I have wrestled for some time with the problem of whether or not to publish one and two star reviews. My writer self doesn’t want to see 1 or 2 star reviews of my work published any more than any author, so when my writer self is in charge, she refrains from publishing them. She has even been known to delete them from Amazon.
Such behaviour scandalises my reader self. Like all readers, she wants to read the opinions of those who recognise the difference between good and bad writing. She doesn’t want to spend money on a book that should never have been published and she is grateful to the reviewers who save her from that fate.
My author self is well aware of how much time, energy and commitment it takes to write and publish a book, and of how fragile authors’ egos can be, even when a reviewer takes pains to write nicely and to divorce their personal opinion from their evaluations as this reviewer does.
My reviewer self, although she is always polite, is not in the business of massaging authors egos. Reviewing is a service she provides for readers, and readers deserve the truth. However, she is well aware that any review, no matter how well informed, is always a matter of opinion, and that low star reviews can, rightly or wrongly, damage book sales. She is also aware that though she knows more than many others about writing, she is no expert.
Do you hear the opposing voices here?
If, under the guise of being ‘kind’ to authors with substandard books, we do not publish low starred reviews, are we not doing a disservice to both the buying public and the authors whose books are good? As it stands now, many poor quality books do not have the low starred reviews they deserve. Not because no one thinks they are bad, but because people are not publishing such reviews. Readers buy these books, discover they are poor and swear off Indie books for good. Thus the stigma against indie books is reinforced and even quality indie books lose sales. Where is the kindness there for our most deserving authors?
These days, readers, assuming that no negative reviews does not mean that a book is good, view all books with only a few reviews as highly suspect. Only when a book has more than around twenty reviews does this reader give any credence to the rating. I simply will not risk buying an indie book with only a few reviews unless it has been recommended by someone I trust. This is far from ideal, but it’s hard to go against the pervading culture of closed mouths. That’s why it continues.
In the end, I simply don’t have time to deal with the fall out when I publish negative reviews. Few authors can resist defending themselves and such emails take time to answer. (Point of note: I highly respect those who still send me a thank you after a less than glowing review.) It takes me a long time to read a book and write detailed feedback which I then check to make sure that it is written as kindly as possible, but still some accuse me of being spiteful (seriously, what do I have to be spiteful about?) or unkind. I do not want to have to deal with other people’s projections. It is just too damn time consuming.
So, though I will not change my review policy about publishing negative reviews, in practice it will be harder for authors to convince me to read their books at the outset. If I see a hint of bad writing in those first few paragraphs, I will not agree to read the book. That will save me a lot of time, but it won’t help readers, nor will it help the authors in the long run. I wish I could be braver, but frankly, I only have so much time at my disposal and I’d rather be writing than trying to convince authors that their book really is poorly written.
I will not enter into correspondence about my reviews or my decisions in refusing to review a book. Not because I don’t care or aren’t interested, simply because my time is limited.
How do you feel about this culture of not publishing negative reviews? Is it helpful or not?
















I think this is a very brave post and I respect the conclusions you’ve come to. I share your feelings. My own (unhappy) compromise is that I now only review books if I feel I can review them positively, but this is because I’m an author as well as a reader. I can’t bring myself to publicly criticise another author’s work, even though in some dire cases I don’t think they are authors, merely would-be authors suffering from what I call “premature publication”.
I realise this doesn’t help readers avoid the trash, but I would rather drive readers towards “gatekeeper” sites like this one. Rightly or wrongly, Amazon reviews are no longer trusted and they seem to be getting shorter. (Have you noticed how many reviews are two-liners now – even the positive reviews?)
I suggest that ebook buyers should always read the sample. You can tell what sort of a book you’re going to get and whether it’s written by a professional or not, just buy reading a few pages. If you’re not sure, don’t buy. There are so many quality books out there, why waste time on junk? And as an author, I think my time is better spent producing quality indie books than writing negative reviews.
I love the term ‘premature publication’, very descriptive of a disease that affects rather too much of indie publishing. I respect your stance on reviewing and completely understand. I used to be the same, but … well you saw the post. I’m hoping that being fussier at the gate, so to speak, will circumvent the necessity to publish negative reviews. It’s a round about way of doing the same thing. My review policy warns authors that they might get one though, just in case.
Amazon reviews are still voluntary, and frankly I’m unsure about what I’d do, but here’s a comparison. If you were asked to write a traditional review for a magazine, a newspaper or some other outlet, would you only do it if it was positive?
Exactly, and with the Awesome Indies now, I kind of feel that we need that kind of credibility. Publishing a range of reviews is realistic, and gets the respect of readers, otherwise they may think that you always gloss up your reviews, which of course devalues them.
I agree wholeheartedly. It is such a dilemma – as an author anything less than a four star review is painful and I feel uncomfortable giving out bad reviews.
I’ve recently read a number of Kindle freebies that deserve two or three star reviews but I haven’t posted anything. I know I should warn others who might be considering spending their money but I feel mean.
If I wasn’t an author, it wouldn’t be a problem because as a reviewer my priorities clearly lie with the readers. It’s only because I’m an author that there is a conflict. Kindness comes in many forms, however, and in the long run, negative reviews for books that deserve them will help the writer to improve. It’s getting the disgruntled authors to see that that is difficult. Check out my next post on Wednesday about this point.