Should writers pay for book reviews? Why not, we pay for everything else.
5 comments:
Gumby
said...
I'm no economist but, dang, if these review places like Kirkus et all can't sell their own wares perhaps their just isn't a market for them. I don't know a single person who reads or cares what they have to say. In fact, the only place I ever see Kirkus mentioned is under a book's reviews on Amazon. So maybe publishers should pay. But even on Amazon I listen more to the individual reviewers.
Writers and publishers should not pay for book reviews, there are plenty of readers who will do it for free, (or for a copy of the book) and post it on Amazon.
No one reads Kirkus Reviews because everyone knows they're paid for. Seriously, most people will buy it on Amazon anyway, that's the place to post a free review.
i always swore i would never pay for it, but now that i'm old...
sorry, couldn't help myself.
i can't see this as anything but a sham. the profiting on desperation angle aside, it creates an inherent conflict of interest, and, sheesh, is there going to be any transparency for these? will i know as a reader that the author paid for a review? methinks no, because a paid review means it lacks legitimacy, no matter how objective (or negative) the review might be.
I am one of the many newspaper editors to whom self-published authors (or their publicists) write begging for free reviews. This seems like a train wreck waiting to happen.
Right now, I use a PW blurb as one gauge of whether an obscure book is worth reviewing, since PW reviews aren't always positive. If these paid reviews aren't clearly designated as such, I won't be able to trust PW at all.
I always look inside a book, self-published or not, before I decide whether to cover it. And if I like it, I'll write a great review. I could probably make more money writing paid reviews full of insincere faint praise and confusing literary verbiage, though...
5 comments:
I'm no economist but, dang, if these review places like Kirkus et all can't sell their own wares perhaps their just isn't a market for them. I don't know a single person who reads or cares what they have to say. In fact, the only place I ever see Kirkus mentioned is under a book's reviews on Amazon. So maybe publishers should pay. But even on Amazon I listen more to the individual reviewers.
Writers and publishers should not pay for book reviews, there are plenty of readers who will do it for free, (or for a copy of the book) and post it on Amazon.
No one reads Kirkus Reviews because everyone knows they're paid for. Seriously, most people will buy it on Amazon anyway, that's the place to post a free review.
i always swore i would never pay for it, but now that i'm old...
sorry, couldn't help myself.
i can't see this as anything but a sham. the profiting on desperation angle aside, it creates an inherent conflict of interest, and, sheesh, is there going to be any transparency for these? will i know as a reader that the author paid for a review? methinks no, because a paid review means it lacks legitimacy, no matter how objective (or negative) the review might be.
I am one of the many newspaper editors to whom self-published authors (or their publicists) write begging for free reviews. This seems like a train wreck waiting to happen.
Right now, I use a PW blurb as one gauge of whether an obscure book is worth reviewing, since PW reviews aren't always positive. If these paid reviews aren't clearly designated as such, I won't be able to trust PW at all.
I always look inside a book, self-published or not, before I decide whether to cover it. And if I like it, I'll write a great review. I could probably make more money writing paid reviews full of insincere faint praise and confusing literary verbiage, though...
That sounds a lot like paying for your friends.
Post a Comment