Comments on: The Political World of Romance by guest blogger Maria Duncan

By: Olivia

Olivia — Fri, 18 May 2007 04:13:32 +0000

Wow. I googled an epub and poor editing and somehow got here, LOL.

I’ll only use this once, since I think it’s redundant: IMO. I mean, really, I’m writing this so it must be my opinion, right?

This topic is uber hot of late, and really off and on over the last few years. Screw the reviews, the reviewers, the author, etc. It’s about how the anonymity of the ‘net gives people a way to be the shitty, ass-hats that normal everyday life doesn’t allow. If these bloggers were actually getting paid to do what they do, they wouldn’t be doing it the way they do. Because some of the shit they say could get them into trouble.

Seriously, you never saw Tom Brokaw come on the evening news and say “those fucking nutjob Islamic militants are at it again”. No way. That’s not acceptable behavior. The internet takes away those typical daily mental ’stops’ all of us run into when we get pissed, irked, or are just really tired.

Instead of spewing drivel about free speech and be nice, what should be asked is: Would you say that to the other person’s face? Would you act like this at your place of employment?

By: Melissa

Melissa — Wed, 16 May 2007 08:19:58 +0000

Now I have to say being a writer and reading a review like some of the links would crush my soul to a certain extent. I’m going to look at my writing and if I still feel that I wrote the story that needed to be written then so be it.

But I will now and forever be a reader. If I read a book that is crap then it’s crap no matter how you try to sugar coat it.

I read a book recently that made steam blow from my ears.I vowed to never read this author again.
I blogged about it, I used strong language, but I didn’t name the book or the author because I don’t review books.

Review bloggers cater to readers. Some use strong lanugae with a negative review others don’t. If all readers hated this type of reviews trust me they wouldn’t happen.

As far as intent, (most) negative reviews comes from being pissed off by a crappy book, it comes from having spent time and money on a crappy book. It’s about an author breaking the implied trust of the reader to provide a good read. A bad book is much like crappy customer service, not everyone is going write nice letters, some people are liable to cuss and get nasty.

By: Wylie Kinson

Wylie Kinson — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 04:21:03 +0000

Good observation, Ciar. That’s why we call her Queen :)

I agree with and earlier comment that brought the publishers into the equation. If I’ve read a particularly horrible book (and I’m pretty easy to please), complete with plot holes, spelling and grammar oversights and just plain messy writing, I tend to avoid the PUBLISHER, especially with ebooks. Someone didn’t do their job…

By: Ciar Cullen

Ciar Cullen — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:34:05 +0000

Geesh, always late to a party. Has anyone noticed that a woman who has sold more books than everyone else here combined x 400,009 (okay, I made that number up), and no doubt has received reviews of every degree of professionalism or lack thereof, maintains a level head about this issue? I’m not saying the rest of us don’t have a right to our opinions, but it’s probably unhealthy to let this stuff rule your life, much less a day or even an hour of your time. The non-clever review sites might go away if we ignore them. Or not. But readers don’t care.

By: Kat

Kat — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 08:36:37 +0000

Katie, I never meant to refer to you in particular when I made the comment about backtracking on generalisations. That was a general (oops! *lol*) comment on some of the exchanges on this thread.

As far as the bloggers named above, it’s far from clear to me that these sporadic explosions of traffic are somehow contrived. Maria’s post started this particular topic at this particular time, if I recall. Other bloggers were just polite enough to rant about it in their own blogs, as one should, rather than clobbering Alison’s comment thread. I know there have been other mini-controversies these past months but more so than usual in any particular blog? I haven’t seen it. Also, who’s telling other bloggers to go visit these blogs? Most of the commenters are regular visitors.

And again, I ask: what’s the big deal about bloggers getting more hits? Some get more hits when they talk about newly released books–would that be a bad thing, too?

I’m not trying to foist a point of view on anyone, or be nasty or anything like that. I really am genuinely puzzled by this notion that bloggers who earn no income off hit counts (and heck, even if they do) are manufacturing all sorts of nefarious ways to increase their traffic by talking about controversial, polarising topics. It seems to me that there’s a fundamental lack of understanding about what blogs are and what bloggers do.

By: katie

katie — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 03:51:55 +0000

Who’s backtracking? You lost me on the generalization disagreement, but no matter.
As for the extra hits it seems that some reviewers send out lures when their blogs are getting slow. I’m not going to name names, but it is clear that this is the motive. I can think of a blog that is plodding along right about now. In a few days, a week maybe, there will be some controversy that will bring in the hits. Mark my words. It is so lame.
I’m done with this subject. I’ll just sit back and watch. Carry on.

By: Kat

Kat — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 03:03:27 +0000

Sure, everyone generalises at some point. But when someone does it, they should just own what they said instead of backtracking and saying “oh, just speaking for myself”. More insidious than generalisations are often the assumptions underlying many of these circular arguments.

Regarding hits, I really don’t understand what’s wrong about bloggers getting more hits. If people are interested in reading something posted on a blog, they’ll go visit that blog. Most reader-reviewer blogs don’t make money off their hit count, so what’s the big deal about them getting more hits?

By: katie

katie — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:31:16 +0000

True, there are many generalizations, but you have them too. I’m not saying that all review blogs are bad, but some create drama to get more hits, or at least it seems that way.

By: Kat

Kat — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 11:59:37 +0000

Actually, sometimes the discussion is livelier when the author doesn’t show up. I remember one of the blogs cited above changed URLs partly (if I recall correctly) because the blogger wanted less author traffic and hassle. (She can correct me if I’m wrong about this.)

Men can and do bitch, too. Some even blog anyonymously–imagine that. And not all women bitch behind each other’s backs. That’s the point–some women will say it to your face, and some women actually appreciate that.

And I’m getting a headache from all the generalisations swinging back to only-my-opinions swinging back to generalisations. Still…I can’t seem to look away. *lol*

By: katie

katie — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 23:38:41 +0000

I believe that some of these review bloggers post bad reviews to try to tempt the author to respond on their blog. You get the bloggers friends defending the reviewer, you get the author and her fans in on it and now your blog has some excitement when it gets dull and boring. I simply love when an author ignores them and doesn’t show up.