Amazon's latest policy: authors can't review other authors' books

So does this mean Amazon will no longer host publisher blurbs written by authors?

Personally, I only use Amazon reviews for two things: a) deciding if a book is eligible for review on my website, and b) as an opportunity to indulge in a little "See? I'm right!" about a book I either loved or hated -- after I've read it.

I'm curious whether anyone here can comment on this:

http://www.blackgate.com/2012/12/27/sff-corruption-part-i/

Quoted: "I can assure those who find this policy to be unjustified and unfair that it is absolutely and completely necessary due to the corruption, both professional and ideological, that is rife within the publishing industry in general and the SF/F industry in particular."

EDIT: To anyone reading this thread later, everyone below seems to agree that the guy I linked to is ridiculous and not to be taken seriously, which I am SO grateful to know (thanks again, everyone!). Carry on.

slhuang said:

I'm curious whether anyone here can comment on this:

http://www.blackgate.com/2012/12/27/sff-corruption-part-i/

Quoted: "I can assure those who find this policy to be unjustified and unfair that it is absolutely and completely necessary due to the corruption, both professional and ideological, that is rife within the publishing industry in general and the SF/F industry in particular."

Click to expand...

Yeah... that's Theodore Beale aka Vox Day, and the "professional and ideological corruption" he's talking about basically boils down to: "Chicks be voting themselves awards that rightfully should go to men."

I take exception to the SF/F comment.

I see more of this stuff in YA and Romance than I do in true SF/F. (I do not count Stephanie Meyers crap as fantasy...)

Amadan said:

Yeah... that's Theodore Beale aka Vox Day, and the "professional and ideological corruption" he's talking about basically boils down to: "Chicks be voting themselves awards that rightfully should go to men."

Click to expand...

Oh wow, I'm glad I asked here. I got linked there and I read it and I was like, "Bwuh?" and it made me start to fear for the entire SFF author community . . . glad to know some context; thank you.

slhuang said:

I'm curious whether anyone here can comment on this:

http://www.blackgate.com/2012/12/27/sff-corruption-part-i/

Quoted: "I can assure those who find this policy to be unjustified and unfair that it is absolutely and completely necessary due to the corruption, both professional and ideological, that is rife within the publishing industry in general and the SF/F industry in particular."

Click to expand...

I'm not surprised there is corruption in voting for awards. I've seen it happen with on-line awards, so why not with ... uhm... let's call them off-line awards?

Still, I might take it more seriously if I hadn't heard great things about Vonda McIntyre's The Moon and the Sun, as well as Jo Walton and Nicola Griffith. Also, some of the books the author thinks should have won are great, but not everyone's style of writing. Individual taste might be part of the issue, as much as corruption.

What a concept. People actually voting for the stories they like instead of the stories everyone said they should like. When I first started reading Locus magazine (an SF magazine), I started buying lots of books from their yearly issue of recommendations. I ended up with lots of books I couldn't get into, and realized my tastes ran more along the lines of reviewer Carolyn Cushman, not the harder SF reviewers. OTOH it's worth noting that most, if not all, of the wonderful Locus reviewers are... gasp! ... authors!

People picking on SFF isn't new. The best thing is to completely ignore those slamming the genre.

justbishop said:

I think the onus is also on the reader/buyer to do a bit of sleuthing for themselves if they are going to base their purchasing decisions on these crowsourced review systems, i.e. checking to see what other books the reviewer has reviewed, if they ever DON'T like something, whether the reviewer is a writer themselves, and if so who has reviewed THEIR books, etc.

Click to expand...

Well, here's the problem right here. Ask crows for reviews, and what do you expect? Either they're going to follow their instincts and trash the book, or they're going to accept peanut bribes and praise the hell out of it.

Blacbirds excluded, of course.

Phaeal said:

Well, here's the problem right here. Ask crows for reviews, and what do you expect? Either they're going to follow their instincts and trash the book, or they're going to accept peanut bribes and praise the hell out of it.

Blacbirds excluded, of course.

Click to expand...

I only accept reviews from the respectable and objective grackle community, myself.

slhuang said:

I'm curious whether anyone here can comment on this:

http://www.blackgate.com/2012/12/27/sff-corruption-part-i/

Quoted: "I can assure those who find this policy to be unjustified and unfair that it is absolutely and completely necessary due to the corruption, both professional and ideological, that is rife within the publishing industry in general and the SF/F industry in particular."

Click to expand...

Oh, that poor man. Seems like there's an infestation of girl cooties invading "his" genre. I'm trying real hard to wipe the smirk off my face.

slhuang said:

I'm curious whether anyone here can comment on this:

http://www.blackgate.com/2012/12/27/sff-corruption-part-i/

Quoted: "I can assure those who find this policy to be unjustified and unfair that it is absolutely and completely necessary due to the corruption, both professional and ideological, that is rife within the publishing industry in general and the SF/F industry in particular."

Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings about the Amazon author reviews ban--on the one hand, I can see why they feel they need to address the abuse of their reviews system, but on the other hand I agree that their new rules don't do the job. But I read this post and IMO it's ridiculous.

First, he's comparing apples to oranges. There's no equivalence between author reviews on a major retailer's website and the award nomination process for a major genre writers' group.

Second, a flawed nomination process for one single fiction award (and I do agree that the old Nebula nomination rules were susceptible to abuse--actually, when I joined SFWA in 1998, the first contact I had from another SFWA member was a Nebula vote-swapping offer) does not point to wholesale "corruption, both professional and ideological, that is rife within the publishing industry in general and the SF/F industry in particular."

Third, the fact that works he thinks should have been honored by the Nebulas didn't get honored by the Nebulas doesn't indicate anything other than his own diverging taste. As a reviewer, he should be well aware that "I didn't like it" doesn't mean "it sucked", and "I loved it and it didn't win" doesn't mean "the whole process is corrupt!!!".

Bleah.

- Victoria

Really y'all. Google "Vox Day" to get an idea of who you're dealing with here.

(Hint: he is fueled by an incandescent hatred of John Scalzi, women, and liberals.)

Poor ol' Vox has been beating that drum for decades. Seems nobody don't give him no respect.

Now I remember this guy. Yep. Girl cooties!

Really y'all. Google "Vox Day" to get an idea of who you're dealing with here.

Click to expand...

Thanks SO much, everyone. I feel silly for not checking this guy out more myself first (someone I thought was reputable linked to him...now that I'm thinking about it though, they might have done so in ridicule and I didn't realize it).

Really appreciate everyone taking the time to tell me how bogus the whole "corruption" thing is. I'll be sticking with my initial opinion about Amazon's policy, i.e., it's stupid, ineffective for its stated purpose, and there are a lot better ways of dealing with this.

(And sorry, I didn't mean to derail this thread into a Nebula discussion. *hides*)

I forgot all about Vox Day, has to be one of the most miserable nasty people alive. There should be public flogging still. Tomatoes anyone?

James D. Macdonald said:

Poor ol' Vox has been beating that drum for decades. Seems nobody don't give him no respect.

Click to expand...

Oh lord, I remember that name back from the Olden Days of the Internet. And I think the same arguments are being used.

I think it's time to remind everyone of The Girl Cooties Theory of Literature.

Phaeal said:

Well, here's the problem right here. Ask crows for reviews, and what do you expect? Either they're going to follow their instincts and trash the book, or they're going to accept peanut bribes and praise the hell out of it.

Blacbirds excluded, of course.

Click to expand...

Oh you know what I meant

Amadan said:

Yeah... that's Theodore Beale aka Vox Day, and the "professional and ideological corruption" he's talking about basically boils down to: "Chicks be voting themselves awards that rightfully should go to men."

Click to expand...

Yeah, this is a person who thinks women shouldn't have the right to vote, so bear that in mind when he's listing out women who shouldn't have won, so men could win in their place.

One thing I'd say with the Nebulas, it looks like the new system (which has run for a last couple of years) has broadened what gets through. There is a more diverse range of authors, new markets getting nominations, and so forth. Which is also going to displease Vox Day, because it means brown people are getting nominated for awards, as well as women. The sky is falling!

Fortunately, this isn't the majority view of people writing SFF, or we'd all be crying in the corner right now. The system's not perfect, but it's not a giant feminist conspiracy either.

As a reader of many genres, I hate the new policy.

Amazon reviews sell more than books, and I think they moved to protect the rest of the corporation. I for one read through the reviews when buying gizmos and gadgets. I'm not a techie and some reviewers cover newbie concerns. The moment a buyer thinks reviews are "faked" Amazon will cough up a money ball. This move was to protect their $$.

So many people are successfully gaming their review system that Amazon should just do away with that feature across the board.

The only reason Amazon has "reviews" is to keep eyeballs on the sales page a few seconds longer. That's all.

You can review a book on Amazon if you haven't read it, but you can't review a book if you write in the same genre.