Is Asking Bloggers Not to Post Negative Reviews Ethical?
Sunday, January 22, 2012 
Guest Post by Irene Watson
I got an email the other day from Ron Fritsch, author of Promised Valley Rebellion after I advised our mailing list of a new Blogger Book Reviews package. He was addressing the note on the information page saying we will not ask the bloggers to remove or not post negative reviews. This also means that the author will not have the option of seeing the review first. Ron said:
I'm contacting you privately only to make one suggestion for a change in your rules... This is my point: as a writer, I'd like to have the option to at least ask a negative reviewer not to post the review on Amazon, B&N, or any of the other usual sites. (I wouldn't wish to ask a reviewer not to post the review on the reviewer's own blog or website. After all, the reviewer did go to the trouble of reading the book and should have something to show for it. Even if it's only the hope for some future citation such as this: "One of the first to see through [the writer]'s pile of you-know-what was [your reviewer], who said [what she/he said].")
On the other hand, writers such as myself who wish to write about serious matters can easily cause some narrow-minded or entertainment-only reviewer to click on the one-star button. I believe the author should at least have the option to request that the reviewer not post the review on Amazon, etc. Any number of review services, such as Kirkus and Clarion, allow the author the right to quash a negative review. The reviewer apparently doesn't need to consent to this. I assume, as a one-time lawyer who never practiced in this area, the Kirkus and Clarion guaranties are legal.
I responded with:
Ron, I can understand your concern. I've thought about this long and hard many times since I started Reader Views 6 years ago. Every so often I get a similar email from an author that I have to address.
I've come to the conclusion that the author can't be with his/her book at all times controlling what the reader thinks of the book. If a reader goes into their local B & N and buys the book there is no way the author can have control of what that reader gets out of the book, or what he/she would write in a review. Just because a book is sent to someone to read and write a review shouldn't make any difference. A reader is a reader, regardless of how he/she got the book.
As well, this is a country where we have the freedom of speech. I believe in this firmly and if I ask the blogger not to post the review because it's negative then I'm denying that person the freedom of speech. When I was doing the test before I let this package be available for authors, two bloggers gave me negative reviews - both 3-stars on Amazon. Did I like it? Nope. But, I also feel the reviewers were honest in what they wrote from their perspective. I honor that. I feel it would be unethical on my part to deny them the right.
ase in point - James Patterson, one of the most prolific writers and many times a bestselling author, keeps on writing/selling even though he gets negative reviews. I did a random check on his book "Kill Alex Cross" and this is what I saw:
Combined he got more 1 to 3-stars than he did 4 & 5-stars combined. It's very doubtful his publicist contacted all those that gave him a negative review to remove it. He just keeps on writing and selling and writing and selling.
So...long story short, I feel if the author did his/her very best, made sure the book was professionally edited for content and grammar, then the book is the best it could be. Not everyone will like it, but that's their option and they have the right to exercise their freedom in this country.
Ron's response was:
Your points are valid. Since I am also a supporter of free speech, I'm going to quit my complaining and fill out the entry form
Another author specified her concerns similar to Ron and when I explained to her it would be unethical for me to deny the blogger freedom of speech she responded with:
I find the diversity of opinion on this issue quite fascinating.
She is right. There are many opinions regarding this matter; some come from authors, some from publishing gurus, some from arm-chair experts...and each one thinks he or she is right. I come from the psychological take on this: those that want control of what people think of their book are coming from their own fear of rejection. Understandably, rejection isn't easy to take and if personally not resolved it manifests in wanting to have control over others...including what the person should say/write. Am I right? I think I am...no different anyone else that has an opinion.
Irene Watson is the Managing Editor of Reader Views, where avid readers can find reviews of recently published books as well as read interviews with authors. Her team also provides author publicity and a variety of other services specific to writing and publishing books.
Reader Comments (16)
As much as I want everybody to like my book and say what a terrific writer I am, not everybody will.
Boo Hoo.
There is an arrogance in the very act of writing down your words and ideas and expecting people to think what you wrote is important enough to them that pay you money to read it. If you are going to be that arrogant - and I speak as a writer - then you have to develop a thick skin about people who may not think they got their money's worth.
I so agree with you, Irene. Freedom of speech matters. Reviewers should be free to express their criticisms of a book if it hasn't met with their approval. I think it is so wrong for an author to request that a negative review should not be posted online; and very wrong for an author publicly to take issue with the reviewer, and defend their book against negative comments. Readers don't have to like a book. Once a book has been published, it is out in the public domain. Some readers will enjoy the book; others won't--and should be at liberty to say so.
Restrictions on free speech should be discouraged.
Robina Williams
Frankly, I would rather know a reader's honest opinion of my work than live in a false delusion that my work is better than it is. It's not just about selling books, it's also about getting feedback you can use to improve your writing. In that long run, you will sell more books if you writer better ones.
I think some authors don't realize they might be shooting themselves in the foot when they squash reviews that only give them 1,2, or even 3 stars, because readers are smart. They know it's impossible for a book to be liked by everybody. Even with Stephenie Meyer's Twilight taking the world by storm, there are still several people who hate the story.
I've visited forums where I occasionally see people talking about how they sometimes don't trust reviews that are only positive, figuring the author either paid for positive reviews or had the review section loaded by friends and family. That doesn't necessarily mean an author should strive for a negative review, but less-than-glowing reviews should be expected and not feared. It's just all part of the publishing process.
If you get a negative review, just feel lucky that you're now in a group that includes Stephenie Meyer, Stephen King, and a host of other big names that have all received negative reviews. The alternative is to leave your writing safely tucked away on your hard drive, where nobody says anything, good or bad, about your work.
I agree with your position that the reviewer should have the freedom to share his/her opinion and rating, regardless of whether the reviewer thought the book was the best thing since sliced bread or a steaming pile. Interestingly, I read a 2 star review on Big Al's Books and Pals that not only was one of the best reviews I've read, but it also would have swayed me to buy the book if the subject appealed to me. As an author, I've had to learn not to be devastated by negative reviews and to realize that even a negative review, if well written could actually encourage potential readers to buy that book.
The one thing that I don't know how to handle as an author, is when a review cites something that wasn't in the book. Do I stir up the controversy by showing that xyz wasn't part of the book or opposite of what was actually written or do I remain mum?
Hi Irene,
As usual a great response. I so agree with you even though I too have received (fortunately only one)a negative review. Even though I hated to see it there was a humorous side. It read:" I was a little disappointed to read when I got the book, that it was written by an amateur. A lot of the techniques to heal are one that I have naturally employed already. Yes you need calm, persistence, faith, I didn't need a book to tell me that." I guess because I didn't have any initials after my name she was miffed. I read it periodically to remind me to practice humility.
Joan, you bring up a valid point about the reviewer citing something that's not in the book. This often happens if the book isn't read and I believe, in fairness to potential readers, the reviewer/blogger should be approached on this and the issue pointed out. In most cases the reviewer/blogger will make the correction.
I completely agree in freedom of speech and not hiding negative reviews from the public. However, I prefer to write positive reviews for two reasons:
1. I write reviews for a local print paper, which means we have limited space and with so many books out there, it feels unfair to me to use space to write a negative review when that space could be used to help out a truly good book. That's not a concern, however, we need have on the Internet.
2. Before I agree to review a book, I will usually look it over, at least the sneak peek on Amazon, to see whether the writing is competent. When I can instantly see it is full of grammatical or punctuation errors or other problems within a few pages, I know I won't be able to write a good review, in which case I will politely decline doing so, explaining to the author why. Most authors politely then thank me for my time, although a few I never hear from again. In any case, I want to be honest when I write the review and feel I should be honest upfront as well before they expect a good review from me.
Irene, I agree about contact the blogger/reviewer via email when possible. However, when I wrote my first reply, I was thinking of an Amazon review I received where I was unable to contact the reviewer directly. I'm not sure if I did the right thing, but I chose the "stir up controversy" route.
Joan, I vote for stirring up controversy! When given a lemon, make lemonade. (I have no idea who coined that adage but it's a good one.) People love to read controversy...I wouldn't doubt your rebuttal sold books.
I'm with Tyler - actually. I want to look at a book before I commit the time to review.I don't want to waste my time with a book that just looks awful from the first word. I have written bad reviews, though - and took very little pleasure in posting them. I certainly wouldn't pull any of that handful of bad reviews if an author asked me.
Authors - I think you have to walk away from a bad review. Don't get into a p***ing match with a reviewer: while some of the resulting comment threads on Amazon make amusing reading for a third party, it really eventually just make the author look very, very bad. Not everyone is going to like your book. Get over it and move on.
Irene, you already know I agree with you and all the comments above. I'm glad, though, my initial message led to your post and this excellent conversation. Ironically, this same day I received an extremely favorable review of my second Promised Valley novel from a review service that I've been told is one of the toughest in the business: Kirkus. What can I say? Let a million flowers bloom! Free speech for me and thee forever!
I find that I learn more from the negative reviews than I do from the positive--how much do I learn from someone saying my writing is wonderful? I'm also curious when I see a wide spread of stars for other people's writing--there's been controversy. My ears prick up. There might even be some room from me to make my own critical judgments and engage with the book. I distrust books that are all five star. Nothing's that perfect. Long ago, I learned not to mother hen my writing. I greet negative reviews with curiosity and a determination to learn from them. It may be that the reader just didn't warm to my story--but heck there are people who don't wam to me. In the end, I'm inclined to trust the reader of the negative review to recognize if there's an agenda.
I wanted to add one more thing because I recently stumbled upon an on-topic article at GalleyCat that lists 10 Bestsellers with over 80 negative reviews. Twilight is at the top with 669 one-star reviews and Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone takes the tenth position with 81 one-star reviews. These 'bad' reviews apparently didn't slow these titles down any.
You can see the complete list at the link below.
http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/10-bestsellers-with-more-than-50-one-star-reviews_b45800
Marty, I saw that list last night and intended to mention it in my comment. I'm glad you did. It's eye-opening to say the least.
Irene, these comments have been immensely thought-provoking. I wrote to you wondering about the option of eliminating negative reviews using the same options Kirkus and Clarion offer. I would never have agreed I was considering this out of a "fear of rejection" as that's not my style. However as a newbie in the world of novelists, I had been advised this was the better path to follow. Absorbing all of these comments, I now agree that bad reviews come and go and the best we can do is learn from them or ignore them depending on their validity. Thanks for opening this discussion!