tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post5360261638383809217..comments2023-12-16T16:50:25.810-08:00Comments on The Heart of the Matter: And Why Beholdest Thou The Mote In Thy Brother's Eye...?Barry Eislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-1967992789747919622012-10-22T20:26:25.079-07:002012-10-22T20:26:25.079-07:00Barry,
Good points, all. An old phrase comes to m...Barry,<br /><br />Good points, all. An old phrase comes to mind: "methinks, she doth protest too much."<br /><br />Too much.<br /><br />Too much vitriol. Too much sanctimony. Too much moral panic. Too much finger-pointing and tongue-clucking. Too much mob rule, and that way lies madness and the tyranny of the masses.<br /><br />Was there any rational discussion of the issues? No. Definition of what exactly constituted "illegal or immoral" behavior? Again, no.<br /><br />Blind accusations and hysteria always make me uncomfortable, whether it's 17th century witch-hunters, 20th century commie-baiters, or 21st century "Patriots."<br /><br />The thing that makes me shake my head is that the NSPHP expressly discouraged any discussion, shamed authors publicly, and then begged for reviews.<br /><br />Wow. I thought we (authors), of all people, were more rational than that. I hoped with our history of showing moral panic and mob mentality for the disgraceful behavior it is, that we were more level-headed and more adult than that.<br /><br />Shows how wrong I can be. Ever wonder if fascism can happen here?<br /><br />Don't.<br /><br />I don't share the guilt of the accused, but nor do I share the facade of moral outrage of their accusers.<br /><br />Ask yourselves this: would you accept a 5-star review from (insert your favorite author) if you knew he or she only read 1/2 of your book? The first chapter? Would you consider giving your friend a 5-star rating for a similar return? How about a 1-star in retaliation? Would you help out a friend with a slightly jacked-up review, hoping for some good karma?<br /><br />Shame on us all.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16640612307524711571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-58800358418467725162012-09-10T17:45:29.760-07:002012-09-10T17:45:29.760-07:00I agree with your post. I had my reasons for not s...I agree with your post. I had my reasons for not signing.<br /><br />One big one is that I was once accused of having fake reviews. This somehow meant I deserved fake reviews that were 1 star reviews all to be piled upon my book in the space of 2 weeks by the accusers and all their friends. <br /><br />Afterward, I "verified" every review I had. I linked to every 5 star review that was from someone who hadn't reviewed before, and for the 95% that I knew came from book bloggers I had requested reviews from, I linked their amazon review and their blog review along with their twitter/facebook accounts for verification of identity.<br /><br />I should not have felt that I needed to prove my reviews were real. But I did. That didn't make those fake negative reviews go away nor did it make my accusers stop accusing me, despite my providing evidence of my innocence.<br /><br />The reason they thought my reviews were fake? It wasn't because they read the book and decided it was crap. It was because they didn't like a comment I made on a social media network sharing my opinion on something.<br /><br />All of this needs to end. The solution isn't people claiming they won't post fake reviews. It's about what they do and what they don't do, and whether they accuse others of the things they themselves are guilty of. A real fix would be for websites to increase their verification methods to prevent/decrease the possibility of sock puppet accounts.<br /><br />As for the book buyers out there... you never needed to count on online reviews to decide to buy a book. There are so many other ways to find books to read and if you use those methods you might find books you love that the reviews for weren't great. For example there is one book I would give 10stars to if I could: it's my favorite book ever! It's amazing! It sets the bar for all other books I read. The average rating on that book on Amazon is only 3 stars.<br /><br />Reviews mean nothing in terms of how much *you* will enjoy a book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-56912751085500284022012-09-10T17:45:07.100-07:002012-09-10T17:45:07.100-07:00I agree with your post. I had my reasons for not s...I agree with your post. I had my reasons for not signing.<br /><br />One big one is that I was once accused of having fake reviews. This somehow meant I deserved fake reviews that were 1 star reviews all to be piled upon my book in the space of 2 weeks by the accusers and all their friends. <br /><br />Afterward, I "verified" every review I had. I linked to every 5 star review that was from someone who hadn't reviewed before, and for the 95% that I knew came from book bloggers I had requested reviews from, I linked their amazon review and their blog review along with their twitter/facebook accounts for verification of identity.<br /><br />I should not have felt that I needed to prove my reviews were real. But I did. That didn't make those fake negative reviews go away nor did it make my accusers stop accusing me, despite my providing evidence of my innocence.<br /><br />The reason they thought my reviews were fake? It wasn't because they read the book and decided it was crap. It was because they didn't like a comment I made on a social media network sharing my opinion on something.<br /><br />All of this needs to end. The solution isn't people claiming they won't post fake reviews. It's about what they do and what they don't do, and whether they accuse others of the things they themselves are guilty of. A real fix would be for websites to increase their verification methods to prevent/decrease the possibility of sock puppet accounts.<br /><br />As for the book buyers out there... you never needed to count on online reviews to decide to buy a book. There are so many other ways to find books to read and if you use those methods you might find books you love that the reviews for weren't great. For example there is one book I would give 10stars to if I could: it's my favorite book ever! It's amazing! It sets the bar for all other books I read. The average rating on that book on Amazon is only 3 stars.<br /><br />Reviews mean nothing in terms of how much *you* will enjoy a book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-32386310854472241282012-09-10T17:42:33.624-07:002012-09-10T17:42:33.624-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06740585379050709010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-84327086755104814052012-09-10T11:06:20.741-07:002012-09-10T11:06:20.741-07:00You've given one heck of a lot of thought to t...You've given one heck of a lot of thought to this. My hat's off to you. As for signing petitions and declarations and such, I generally don't do it because I don't much trust them either. Ron Scheerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15357501069513854664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-30533882616876929282012-09-09T14:46:30.609-07:002012-09-09T14:46:30.609-07:00As a reader and someone who has spent over 30 year...As a reader and someone who has spent over 30 years working in libraries I thought the nsphp authors sounded a bit whiny no substance to the letter just crying how wrong this is and how bad 3 authors were for doing it. In disclosure I like the books of both Locke and Leather and have no intention of dropping them - luckily with all the choices out there I can move the authors who have signed on to the nsphp to the bottom of my look at list (even though I read a lot, I generally like midlisters rather than so called best sellers so the more well known signers have been on the yeah, good authors, I'll get around to them someday - ok one exception and he wasn't that great (and who the Hades came up with a name that boils down to a crappy acronym?)<br /><br /> Perhaps if they had come up with some substance on what could be done about their complaints instead of mostly focusing on a few names in the how dare they vein I might not think of them as prigs. I DO get angry, in fact I get down right furious at 1 star reviews that are obviously hatchet jobs written with a personal agenda in mind and I sometimes buy books because of the one star review especially after I look at "all my reviews" and see they have only done 1 or only done reviews on 1 author (checking out particularly visious 1 star reviews has actually been my hobby for several months). BUT I have a brain, I can read between the lines of a review and am quite capable of making a decision on how realistic the review sounds myself. I rarely look at 5 stars for anything other than additional plot info.jryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06375921341016401539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-66688058958515166552012-09-06T17:13:10.726-07:002012-09-06T17:13:10.726-07:00"I think I'd rather condemn with some exp..."I think I'd rather condemn with some explanation, self-reflection, and nuance."<br /><br />Awesome. This analysis is wonderfully perceptive and helpful. Thank you. I'm just going to pretend you got there first and imagine myself as having signed your pledge. It's perfect.<br /><br />Bemotedly,<br />Becca MillsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-48949319617222254092012-09-06T08:19:23.571-07:002012-09-06T08:19:23.571-07:00I've been slagged by the one-star reviews, and...I've been slagged by the one-star reviews, and I was added to a 'secret' group that exchanged reviews. I left the group because it frankly smelled like a set-up! But I don't want to review books anyway. It's a moral minefield, and what are my qualifications? When I get a good review, at least I know I earned it. Am I jealous of people spending $425 for a review? Yeah--kind of. But publishers have had a cozy relationship with reviewers for many years, and I don't think there's much to be done about that.Louis Shalakohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17535102837963410061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-36498095086127113682012-09-06T08:02:44.713-07:002012-09-06T08:02:44.713-07:00I had all the reservations you wrote about in this...I had all the reservations you wrote about in this post before I signed my name. I still have them. I didn't even know people were leaving comments other than their names until I read your post. But I'm leaving my name up there because this is the first time I've seen this issue discussed openly this way. <br /><br />This review problem isn't just in publishing. It's in all walks of life from people who own restaurants to doctors. It's an Internet problem that is only going to increase if it isn't addressed.ryan fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13361694356025572544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-22202418623728596192012-09-05T19:16:29.948-07:002012-09-05T19:16:29.948-07:00It's highly unlikely that the ten or so employ...It's highly unlikely that the ten or so employees working in a Barnes and Noble will be able to provide me with an honest review on the 25,000+ titles they stock in the store. Even in a smaller, independent bookstore it's unreasonable to expect them to have read all their titles. They can only help so much.<br /><br />On Amazon I can get a review of nearly any book, even obscure works. They have a customer base from all over the world, so somebody's bound to have read and reviewed the book I want to buy. Sure, there might be sock puppet reviews, but the benefit outweighs the risk.<br /><br />I don't see bookstore employees as the silver bullet here. Upholding the integrity of the review system (no sockpuppeting) is a better solution. There's nothing wrong with the review system in and of itself, it's the gaming of the system that causes the problem.<br /><br />Besides, it's not necessarily a good idea to buy books based solely on reviews anyway. Read the sample and see for yourself. If the sample doesn't catch you then it really doesn't matter how many five star reviews the book has, faked or not.Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05340115435062756438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-46905189237796164702012-09-05T05:49:11.702-07:002012-09-05T05:49:11.702-07:00I think readers should just use common sense, and ...I think readers should just use common sense, and if they have any doubt about an e-book, download a free sample and buy the book based on a sample of the writing, instead of somebody else's opinion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-13974262565432765942012-09-04T19:39:12.389-07:002012-09-04T19:39:12.389-07:00There is such a compulsion to never admit a mistak...There is such a compulsion to never admit a mistake in the digital age where everything we say or write, every view we adopt is recorded, catalogued and archived. <br /><br />Well done Barry for being prepared to admit making a mistake and being on the side of reasoned debate and not lazy bloody-minded and un-nuanced 'clicktivism'.Michael McKenziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13745379021531770888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-44921950960239556062012-09-04T19:02:25.397-07:002012-09-04T19:02:25.397-07:00Thanks for the thoughts, everyone. David, it'...Thanks for the thoughts, everyone. David, it's an honor and a comfort to know you have my back, and I feel the same about you.<br /><br />WH, it's always good to know someone with whom disagreement on some things doesn't mean disagreement on all things.<br /><br />For everyone: one thing that gets lost when the hysteria rises is this: that someone disagrees with your means doesn't mean he disagrees with your objectives. An extreme (but tragically real) example was, "You don't want to invade Iraq? Then you don't care if Saddam Hussein gets a nuclear weapon!"<br /><br />Uh, no... I care a great deal, I just think an invasion is a bad means to that end.<br /><br />Anyway, after more thought and increasing discomfort, I've asked NSPHP to remove my name from their signatures list. My reasoning in the update to my blog post.Barry Eislerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-134058278942765602012-09-04T17:55:48.578-07:002012-09-04T17:55:48.578-07:00Barry,
Thanks for making your views on the matter...Barry,<br /><br />Thanks for making your views on the matter clear. I think they're fairly well reasoned too. I hope other writers read your post and think it through for themselves. <br /><br />I disagreed with you on that other blog because it seemed to me you were browbeating some poor guy who was looking at his only means of discovery disappear down a poisoned well. Now that you're making your case, I salute you (regardless of whether I agree with it all!). <br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />W. H. DeanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-21445598506436557282012-09-04T16:22:02.786-07:002012-09-04T16:22:02.786-07:00Writers and publishers have been paying for review...Writers and publishers have been paying for reviews for decades. It's a well known practice. Do people really think that giving a free copy away to a reviewer is not a bribe? Sorry, it is. I wonder how many writers on that list have had free copies of their books sent to reviewers or had their publisher pay for reviews. Most of those writers have had books reviewed by Kirkus - a pay for review site. They should look at themselves before they throw stones at others. <br /><br />The Amazon review system is basically a bulletin board where anyone can post anything - so people do. And are readers so foolish that they need someone else to tell them what to read? I hope not. <br /><br />Regarding the negative reviewing of other people's work, I agree, it's not on. It's disdaining and unnecessary. Having said that, it's happened to me like it has happened to a lot of people. In summary: Man up, everyone. It's a tough world. <br />1001 Secrets of Successful Writershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04293933614078633600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-44633615867892990292012-09-04T14:18:14.991-07:002012-09-04T14:18:14.991-07:00Good points, Barry. My mother reviews on Amazon q...Good points, Barry. My mother reviews on Amazon quite often, as she is an avid reader. And she reviewed one of my earlier books. She disclosed that she was my mother, even though it wouldn't be readily apparent, as we don't share the same last name. I was glad she did. I couldn't abide the thought that someone thought it was less than honest somehow, especially since she writes other reviews. (Of course, the review was so glowing, I doubt anyone could have mistaken it as having been written by anyone else!)<br /><br />But I think most readers can see through the 5 star glowing mother's reviews (or self-made reviews as recent news has indicated). What is less apparent to readers to recognize (and more appalling in my mind), is when someone writes a low review of someone else's work to somehow boost their own standing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-52069792089864223472012-09-04T13:49:10.453-07:002012-09-04T13:49:10.453-07:00This was a really thoughtful and well-reasoned pos...This was a really thoughtful and well-reasoned post -- thank you for writing it. <br /><br />I wouldn't be comfortable signing the NSPHP letter because it unreservedly condemns paying for reviews without qualification. So who's going to be the first to tell Kirkus Reviews that their business model is unethical? Interesting, the dictionary definition of unethical (which I did actually look up!) is "not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior," which makes me think the self-publishing community needs to take a closer look at the standards of the traditional-publishing community before making up their rules. Paying for a review where the reader hasn't read the book shouldn't be an approved practice, but paying for a fair assessment in a written form that can be shared with others doesn't belong with sock-puppetry in the "to be condemned" list. IMO, I suppose.<br /><br />Anyway, I appreciated what you wrote today. I think John Locke probably deserves all the vitriol being thrown his way, but mostly because his book about selling a million books on Amazon didn't include the fact that he'd paid for reviews. But the reaction in general feels uncomfortably strong to me, and I'm glad to read some calmer words. (I'm self-published, but also spent a decade in traditional book publishing and five years as the reviews editor of a technical magazine, so I've got some background in the traditional business side.) Sarah Wyndehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02208314684112329427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-49830345153744452372012-09-04T13:00:15.723-07:002012-09-04T13:00:15.723-07:00I think the real issue is honesty and secrecy here...I think the real issue is honesty and secrecy here. The way to deal with that is, as an author, to insist that anyone who reviews your book anywhere disclose their relationship to you, if any. <br /><br />If your Mom write a glowing review, she has to state at the end, "I am the author's mother." If you pay someone to review your book, they have to disclose, "Review paid for by author." If they have a professional relationship, that too must be disclosed. "I am the author's dentist".<br /><br />This would go a very long way towards resolving all these ethical issues. Much more than just signing a petition condemning these things, which only elevates the signer, it doesn't change the overall practices one bit.Broken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-84058569161901414082012-09-04T12:56:33.484-07:002012-09-04T12:56:33.484-07:00" And the answer, I think, is that they were ..."<i> And the answer, I think, is that they were in too much of a hurry to condemn, and probably because (i) condemnation feels good;...</i>"<br /><br />I'd go with this either/instead: too many people give away free copies in exchange for reviews, and knowing that other people simply pay for it instead of giving away something of value, well, the similarities hit just a little too close to home for them. And on top of that, it's far more effective than what they are doing.<br /><br />They did it the "right way", which doesn't work very well. Or not as well. The hacks did it the "wrong way", and it works great for them. Or at least it did for some people.<br /><br />Now, add the these four things together:<br /><br />* A little bit of jealously (because it clearly works well for some)<br /><br />* A little bit of guilt (because the similarity to the giveaway model outweighs the difference)<br /><br />* A little bit of self-righteousness (everyone always thinks they are the good guy)<br /><br />* The pack mentality<br /><br />If there's such a thing as a teachable moment, that's a good recipe for its repellant.Paul William Tennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10680571553624163666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-42390958328298207182012-09-04T12:54:02.327-07:002012-09-04T12:54:02.327-07:00I wonder if what Locke did should be deserving of ...I wonder if what Locke did should be deserving of less condemnation than Ellory. Every time Locke used bought reviews to help jump on an Amazon top 100 list he bumped off another author who had earned that spot the old fashioned way, and as long as Locke stayed on that list he blocked other authors who had a right to be on the list.<br /><br />So how do you equate a crap load of acts of unintentional harm to a handful of acts of intentional harm? Is the latter really worse?Eric Christophersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03534731344216684771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-91983818874669338722012-09-04T12:39:32.242-07:002012-09-04T12:39:32.242-07:00Hi Barry, I also thought the document was problema...Hi Barry, I also thought the document was problematic, but signed it because it's a beginning, and also because I'm certain that fraudulent authors and online bookseller' greatest hope is that the issue will just fade away, like most scandals, with time as people grow bored with it. I think the document at least provides some momentum.<br /><br />Your thoughts on casting the first stone are admirable, but I think the issue is best understood in simple terms. Asking your mom to review your book, as opposed to buying 5 stars by lots of fifty, is the equivalent of stealing a nickel as opposed to 10,000 bucks.<br /><br />And also, those fake stars blow the algorythms out in the rating system and I think the ramifications are greater than you give them credit for. And I believe that we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg, that the online rating system is subverted and destroyed. I've explained elsewhere that sites can use email addresses to trace IP addresses and the extent of abuse and the identification of abusers could be ascertained in a matter of days. If they wanted to.<br /><br />And trashing other authors' books because they're viewed as competition or whatever pathetic reason is an attempt to cut their sales, eat into their income. That's theft. Stealing. Last I heard, a crime.<br /><br />And this is also about books. Books are of tremendous importance to our culture, and this whole scandal has been a way of spitting on them. You maybe be right, that some crimes are more serious than others, but I would like to see the lot of them censured in the most severe way suitable for their infractions. Best, James ThompsonJames Thompsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17801466499036971239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-25196986845978446402012-09-04T11:01:07.298-07:002012-09-04T11:01:07.298-07:00Barry:
That's an incredibly insightful take o...Barry:<br /><br />That's an incredibly insightful take on the matter, and I'm grateful for that. I did sign the letter, and I think despite its flaws it makes a statement that needs to be heard, as imperfect as it is. <br /><br />Maybe you aren't outraged or surprised, just disgusted. Given your argument, I have to admit I think in many ways you're right. But I'm outraged. I just find this so punkish and small and yes, it gums up a system that may not be perfect but with every revelation like this readers' faith in getting anything in print that even sniffs of honesty takes another hit.<br /><br />Am I over-reacting? Maybe. But friends of mine were viciously attacked in print by cowards. If it happened to you, I'd jump -- and I mean jump -- to your defense, and I think you'd do the same.<br /><br />That said, your remarks about the alluring nexus between anger and self-righteousness aren't lost on me.<br /><br />Hope you're well.<br />David CorbettUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02777012594508314397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-81894175043924340312012-09-04T08:49:58.341-07:002012-09-04T08:49:58.341-07:00My all time favorite Sock Puppet is Mary Rosh, a &...My all time favorite Sock Puppet is Mary Rosh, a "former student" John Lott inventented when Lott was challenged for making up data in his anti-gun control zealotry. According to "Rosh", Lott was the bestest and smartest prof she ever had, and he would never lie or misrepresent data because he was so brilliant. "She" repeatedly defended him until someone noticed her IP address was John Lott's IP address.tomdurkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05575650883923731416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-67678574822575104012012-09-04T07:50:45.209-07:002012-09-04T07:50:45.209-07:00This all blew up while I was away at Worldcon (the...This all blew up while I was away at Worldcon (there were rumblings last week but it seemed to go haywire over the weekend). I feel like I have maybe a unique perspective since I'm getting to see it all in hindsight, plus I'm friends with some of the writers involved.<br /><br />First, none of it surprised me. In business, dishonesty often pays. <br /><br />It has occurred to me to completely do away with all reviews on purchasing sites. I do think if the writers who signed were truly serious about bucking Amazon's system (which I find the heart of the problem and some clever writers game well) they'd opt out of receiving reviews. Not that I've ever noticed an option to do so, but my publishers put up my books, not me.<br /><br />I never read reviews or pay the least attention, except my own, of course:) It's anecdotal, but most readers I've talked with say the same. All reviews really do is to raise your rankings. The ranking system is something else I'd like to see abolished as well. <br /><br />Ideally, we'd sell our books with back flap copy and the free sample. If that doesn't sell it, then the person doesn't want it. <br /><br />I'd rather see a really well-designed search engine on Amazon and other purchasing sites with parameters chosen by the reader: genre, publisher, similar items to previous purchases, release dates, etc. There is a vague search engine on Amazon, but I've never found it to be of use.<br /><br />As for the statement; I couldn't sign because Wordpress has long not liked me. Generally I thought the statement was well meant.ssashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15527483283426518167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22165230.post-38838670575689447102012-09-04T07:05:24.475-07:002012-09-04T07:05:24.475-07:00Barry, Thank you very much for presenting this rea...Barry, Thank you very much for presenting this reasoned and less emotional look at all this recent "Shocked, shocked" reaction to the Sock Puppet Scandal. The issue of integrity of reviews and blurbs is far more complex than NSPHP recognizes, and I wish that authors would examine the entire system and come up with a code of ethics for more than just sock puppetry. I wrote to one of the organizers of NSPHP about my concerns that pointing fingers at paid-for reviews when professional writers often blurb books without reading them struck me as hypocritical, and the answer I got was that discussing the blurb system had become tedious and besides, no one takes notice of blurbs. "It's a bit of a silly game." To say I found that response disappointing is an understatement. I was so pleased to see you bring this up in your blog, and as I hadn't read the previous post you did on MJ's blog, I was thrilled to see you had been beating this drum for a while.<br /><br />In her response to you, MJ stated that publishing in general is full of lies and corruption. In the old days of brick and mortar stores, publishers acted on an author's behalf through coop money to get a book on the table at the front of the store. They paid lots of money to get discoverability. Was that ethical behavior for authors to allow their publishers to push them to the front of the line? Today, some self-published authors are doing the same thing via paid-for reviews and while I don't condone it, at least I understand it. It has made me examine the entire system of online book sales and like you, all this talk has made me look at my own behavior.<br /><br /> When I self-published my collection of short stories, I paid a company to distribute that book to reviewers. There was no guarantee of positive reviews, and the reviewers were required to mention in their reviews that they received the book free for review. It was a little like the poor man's Amazon Vine. Is the Amazon Vine program legitimate because traditional publishers use it? Is this similar to what John Locke did? Now that I examine it, I think it's too close for comfort. I won't do it again. <br /><br />Rather than rush out with this letter, I would like to see a thoughtful discussion of how publishing has changed, and how we can navigate our way to improve this system that has been corrupt since long before the arrival of online book sales.<br />Christineklinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12222756129930225646noreply@blogger.com