It is not a huge surprise that Anne Rice’s petition coincides with a new book launch.
When most restaurants get bad Yelp reviews, they just shrug them off and move on. Occasionally they might get into an internet spat with their bad reviewers (an exercise that never fails to entertain), but usually they just look at it as one crappy review. Why bother caring?
As often as there are people suing over bad Yelp reviews - or, alternately, being arrested in a year long sting operation for faking reviews - there seems to be a tradition of sweetly lighthearted responses to bad reviews.
When I first read about Anne Riceâs new pet project, a Change.org petition to convince Amazon to disallow pseudonymous reviews (theyâre not truly anonymous, since they must be connected to an Amazo…
I’ll just note here that I know I’m outside of the stated purpose of this tumblr, but the recent petition signed by Anne Rice and others to remove psuedonymity in Amazon reviews is just another skirmish in the reviewing wars.
Is your watch broken? Do you need to get your watch fixed? Are you looking for a New York-based watch repair shop? You should probably skip Ron Gordon Watch Repair, because he’s so bad at fixing watches, he’s threatening frivolous, insane lawsuits against critics.
Some litigiousness over reviews, though obviously not book reviews.
A fiction writer did get as far as pondering aloud whether he should sue a reviewer for “lost revenue”, but so far I don’t think that has gotten to the cease and desist stage. Weirdly, in the comments section of the linked post about the author thinking about suing a reviewer, the reviewer shows up and is attacked by the blog post writer for posting his review pseudonymously? After defending the review in the post? I honestly do not even get what’s going on here, and obviously there’s a whole lot of competing priorities. What a mess.
Anne Rice thinks there are communities of âparasitesâ intent on dragging down writers by slating their books online. Is she right â and why are we such slaves to the star rating, anyway?
Interesting take on the petition to remove anonymity from Amazon reviews.
This ruling by an appeals court deals with Yelp reviews. Apparently, if the review was written by a customer, then their opinion has First Amendment protection, but if not, it is a false statement. A lawyer I am not.
Yelp reviews are different from book reviews, of course, and it’s probably not fruitful to start panicking about getting doxxed by the courts for writing a negative review. But given that roughly 25% of Yelp reviews are fake - and positive fakes, written by companies to skew their own ratings - going after the few negative ones in this manner seems legally messy.
"With that disclaimer, here are some books I couldn’t bring myself to finish in 2013. What to Read, the column I write for Salon, singles out the best book I’ve found that week, so I don’t end up writing negative reviews and therefore am seldom forced to finish a book I don’t care for. But, contrary to the recent outbreak of Chicken-Little hand-wringing about the decline of critical standards, this doesn’t mean I’m indiscriminate. The vast majority of books are published into obscurity and my thumbs-downs typically take the form of allowing them to remain there. For that reason, what follows are my responses to books you might possibly have heard of, rather than the absolute worst things I read. (Those would be the half-dozen self-published YA and fantasy novels I looked at while researching a piece on reviewer-author feuds on Goodreads.)"
"Amazon’s social reading platform Goodreads now has 25 million members, almost double the number of members that it had at this time last year."
So, in the ongoing litany of bullshit that has gone on with GR since September I have just received this.
Another response to the returned reviews.
Joining Archer in posting about the continuing clusterfuck at Goofreads.
One reaction by a reviewer who finally had her reviews returned by Goodreads after they deleted them three months ago.