My transaction with Jane Doe is of no consequence to you. Indeed, there is no reason for you to even communicate with Jane.
For all you know Janes review was a freebie, or maybe Jane washed my windows in return for a review. Get my point? My transaction with you the reviewer is completly separate from my transaction with the author. Further I could collect funds for a review and acutually not pay the reviewer. The does not warrant a "disclaimer".
The real benefit to you as an author is that you can almost guarantee you will get a book review.
The benefit to you as a reviewer is that more paid review opportunities will be made available to you.
The benefit to the reader is that they will see more book reviewed and the quality will inprove as competition for reviewers heats up.
The benefit to the book review publisher is another source of revenue which, for those of us not in it only for the money, can fund other actitivies to benefit society.
This has the potential of being a win, win, win win situation.
Of course, as you suggest, authors may balk at the fee. Not every publication can command a $350 fee for a review. Kirkus can, AALBC.com can not. Our fee will have to be somewhere south of our authors profile rate. Which is $299 for self published authors.
Part of your these comments assume that only fee based reviews will be performed. Of course when Ms. Morrison's next book comes out it will be reviewed. But the authors who also paid for a review will have there books reviewed. The fee paying reviewees will be subsidizing the Nobel Laureates. Again none of this should have any impact on the reviewer.
Emanuel, if you don't mind me asking in terms of the revews you have written how much were your typically paid for writing them? Did you you ever write any for free? Would you have prefered to be paid in those instances. I see you have reviewed for many entities what is your general impression about the compemsation you have received?
Emanuel, some authors would be much better off paying for an ad, others might be better off paying for a book review. It depends upon the author and the books.
Jmho Time will tell. However I have no problem publishing all favorable reviews if that is the way if falls out. If people want to think the reviews are baised because of connection they have created in their minds there is nothing I can do about that. There is no reason that people can not do that today.
|
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 1647
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 06:18 pm: |
|
Questions:
What happens if you have authors who are willing/capable of spending more than $350 to have their books reviewed? Isn't it possible that reviews can end up being bidded on like (inflated) stocks on the New York Stock Exchange or (cheezy) heirlooms at Sothersby? And if that occurs, does THAT promote a healthy book market? |
Emanuel
Veteran Poster
Username: Emanuel
Post Number: 69
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 08:34 pm: |
|
Troy, even though you would be the middle man between the author or publisher and the reviewer, I think there would still be some pressure on the reviewer from his Editor to write a glowing review if the money is right. I could imagine you saying, "Here's $200.00 for a review by Jane Doe from Random House. Random House has 150 more reviews they would like us to do for them, which means more money in our pockets. Try not to slam this one too hard, since we'd like to keep the money flowing."
I've written reviews for The Midwest Book Review, Rock Publications, and A Nu Twista Flavah. My only compensation has been the book itself, free bookmarks, a T-shirt, some Columbian coffee and a generous byline. The byline, publishing credit, and access to major players in the industry have been my sole motivation to write the reviews. I just wrote my last review a few days ago because it is too time consuming. But if I start getting paid for my reviews, I will reconsider.
-Emanuel Carpenter |
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 84
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 08:45 pm: |
|
Troy wrote:
If people want to think the reviews are baised because of connection they have created in their minds there is nothing I can do about that. There is no reason that people can not do that today.
Again, true but as a reader of the review, they have no idea how much that the fact the reviewer was paid had any influence upon their favorable review written, right? This isn't about what one has created in their minds -- either way. If you didn't review the book personally then you as site owner who hired the reviewers don't know either. Just as the readers of the review don't know. But the possibility does exist.
However, I suppose a reviewer could add to that disclaimer mentioned, yes I was paid to write this review but it had no influence whatsoever on what I wrote.
Money is a factor -- if it wasn't we wouldn't even be having this discussion. |
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 85
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 08:50 pm: |
|
Thumper wrote:
If a reviewer's integrity can be bought by a mere (let's say) $350, he's not a reviewer--he's a cheap ho.
Well, we all know some who have done a lot more for a lot less.
|
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 313
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 02:52 am: |
|
Okay, let me jump in as a reader AND as a person that is always trying to hear what is not being said.
There are a few important facts that should be considered that has not hit the board. First, has there (I doubt it) been a study/system that tracks the correlation between reviews (good or bad) and book sales/dollars?
I consider myself to be an average reader that has lived with a ferocious reader so I thought about how we became aware of the books we eventually bought and those we passes on or picked up at the library. Again, I used our buying method/decisions as a model and took into account our income and loose-free-spendable book buying cash to develope my own opinion of the true value of reviews. Although Thump would have you believe that I am tight and have money falling out of my pockets, that is not the case and I think we would fall somewhere in the middle and therefore a deceit model.
Let me also throw this on the table. We would be remiss if we didn't identify/admit that money is the driving force, therefore each individual or business involved in the book review process, be it the author, the reviewer, the publishing house, the magazine or even book clubs and their "owners", have some form of vested interest. So the motive behind even championing there usefullness, paid for or not must be considered.
Having said all of that, here's my take/opinion. Opps, wait, I have one more "frame". I believe we are of average intelligence and believe a persons ability to decifer the grain from the shaft should/can be a factor in the importance or relevance of reviews.
NOW, As I've said in the past, I believe a review should be considered in the decision to purchase a book ONLY if one knows the style/taste/honesty of the reviewer. I no longer give any credence to any and every reviewer because , I don't "think" they are motivated by money or some other form of "payment" I know they are! Again, be it some reviewers that want more business (as mentioned above), the proprietors of tiny book clubs that desire free books and the elevation of their club for various personal means, or as been mentioned the distributor of the book being reviewed settling for nothing less than a favorable review, it's all about the dollar. Yet, one may ask or assert that all reviews are not favorable so that tears a hole in my opinion. Well, not really. Do you think reviews are written to imped the progress of a competitor and in doing so increasing the chance that those spendable dollars will flow their way.....uuummm. But are we really talking about unfavorable reviews?
Okay, it's safe to say that not all reviews are doctored or slanted but again it's incumbent upon the reader to know "their" reviewer. Now, back to my original statement or question of how effective/important are reviews in the decisions making process of buying books. I've said all of the above to say, in the book buying AA community, word of mouth is king. Don't get me wrong, my family has on several occasions decided to purchase a book upon the recommendation of a reviewer. Yet, this decision was based on the fact that we were buying and reading faster the word of mouth could fly. Yet many others that I've talk with were tipped by someone else. Also, a large part of our entertainment dollars are spent on books. Many others might not have that kind of dollars allocated towards the purchase of books. In short, I believe good reviews in the AA community are not the driving force behind book sales. I'd sure like to know how important they are and the demographic of those that use them as a buying guide.
I know I skipped around a bit but I hope I added something to chew on. I do know one thing. I got lost in thought while writing this so please excuse me if you did so while reading it.
Carey |
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 86
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 08:56 am: |
|
Carey wrote:
I'd sure like to know how important they are and the demographic of those that use them as a buying guide.
Carey, I think this is a very good question, and you did raise some other good points.
I know that I have decided to buy/read a book based on reviews. As well, I have decided to not buy/read a book based on the reviews. Even if the review was seen as a favorable review by many others, including the author. The same hold with movies, music, etc.
I agree, you have to know your reviewer(s). You track the books they've reviewed as favorable or unfavorable and take in consideration what type of books you like to read.
But, I also think that reviewers are included in the "word of mouth" crew.
Reviews are written to influence, among other things. The author of the book want people to read them and be influenced or swayed to read or buy and read their book. As mentioned before they are a way to advertise. And, as a consumer, with all advertisments, you have to take a look at the ad and make a decision -- is this a product (book) that I think I will like to buy. Or ponder is this a product (book) that I will enjoy.
Besides, don't all ad agencies get paid by their clients? They get paid to do what they do best -- ultimately to get folks to buy or try product or service advertised. Advertisting is more than just making the consumer aware of products and/or services. But we all know that ad agencies get paid, and most would be shocked if they didn't receive any type of compensation. But we also can't deny when you know there is compensation, then one considers did that have any influence on what is said about the product or service. |
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 316
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 11:51 am: |
|
Yes, JMHO, one should know their reviewer. Because make no doubt about it, everyone has a slant. I hate to continue to use Thump as an example but he is "my" reviewer. Has Thump ever steered me wrong, I'll say I've been less than happy upon buying a book that he has given the green light but that's to be expected. We are two different individuals and we are never going to agree on everything. But for the most part, he's still my guide. I've openly told him that I thoought his recommendation was offline and he was cool with that. Has he taken it easy on an author, sure he has but again I still believe he's true to the game. Let's be real, it is a game.
JMHO, you did bring up an important point. I have NEVER purchased a book that he has said is do-do. Again, it's because I know the man and have read the books he has thought were not ready so I'm in line with his thinking process. Plus, I've read books that other reviewers have raved about that told me that the reviewer was full of S*&t and could never be trusted ever again. I know for a fact that some reviewers don't know what the hell they are talking about and can not be trusted. There was no way some books that they championed should have made it pass first base, the books were absolutely terrible. When this was pointed out to them they hide behind so ol'lame excuse like "we are all different and I liked it". All reviewers have a responsiblity to know the craft of efficent storytelling and proper gramer and this reviewer flunked. |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 88
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 12:16 pm: |
|
JMHO/Carey, I too think you must know your reviewer. And, just as you said JMHO, you have to access what they've read against what you've read and track the books they liked/disliked against yours. There are some reviewers I hardly ever agree with, yet there are some who are very inline to my own preferences in books. I know I've read books that some of my reviewer's read and disagreed with their rating of it and I've loved some they hated. So? Again, this just points back to knowing your reviewer. It doesn't make them wrong,
And Carey, just as you have never purchased a book Thumper said is do-do, I have, simply because I wanted to form my own conclusion. And in some cases, yes, you guessed it...I liked the book. Just as I didn't like some books he did. While this is Thumper's board and he's good at what he does, he's not the end-all-be-all when it comes to having an opinion on a book. (No disrespect intended Thumper). But Carey, please realize that just because someone isn't him that it doesn't take away their credibility, it just means they differ in opinion and that is okay.
The issue of this thread is paying for reviews, so I'm not sure how we got to this, but I'd be interested to know your thoughts on the actual topic at hand.
-Tee |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 89
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Troy said:
Tee There is more than one way to do everything. I wish there were more of us trying. Thanks for the compliments. You know I feel the same for your efforts as well.
Tee:
Troy, you know I gots nothing but love for ya! |
Thumper
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Thumper
Post Number: 285
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 03:58 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Tee wrote: And Carey, just as you have never purchased a book Thumper said is do-do, I have, simply because I wanted to form my own conclusion. And in some cases, yes, you guessed it...I liked the book. Just as I didn't like some books he did. While this is Thumper's board and he's good at what he does, he's not the end-all-be-all when it comes to having an opinion on a book. (No disrespect intended Thumper).
You ain't got to worry about disrespecting me like that Tee. As you know, I have never had a problem with people disagreeing with my opinion. I still believe that's what makes discussing books fun. Whenever I'm out in public, I get called on books that I loved and other people hated and vise versa. It doesn't faze me in the least. You know, Tee, you've got me on a couple of occassions yourself (that damn Minion book comes to mind. *big smile*) It all boils down to trusting the reviewer to be honest. For instance, there are some people that I love it when they disagree with me: Linda, Crystal, to name a few. Miss Ann (oh, how I do miss her) very seldom agreed with me on books. But, the beauty of the thing is I can't wait to hear why or how they feel the way they do. So, in my opinion, a negative review would not hinder anyone from buying a book, if that's what they really want to read.
Tee wrote: But Carey, please realize that just because someone isn't him that it doesn't take away their credibility...
I don't see why it don't! *LOLL*
|
Thumper
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Thumper
Post Number: 286
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 04:07 pm: |
|
Hello All,
Carey wrote: All reviewers have a responsiblity to know the craft of efficent storytelling and proper gramer and this reviewer flunked.
Exactly Carey. I believe any reviewer has to know the craft of writing. I've ran into a few (I won't say their names) who raved about a certain book that I detested and I asked them why they felt the way they did. They gave me all of the positive stuff. I asked them if they had seen the misspelling and grammatical error (they had), and the holes in the story (they had). Then what was so damn good about the book then? I asked. I just liked it, they replied. Well, see, that is a stupid ass answer. I haven't read another review by either of them. So, I'm feeling what you're saying. |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 91
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 05:53 pm: |
|
LOL Thumper...ooooohhh weee oooh wee, I just got The Bitten (the 4th in the Vampire series) in my box and Lawd, I'ma have to hide it from my reviewers and maybe log it in two weeks from now once I've cleared off at least 3-4 of the books in my stack. I still think the Vampire Huntress series is ALL THAT. Too bad it's a BAB, or I'd sneak it in. I'll let you know how it is when I get to it. <smirk> Hubby even likes the series and gave me more than his usual "it was okay" like he does on most books, with the exception of The Known World and Pretenses.
BTW, did you do your review of that latest Ernest Hill book yet? The one where he kept saying he was a man ova and ova again? Let me know when you do...
Whew, I'm off topic like Carey now. I'll start a new thread next time.
-Tee |
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 319
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 06:33 pm: |
|
Oh, yoou were off topic like Carey now huh. What's up with that? Did you feel a little something when I mentioned reviewers that do not know the craft or did you simply have a need to try a low blow.
The topic was paying for reviews...wasn't it? Now, was it off topic to take that lead in the direction that I did. I don't think the topic was deadly specific.....I doubt it. So to venture through the usefullness and validity of them, seems to be related. If a topic was "should prostitution be legalized" would it be offline to look into the need for legalization/ or various other reasons why it's not even a big deal.
As I've frequently said in the past, I look for what's not being said in a post and I heard what you were not saying loud and clear. It's obvious something I said stuck on you and you were trying to shake it off. Your statements rang of defensiveness. I didn't name names but.......
Since you threw Thump's name into the mix I'm compelled to point out that you've been called out on your skills, right here at Thump's corner, so I understand, I really do!
Don't hate, look the truth square in the eye and work on your craft. Then maybe next time you will not think the post was directed at you. But as I said, if you feel the need to defend yourself maybe you need to look within.
Did I get offline? Oh well, now I'm acting like you! |
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 320
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 07:05 pm: |
|
Let me hit this one more time, Tee, you got me going. (bout to get offline )As Thump stated, a reviewer has to know the craft of writing. Therefore individual likes and dislikes do have a place in the overall picture. However....HOWEVER, the staement "everyone is different so reviewers will not always agree on certain books" is in a sense a coverup . Look at it like this, if you said you were a professional boxer yet got knocked out every single time you stepped into the ring, would you expect others to value your skills as much as someone that has a decent record? Or would you put your money on a fighter that is KNOWN to have taken a bribe?
Let's face it, just because a person says they are this or that does not mean they are. As in any profession, there are good ones and bad ones. Just because we are all different is a poor excuse for them not knowing their craft and is a lame argument to stand behind. |
A_womon
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: A_womon
Post Number: 942
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 07:06 pm: |
|
Dang, Carey! Did you have some razor blade soup last night? Or perhaps a rattler climbed into your bowl of oatmeal this morning? Cuz you shole (I like that word Brelei, so sue me, haha!) you shole have been cutting people and spewing venom today! And you got started eeaaaaaaaarrrrrrrly this mornin! What up? I thought new romance made one smile==not growl!
sheesh! |
Jmho
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Jmho
Post Number: 87
Registered: 03-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 07:22 pm: |
|
Tee wrote:
And Carey, just as you have never purchased a book Thumper said is do-do, I have, simply because I wanted to form my own conclusion. And in some cases, yes, you guessed it...I liked the book. Just as I didn't like some books he did. While this is Thumper's board and he's good at what he does, he's not the end-all-be-all when it comes to having an opinion on a book.
Tee, I didn't read Carey to mean this though I acknowlege he could have. Just as many have decided some reviewers have a similar taste as themselves, thus their opinions carry a bit more weight, that is what Carey is saying. That he knows what Thumper like and if he doesn't like a book then he probably won't either.
But, let's be real, there are only so many hours in a day, a year and one's life, so we won't read every book that's ever been published or will be published. Just as time is limited, most have limited funds. Some books I am just not interested in reading based on many things -- interest, writing style, subject matter, etc. That's why we look to others for recommendations in form of reviews, opinions, etc. Most reviews end with: I recommend that you read this book (based on what I just wrote).
And, if there a person, who has similar reading tastes as myself, says Book #1 is good and Book #2 is not, and I have time to read one book then I am going to read Book #1. I use reviews in that manner. Not the be-all-end-all but as a guide. It's going to take more than the fact this is a book for me to spend my time and money on it. For those with unlimited time and money, then power to you. I just don't have it like that.
|
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 322
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 07:38 pm: |
|
Yeah Jamo, dat der is what I be talkin' bout. And consequently I wrote my last post because of it, they knew where I was coming from but decided to slip in some do-do and I smelled it.
A_Womon, sometimes ya gotta show your ass, you know that *smile*. See, sometimes people have hidden issues and they run up in here thinking others ain't peeped it.
Venom you say *lol*. Dang, if I didn't know better I'd think someone was talking to you. But hey, we family....right.
Just as in baseball or other sports, the team leader or coach isn't necessarily arguing the call at hand, he's arguing for the next call. Get it? |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 94
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 07:53 pm: |
|
Carey said: Did you feel a little something when I mentioned reviewers that do not know the craft or did you simply have a need to try a low blow.
Carey, it was simply a joke, a tease. I apologize if it bothered you and in the future, I'll moniter my responses. Also...what I felt when I read your post is what I said in my reply above. We've had this discussion before as it pertains to my "skills" when it comes to knowing a good book (because I liked Minion and you didn't), so I'm not interested in travelling down that road again with you.
Additionally, I wasn't being defensive, at least not intentionally, I was just sharing my opinion on things. I'm pretty upfront and don't feel the need to tip-toe around the subject simply because I consider myself a reviewer and you or someone else may not. So, if you're wondering what I'm saying and can't clearly understand it, feel free to ask vs coming up with your own thoughts or "reading between the lines" as you may be a little off in your assumption. I mentioned Thumper because you did Carey, I didn't throw him in the mix, you did.
As far as your scenario regarding the boxer, I do agree and would like to say that the key word is professional. I've never claimed to be a professional reviewer. I'm a reader-reviewer and I do realize there is a difference. There is no need for me to "hate" but I will take your advice as I'm always willing to acknowledge there is room for improvement with anything.
-Tee
|
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 95
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 08:08 pm: |
|
JMHO, I gotcha and I agree. "Talking" in this manner via these message boards leaves out a lot in regards to tone, body language, and things of this nature. It was not my intent to offend, be disagreeable, or lead anyone to "show their ass," I was merely sharing my views on the subject.
Though I am opininated, I always try to be respectful of others and listen/learn from their ways of thinking.
-Tee |
Carey
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Carey
Post Number: 323
Registered: 05-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 08:53 pm: |
|
Yeah, mayber I need to get some sleep, I've been on edge all day. I've been looking at that new 300 C class and my defensive skills (talking with salesman) are at their peek. So please excuse me if I jumped off on you. Yeah, we've had this discussion before and you're right, there's no need to twist that s*&t around anymore. Thanks for the cool down, I needed that.
A_Women, now what do you have to say?
Don't you see grown folks up in here talking, ain't you got something to do?
And stop smackin' that gum and close your mouth before you catch something . |
Tee
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tee
Post Number: 96
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 07:41 pm: |
|
It's cool Carey. I hope you were able to get some sleep, the 300 C class, a good book or two, or somethin' to make you feel better.
-Tee |
|
Email This Page