Review 'Disclaimers'

[TWErvin2]

Sometimes I read reviews, such as on Amazon, where at the end of a review the reviewer puts in a disclaimer:

"I know this author from a writing forum"

"I am a member of this author's writing group"

"I gave this honest review in exchange for a potential future honest review of one of my works"

"I went to school with this author years ago"

etc.

I believe this is totally unnecessary if the reviewer gave an honest review and that it completely undermines the intended effect of the review. As a reader of reviews, I'm going to at least somewhat discount all that was said, because it reads as if the reviewer is saying in effect, "Take the good things (or the bad things) I've said with a grain of salt because I know this author in some way." It largely nullifies the impact this review might have on whether I'll read/take a chance on a book or not.

If it was an honest review, the reviewer's integrity remains intact. If the information was added to relieve any bit of guilt, then revise the review, or don't post it.

There are times it is appropriate to put in a disclaimer. Such as if the spouse or brother is reviewing, or if the reviewer was given a copy of the novel to review, or if the review was paid for.

I know there has been a number of articles recently on authors padding their review rankings and such with sock puppet efforts, and slamming 'competing' authors in the same genre to tain advantage, but what I am suggesting is different.

If the reader/reviewer paid for a copy of the novel/short story/anthology, etc. they have the right to review it honestly. Because if the novel is utter crap and they're saying glowing things, well, that will catch up with them.

Just my two cents.

 

[CupofJoe]

I put such disclaimers on reviews that I post if I think it appropriate. Mainly this is so it doesn't cause problems later on if it comes out that I know the person who created the work. Unlikely I know but I think it best to be clear and up front if there is the possibility for confusion or contention.
The reader can then weigh my review in context. I don't do paid reviews. I have not posted several reviews on the grounds of "if you can't say something nice...". In those cases; I have let the author know privately why I haven't reviewed their piece. Most of my reviews are in the music and art fields and not literature.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I'm sorry, TWErvin, but I have to completely disagree. It's utterly unethical not to disclose a personal relationship when doing something that can have a financial impact on someone.

The crux of it is this:

I believe this is totally unnecessary if the reviewer gave an honest review

We humans are pretty bad at giving honest, unbiased opinions about anything, let alone when we have a personal interest in the outcome. Having a prior relationship with someone whose work you're promoting is something that needs to be disclosed.

You may not find such reviews particularly useful, but (nothing personal) the utility you personally experience is not relevant.

 

[TWErvin2]

I'm sorry, TWErvin, but I have to completely disagree. It's utterly unethical not to disclose a personal relationship when doing something that can have a financial impact on someone.

The crux of it is this:

We humans are pretty bad at giving honest, unbiased opinions about anything, let alone when we have a personal interest in the outcome. Having a prior relationship with someone whose work you're promoting is something that needs to be disclosed.

You may not find such reviews particularly useful, but (nothing personal) the utility you personally experience is not relevant.

Is posting an honest review after purchasing and reading a piece promoting it? I don't equate a review as promoting. I've written blurbs for the back of novel covers for authors. That, I do consider promoting it, but there is a difference.

Does a positive review help a book out? Yes. Does a negative one adversely affect it? Yes.

Actually personal utility I experience is relevant. Not only how it affects me as a potential reader, but how it affects other readers.

Taking it a step further, I've had folks I met at book signings who took my card or book mark, looked up my work, and have asked about some reviews via email, and ask about what they said. I had a student who just recently find out I write, look up my book, and asked me about a review, saying, "This guy reviewed your work and said it was your intention to review his if it ever got published. He said good stuff, so you're gonna say good stuff about his?"

I 'know you' online, Benjamin. Do I have a personal relationship with you?

If people are terrible about giving unbiased opinions about anything, what's the point of reviewing? If you (meaning you in general) had a relationship with a girl named Joyce that end badly, and the author's name is the same, and that might have tainted your view of the book, should you put that as a disclaimer? If you met the author once at a book signing and they were nice to you and signed the copy, should you put that as a disclaimer? If your friend is a friend of an author, and you read and post an honest review of the book, should you put that disclaimer? What about a friend of a friend? Should a blog reviewer put a disclaimer that the author is one of their blog followers? Where is the line drawn?

When you write a poor review, that affects an author financially as well. If a reader refrains from posting a negative review (as was suggested in a post above), might that not only affect that author financially, but other 'competing' authors in the genre as well? Is that ethical? Should a disclaimer review be put out that you read a book but don't want to review it because it might adversely affect that author? The point of an honest review is to tell about the book, and assist readers in making a choice. So not posting a bad review fails to provide readers information to make an informed choice. Where is the line drawn?

I guess I look at it differently. In my job, for example, I have students that are decent kids, nice kids actually. I have a positive teacher/student relationship with them. I also fail them when they don't measure up, sometimes meaning they have to retake the course, or pay for an e-course, etc. It's not based on objective testing. It’s largely based on reading and evaluating essays and other assessments that have subjective components. I have students that I have a ‘not so positive’ teacher/student relationship with (discipline referral issues for example). That doesn't affect how I grade their work and post their scores. If a student earns the grade, they get the passing grade. If they don’t, they don’t. (Nobody is perfect, but on this I sure strive to be).

That’s pretty much how I approach reviewing. Isn’t that how an honest review goes?

A specific example, Benjamin. If you feel strongly how utterly unethical it is not to disclose, why not ask me as a reviewer to alter my review of one of your works, indicating there was a relationship? Or ask me to remove the review? Why didn't you, as the author, go and comment that we crossed paths online and are members at a mutual online writing forum? If other members at this forum have posted reviews of your works, should you not request or do the same?

Or did you figure that I (and other forum members) gave an honest assessment of your work after reading it?

Where is the line drawn?

I have no members of my family that have posted reviews. I’ve not encouraged them to do so, but if they do, that’s their choice. I have many friends that have read my works, close friends, and they haven’t posted reviews. I don’t think I have any friends (ie from college, co-workers, and the like) that have posted reviews, and I don’t make it my policy to ask that they do. Maybe on Goodreads, I cannot say because I don’t frequent it enough, but not on Amazon, B&N, Smashwords, and Audible. I don’t have an iTunes account, so I don’t know there. So I am not in this as a gaming the system effort. Actually, the first reviewer of Blood Sword on Amazon said this:

“I'm somewhat surprised that I'm the first to write a review of this excellent book since it's several months' after its release. Perhaps it's because it slipped out into publication with little fanfare. The author really needs to get with it and learn the rules of independent publishing...namely, any release needs to include having 10-20 glowing reviews posted from shills so that the book can make the "most popular" filters of the Amazon website. Well I'm going to post what I hope is a glowing review, but I'm no shill.”That, I guess says something about how readers read reviews, whatever the case may be, and could be a thread in itself.

We draw the line in different places in this matter. Like I said, paid reviews (there are places that do that, although I’ve not ever looked much into them), if the book was given to the reviewer, or if it’s a close relationship, a brother for example. I don’t see my POV on this as utterly unethical.

 

[TWErvin2]

Correction: I went back and looked. That I can tell, one co-worker and one fellow I knew in college have posted a review on Amazon.

 

[Steerpike]

If the reviewer believes he is providing an honest, objective review, the same as he would for any other book, I see no reason for disclosure of a personal relationship. I do not intend to mention being a member of the same writing forum or maybe critiquing something from an author here if I end up doing a review on Amazon. If a person is being paid directly to provide a view, I believe that should be disclosed.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

If the reviewer believes he is providing an honest, objective review, the same as he would for any other book, I see no reason for disclosure of a personal relationship.

See, the problem is, someone may think they're being unbiased, but when you have an interest in the content of a review–either an explicit interest, as in you're getting paid; or an implicit one, as in wanting to maintain your friendship with the author–it's human nature to emphasize the positives and deemphasize the negatives. Which is exactly why ethicality demands full disclosure.

It's the same reason why judges are supposed to recuse themselves if they're close to any of the parties in the case, or why any number of other professions have disclosure requirements about various kinds of interactions. People who are supposed to be impartial aren't allowed to unilaterally decide that a potentially compromising interaction hasn't affected their impartiality. Any interactions that are potentially compromising are made public, and it's up to the public to examine the person's work in light of those disclosures.

I'm not claiming that a random book review on Amazon is as important as (say) a criminal trial; but I don't know that there's a lower limit on how ethical one is supposed to be. Given the recent spate of blatantly unethical undisclosed paid reviews (i.e. astroturfing), it strikes me as a superior approach to maintain a higher level of ethicality.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

A specific example, Benjamin. If you feel strongly how utterly unethical it is not to disclose, why not ask me as a reviewer to alter my review of one of your works, indicating there was a relationship? Or ask me to remove the review? Why didn't you, as the author, go and comment that we crossed paths online and are members at a mutual online writing forum? If other members at this forum have posted reviews of your works, should you not request or do the same?

I don't know that our relationship is significant enough to warrant that. I wouldn't insist that anyone you ever talked to must disclose such contacts; that's pretty clearly below any kind of significance to ethicality. (And I'll also admit that the specific ethicality constraints of Amazon book reviews are probably not very well defined in any kind of professional literature.)

As a data point, Telcontar included a disclosure at the bottom of his review of my novel, but he and I have had a lot more interactions (outside of MS) than you and I have. I didn't ask him to; it was his idea.

 

[TWErvin2]

See, the problem is, someone may think they're being unbiased, but when you have an interest in the content of a review–either an explicit interest, as in you're getting paid; or an implicit one, as in wanting to maintain your friendship with the author–it's human nature to emphasize the positives and deemphasize the negatives. Which is exactly why ethicality demands full disclosure.

It's the same reason why judges are supposed to recuse themselves if they're close to any of the parties in the case, or why any number of other professions have disclosure requirements about various kinds of interactions. People who are supposed to be impartial aren't allowed to unilaterally decide that a potentially compromising interaction hasn't affected their impartiality. Any interactions that are potentially compromising are made public, and it's up to the public to examine the person's work in light of those disclosures.

I'm not claiming that a random book review on Amazon is as important as (say) a criminal trial; but I don't know that there's a lower limit on how ethical one is supposed to be. Given the recent spate of blatantly unethical undisclosed paid reviews (i.e. astroturfing), it strikes me as a superior approach to maintain a higher level of ethicality.

Then from your blog post: When All of a Sudden...: Becoming a Professional where you state:

When it comes to a mass audience, a large part of success is perception. If a potential reader perceives that your work is Professional Qualityâ„¢, they're more likely to buy it.

How do you get them to think it's professional, when all the merchandise you've got is a product page on Amazon? It's a long, slow, pulling-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps process. I went into this expecting zero success, so I find myself inordinately pleased every time I sell a single copy of THE QUEEN OF MAGES. I have no marketing budget and am slowly working my way into communities where I can suggest that, hey, maybe you'll like my book!

If you can get a few good reviews, and get some buzz going, it can have a multiplier effect. Suddenly more people are exposed to your work, and they see other people recommending it–they start to think, hey, maybe it's worth something. It raises its value in their eyes.

Is that unethical as you're establishing a relationship (or relationships) with the intention of obtaining reviews? Should you not disclose or require on every review generated in such a manner notice that a relationship has been established with the intention of obtaining reviews? And that they cannot be unbiased and your goal was to positively affect your monetary income by attracting readers with those reviews solicited in such a manner?

Or, if an author does not know which reviews specifically emerged due to such efforts, if that author intends to remain ethical by the standards suggested, they'd have to place, in their Amazon author page bio for example, how they've gone about and established relationships on forums to generate reviews, and that by establishing such relationships they are not unbiased reviews, and the goal is to enrich themselves?

 

[TWErvin2]

I don't know that our relationship is significant enough to warrant that. I wouldn't insist that anyone you ever talked to must disclose such contacts; that's pretty clearly below any kind of significance to ethicality. (And I'll also admit that the specific ethicality constraints of Amazon book reviews are probably not very well defined in any kind of professional literature.)

As a data point, Telcontar included a disclosure at the bottom of his review of my novel, but he and I have had a lot more interactions (outside of MS) than you and I have. I didn't ask him to; it was his idea.

Then I don’t see your point about being utterly unethical when you wrote:

I'm sorry, TWErvin, but I have to completely disagree. It's utterly unethical not to disclose a personal relationship when doing something that can have a financial impact on someone.

The crux of it is this:

We humans are pretty bad at giving honest, unbiased opinions about anything, let alone when we have a personal interest in the outcome. Having a prior relationship with someone whose work you're promoting is something that needs to be disclosed.

You may not find such reviews particularly useful, but (nothing personal) the utility you personally experience is not relevant.

My contention had to do with:

"I know this author from a writing forum"

"I am a member of this author's writing group"

"I gave this honest review in exchange for a potential future honest review of one of my works"

"I went to school with this author years ago"

I suggested paid reviews, close relationships such as a brother, when the author recieved a free copy of the work for a review, for example, it wasn't the same thing and disclosure would be appropriate.

 

[gavintonks]

you can rent afan club from India for US$0.500c a post and it is coming out that many of the top online companies but massive blocks of patronage this way

 

[BWFoster78]

Sometimes I read reviews, such as on Amazon, where at the end of a review the reviewer puts in a disclaimer:

"I know this author from a writing forum"

"I am a member of this author's writing group"

"I gave this honest review in exchange for a potential future honest review of one of my works"

"I went to school with this author years ago"

etc.

I believe this is totally unnecessary if the reviewer gave an honest review and that it completely undermines the intended effect of the review. As a reader of reviews, I'm going to at least somewhat discount all that was said, because it reads as if the reviewer is saying in effect, "Take the good things (or the bad things) I've said with a grain of salt because I know this author in some way." It largely nullifies the impact this review might have on whether I'll read/take a chance on a book or not.

If it was an honest review, the reviewer's integrity remains intact. If the information was added to relieve any bit of guilt, then revise the review, or don't post it.

There are times it is appropriate to put in a disclaimer. Such as if the spouse or brother is reviewing, or if the reviewer was given a copy of the novel to review, or if the review was paid for.

I know there has been a number of articles recently on authors padding their review rankings and such with sock puppet efforts, and slamming 'competing' authors in the same genre to tain advantage, but what I am suggesting is different.

If the reader/reviewer paid for a copy of the novel/short story/anthology, etc. they have the right to review it honestly. Because if the novel is utter crap and they're saying glowing things, well, that will catch up with them.

Just my two cents.

Interesting topic. It might be a bit of my vanity showing through (I'm so vain, I probably think this post is about me!), but this seems to be in response to the disclaimer I added to the review when I posted it on my blog.

The disclaimer notes that I "know" Terry from Mythic Scribes and expect an honest review of my book in return for my honest review.

I did not add that disclaimer to my reviews on Amazon, B&N, and Goodreads.

Here's my thinking:

1. I've read a lot of anger at shill reviews. Even though my review was completely honest in all that I said, I felt that the disclosure was necessary on my personal blog. On Amazon et al, the people reading don't know me from Adam and add a grain of salt, presumably, to what I'm saying. On my blog, the people reading have a lot more context about what I'm saying. I felt it necessary to give them the additional information.

2. More importantly, I actively solicit such review exchanges in the Submissions section of my blog. Since I've got that publicly out there, I think it's important to show which reviews are the result of such an exchange.

I don't know. Maybe they're not necessary. I really don't think they're a big deal one way or another.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

Then from your blog post: When All of a Sudden...: Becoming a Professional where you state:

Is that unethical as you're establishing a relationship (or relationships) with the intention of obtaining reviews? Should you not disclose or require on every review generated in such a manner notice that a relationship has been established with the intention of obtaining reviews? And that they cannot be unbiased and your goal was to positively affect your monetary income by attracting readers with those reviews solicited in such a manner?

Or, if an author does not know which reviews specifically emerged due to such efforts, if that author intends to remain ethical by the standards suggested, they'd have to place, in their Amazon author page bio for example, how they've gone about and established relationships on forums to generate reviews, and that by establishing such relationships they are not unbiased reviews, and the goal is to enrich themselves?

Like I said before, I don't know that the threshold has to be that low. Mostly I was saying that personal relationships should be disclosed, not that every possible interaction ever needs to be disclosed, or that just because you happen to be on the same forum as someone means you need to disclose that relationship up front. I just object to the assertion that disclaimers are "totally unnecessary if the reviewer gave an honest review." Whether the review was honest is irrelevant. When there's a potential conflict of interest, close relationships need to be disclosed in order for ethicality to be maintained.

In my blog post, I didn't say anything about astroturfing or hiding relationships; that discussion is essentially orthogonal to the marketing tactics I was discussing.

 

[Chime85]

Personally, I think disclosure is the better policy here. By not stating an established relationship with the author, the reviewer has already participated in a campaign of misinformation. Personally I would feel better reading a review that was fully disclosed, than to hear a particular author has friends who review "impartially" on their work. At least with disclosure, I can make my own mind as to if I should take the information given as insightful or otherwise.

I completely agree that "trashing" other authors work via comments and feedback, to raise ones own standing (3rd party or otherwise) is unethical. By leaving annonymous remarks on other writing is, let's face it, done for pure popularity and monetry gain.

However, we have fallen into a slight trap here, when considering that all disclosed (I'm using this word now to describe people known to the author on a personal, unproffesional level) as being glowing and full of praise. As a potential reader of said book, I would be very appreciative of a disclosed review pointed out some of the books shortcomings. If they are being as impartial as they claim, it's safe to say that not every disclosed review will be giving the author a gold star, maybe just a gold star with a tarnished edge.

x

 

[TWErvin2]

Like I said before, I don't know that the threshold has to be that low. Mostly I was saying that personal relationships should be disclosed, not that every possible interaction ever needs to be disclosed, or that just because you happen to be on the same forum as someone means you need to disclose that relationship up front. I just object to the assertion that disclaimers are "totally unnecessary if the reviewer gave an honest review." Whether the review was honest is irrelevant. When there's a potential conflict of interest, close relationships need to be disclosed in order for ethicality to be maintained.

In my blog post, I didn't say anything about astroturfing or hiding relationships; that discussion is essentially orthogonal to the marketing tactics I was discussing.

Then we are in agreement, or largely so.

In my original post, you overlooked/ignored/did not take into account (or appeared to), my statement:

There are times it is appropriate to put in a disclaimer. Such as if the spouse or brother is reviewing, or if the reviewer was given a copy of the novel to review, or if the review was paid for.

when indicating that what I stated/put forth was utterly unethical. The content of your reply and quote lumped together all of my examples, from being a member of a mutual forum to being a spouse, as being personal relationships.

Beyond that, I enjoyed the use of a largely mathematical term with respect to writing in your last post.

orthogonal

( That doesn't happen often enough.)

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

In my original post, you overlooked/ignored/did not take into account (or appeared to), my statement: when indicating that what I stated/put forth was utterly unethical. The content of your reply and quote lumped together all of my examples, from being a member of a mutual forum to being a spouse, as being personal relationships.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that; I just felt like you'd set the bar too high.

Beyond that, I enjoyed the use of a largely mathematical term with respect to writing in your last post. ( That doesn't happen often enough.)

Heh, I use that word all the time. It's a lot more precise than "have no effect on each other."