TWErvin2
Auror
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.
"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.