a question about ethics

iwannabepublished · May 7, 2013

After recently self-publishing my three book action adventure series I have begun attempting to get some reviews. I have received a few reviews already that I'm very happy with. One of the people I did a lot of beta reading with told me he felt it was unethical to write a review for me and did not want me to write one for him. While I honored his request, I still wonder if it is really unethical for self-published authors to review each others books. Also, does anyone know if sites like Amazon and Barnes & Noble do any kind of policing of reviews? In other words, do these sites remove reviews if they discovery this kind of activity?

Polenth · May 7, 2013

It's not unethical for authors to review books honestly, whether they're trade published, self-published or both. It is unethical for people to swap five-star reviews, in order to boost their rankings, as it's lying to readers who want to use the reviews.

When it's an author who helped work on the book, it's difficult territory. They could give an honest review, but this could be damaging for the relationship if they gave it three stars and said it was a decent first effort with flaws. There's pressure to rate it at five stars, even if that's not explicitly said. And that's why someone might want to avoid reviewing authors they work with at the pre-publication stages.

veinglory · May 7, 2013

Generally is it safest to get reviews from 1) customers and 2) third party reviewers. A friend or tit-for-tat reviewer is biased and so the review might end up being deceptive.

Jess Haines · May 7, 2013

Amazon authors are not supposed to review other authors.

You can probably search for the actual language in the Amazon Author Central dos and don'ts, but here is an article about it on Salon. That was the first thing that came up with my Google-fu, so I'm sure you can find other articles that go into more detail (I think there were even a couple of threads about it here on AW) if you search.

C. Greenwood · May 8, 2013

iwannabepublished said:
After recently self-...I still wonder if it is really unethical for self-published authors to review each others books. Also, does anyone know if sites like Amazon and Barnes & Noble do any kind of policing of reviews? In other words, do these sites remove reviews if they discovery this kind of activity?

According to Amazon's TOS, authors may not review books in which they have a financial stake. There's various ways of interpreting that, as some may not consider a friend to have a financial stake, whereas a competitor might. But yes, I've known people who've had their reviews removed because of a connection between the author and the reviewer. It seems pretty hit or miss as to how well Amazon actually polices the policy.

However, I've also seen emails authors have received from Amazon's KDP customer service in which they state authors are allowed to review, as long as the books they review aren't in their own genre, presumably because they aren't considered to be competing for the same readership.

How that effects review swapping, I couldn't tell you but if your friend is uncomfortable with it, I wouldn't press him. Many authors feel strongly that reviewing swapping is unethical or at best that it's a slippery slope and presents a dishonest appearance.

iwannabepublished · May 9, 2013

Thanks for the feedback. I will double check on Amazon, KDP and Greatspace sites to see if I can find any specific language regarding this issue.

quicklime · May 9, 2013

ethics are personal.....there is no right or wrong here.

That said, I'd be inclined to side with your friend. I will plug a book, like Flibbles, that's a damn good book even though I helped with the query, because the book is what sold the book, the query only got it a request. But had I beta-read it, I would be reluctant to review it because it would be, in some small part, my baby as well.

Arpeggio · May 9, 2013

If the .com site for the Book depository has just under 24,000 reviews for all of its books...

http://www.bookdepository.com/reviews/list

...and Amazons .com site, in some cases can get that many reviews between 4 or 5 books alone.

Then in spite of Amazons market high share this is still heavily disproportionate.

This is because most Amazon reviews are fake and their customers are stupid.

merrihiatt · May 9, 2013

Arpeggio said:
This is because most Amazon reviews are fake and their customers are stupid.

As an Amazon customer, I don't apreciate being called stupid, nor would I call the readers of my books who purchase from Amazon stupid.

C. Greenwood · May 9, 2013

Arpeggio said:
If the .com site for the Book
This is because most Amazon reviews are fake and their customers are stupid.

I'm not following your thinking. Do you believe the Book Depository is as famous and widely used as Amazon? Because if it's not, the number of reviews it contains have no bearing on the number of Amazon reviews.

As for the suggestion everyone with an Amazon account is stupid, that's like saying everyone who shops at Wal-Mart is stupid. Or everyone who has blue eyes or was born on a Tuesday. I'm curious why you would make such an ungenerous assumption about millions of strangers?

Old Hack · May 10, 2013

Arpeggio said:
If the .com site for the Book depository has just under 24,000 reviews for all of its books...

http://www.bookdepository.com/reviews/list

...and Amazons .com site, in some cases can get that many reviews between 4 or 5 books alone.

Then in spite of Amazons market high share this is still heavily disproportionate.

This is because most Amazon reviews are fake and their customers are stupid.

Arpeggio.

I don't know where you buy your logic from, but if I were you I'd take it back and get a refund.

And I, like the others here, find your name-calling offensive. Watch your step.

Arpeggio · May 10, 2013

Old Hack said:
Arpeggio.

I don't know where you buy your logic from, but if I were you I'd take it back and get a refund.

And I, like the others here, find your name-calling offensive. Watch your step.

OK I knew that bit was risque. I will rephrase it:

Most Amazon customers want to believe that the reviews are credible because "Convenience is King", to think otherwise would open a whole new kettle of fish that completely flies against that, for which most people don't have the inclination.

http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/201...reviews-but-theyre-swayed-by-them-anyway.html

"What’s crazy is that 80% of those surveyed said they were concerned about the authenticity of consumer reviews and yet 77% preferred consumer reviews over editorial reviews."

Otherwise Google has "for money" ranked above "are fake" for the suggestion after the phrase "online reviews".

Arpeggio · May 10, 2013

C. Greenwood said:
I'm not following your thinking. Do you believe the Book Depository is as famous and widely used as Amazon? Because if it's not, the number of reviews it contains have no bearing on the number of Amazon reviews.

I'm talking about number of reviews in proportion to market share. If for instance The Book Depository had 2% Market share on books and Amazon had 30% on books, the number of online reviews on Amazon is still heavily disproportionate. The same calculations can be applied to any other retailer in comparison to Amazon.

Market share relevant because that denotes actual purchases for which the customers can review.

C. Greenwood said:
As for the suggestion everyone with an Amazon account is stupid, that's like saying everyone who shops at Wal-Mart is stupid. Or everyone who has blue eyes or was born on a Tuesday. I'm curious why you would make such an ungenerous assumption about millions of strangers?

Whether WalMart customers are stupid or not. As far as Wal Mart ethics, apparently they drive down retail wages by 3 $billion a year. It gets interesting at about 19:50 minutes...

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/wal-mart-the-high-cost-of-low-price/

At 35:30 it's about how they work off the clock, and at 36:50 using a false user ID's to shift time worked to a different week. At 38.50 mins how they get illegal immigrants in and literally lock them in store overnight.

Torgo · May 10, 2013

Arpeggio said:
I'm talking about number of reviews in proportion to market share. If for instance The Book Depository had 2% Market share on books and Amazon had 30% on books, the number of online reviews on Amazon is still heavily disproportionate. The same calculations can be applied to any other retailer in comparison to Amazon.

If you assume that a linear relation holds between review volume and market share; but I think that's a faulty, reductive assumption. There are many other factors at play here. Site design would be a big factor: TBD rather hides away user reviews. Amazon puts star ratings in the most prominent possible place in listing pages and product pages. Amazon encourages you to rate things, and has a recommendation algorithm that relies on it and which people can use to browse the site, thus providing an incentive. TBD doesn't, as far as I can tell. Amazon tries to be a social network to some extent, allowing customers not only to rate and comment on books, but also on other customers' ratings and comments, and to start lists and discussions on site. There's very little of that that I can see on TBD, which is more of a pure ecommerce site.

I do believe that fake and log-rolling reviews on Amazon are a problem, but I don't think your maths prove anything about the scale of it.

(Oh, TBD is owned by Amazon, so it's getting kind of hard not to be an Amazon customer these days...)

Arpeggio · May 10, 2013

Torgo said:
If you assume that a linear relation holds between review volume and market share; but I think that's a faulty, reductive assumption. There are many other factors at play here. Site design would be a big factor: TBD rather hides away user reviews. Amazon puts star ratings in the most prominent possible place in listing pages and product pages. Amazon encourages you to rate things, and has a recommendation algorithm that relies on it and which people can use to browse the site, thus providing an incentive. TBD doesn't, as far as I can tell.

I don't think Amazons review system is that unique, TDB was just one comparison. I think the ratings here are prominent enough...

http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/dan+brown/the+lost+symbol/6750450/

Torgo said:
Amazon tries to be a social network to some extent, allowing customers not only to rate and comment on books, but also on other customers' ratings and comments

You are right that Amazons customer review incentive and reliance on them would naturally encourage customers to posts reviews, but at the same time that reliance could be a reason that encourages dodgy activity.

On other customer rating other customers ratings and comments…

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-29873-8_5

“Using the survey questionnaire, the study found that there were indeed significant differences between the helpfulness ratings displayed at Amazon.com and those from a simulated online shopper population.”……“Thus the "true" ratings on online user reviews may well be quite different from what we see at Amazon.com.”

Torgo said:
I do believe that fake and log-rolling reviews on Amazon are a problem, but I don't think your maths prove anything about the scale of it.

(Oh, TBD is owned by Amazon, so it's getting kind of hard not to be an Amazon customer these days...)

Yeh I know TDB is owned by Amazon, and was making the comparison with that knowledge, not that I’m saying you are suggesting that in itself makes it irrelevant.

Torgo · May 10, 2013

It's almost like the whole issue is extremely complex and not easily reducible to "Amazon reviews fake, customers dumb"

Arpeggio · May 10, 2013

Torgo said:
It's almost like the whole issue is extremely complex and not easily reducible to "Amazon reviews fake, customers dumb"

I changed my choice of words on post #12. I have been warned against using them, now I am being engaged in conversation which uses similar words.

Anyway, that is an interpretation that can be made of it, but I wont mistake you for going halfway to putting words in my mouth as though you are implying that's what I think.

Torgo · May 10, 2013

Arpeggio said:
I changed my choice of words on post #12. I have been warned against using them, now I am being engaged in conversation which uses similar words.

Anyway, that is an interpretation that can be made of it, but I wont mistake you for going halfway to putting words in my mouth as though you are implying that's what I think.

I am afraid I don't understand what you are saying here at all, which is likely my fault.

Your initial statement was clearly an oversimplification, and somewhat offensive. You then moderated your choice of words but continued to make claims that I felt were oversimplified (but, I should point out, not offensive at all.) In pointing out a few wrinkles I felt you had ignored, I don't believe I called you stupid at any point. You pointed out a few more things to consider, and in my last post I wanted to express my feeling that as we continued the conversation we were moving further and further away from your initial reductive claim.

I even used a winky smiley (something I almost never do) to underline the fact that I was being friendly about it.

The last thing I'd want to do is to put words into your mouth, so if you would like to point out where I have done that, I'll apologise forthwith.

Arpeggio · May 10, 2013

Torgo said:
Your initial statement was clearly an oversimplification

Not to me. If you can explain with compelling and real evidence why Amazons amount of customer reviews is disproportionate to its market share then I will agree with you that it is an oversimplification in the sense of “wrong”.

So far you have said that Amazon putting more encouragement and reliance on customer reviews is reason for there to be more reviews, when that is equally as much a reason for there to be fake ones

While I have posted research showing significant differences between the helpfulness ratings displayed at Amazon.com and those from a control subject.

Torgo said:
The last thing I'd want to do is to put words into your mouth, so if you would like to point out where I have done that, I'll apologise forthwith.

OK here it is…

Torgo said:
The last thing I'd want to do is to put words into your mouth, so if you would like to point out where I have done that, I'll apologise forthwith.

You are doing it right now by implying I have said you have put words in my mouth.

Here it is again…

“Anyway, that is an interpretation that can be made of it, but I wont mistake you for going halfway to putting words in my mouth as though you are implying that's what I think.”

In reply to…

“It's almost like the whole issue is extremely complex and not easily reducible to "Amazon reviews fake, customers dumb"

As in that’s your conclusion after my post #15, which I replied to, to say that you aren’t speaking for me there.

Torgo said:
I even used a winky smiley (something I almost never do) to underline the fact that I was being friendly about it.

I’m so sorry I didn’t realize

MartinD · May 10, 2013

Jess Haines said:
Amazon authors are not supposed to review other authors.

Which is probably true but it's a silly rule. I'm an Amazon author and I absolutely review the books I like (and hate). Shhh, don't tell our Amazon overlords!

As long as I don't swap reviews, or review novels written by friends and loved ones, I don't see why I shouldn't be allowed to share an honest opinion.

WriterTrek · May 10, 2013

If my friends publish books, and I read them, then I'll go comment on them and leave a mostly honest review.

I'm not going to give something 5 Stars if it doesn't deserve it, but if it's a friend and their book doesn't suck I'll give it 4 and comment on a few things.

If it sucks then I won't review at all.

I would also do this from the Amazon account I've had since I was a little kid, which is still the one I use, but which is not the one I intend to use if I ever self-publish (probably won't).

If I stood to make money off sales of the book I wouldn't review regardless.

Torgo · May 10, 2013

Arpeggio said:
Not to me. If you can explain with compelling and real evidence why Amazons amount of customer reviews is disproportionate to its market share then I will agree with you that it is an oversimplification in the sense of “wrong”.

The oversimplification to which I was referring was "most Amazon reviews are fake and their customers are stupid." I felt that you had acknowledged this when you retracted it in post #12.

So far you have said that Amazon putting more encouragement and reliance on customer reviews is reason for there to be more reviews, when that is equally as much a reason for there to be fake ones

So you agree that Amazon encouraging and spotlighting the review feature is one reason that accounts for there being more proportionally more reviews on Amazon than on websites that don't do those things? Good. And you say that those reviews are equally as likely to be bona fide as fake? Good. So the statement that you initially made about most of them being fake was an oversimplification of a complex issue? Cool.

While I have posted research showing significant differences between the helpfulness ratings displayed at Amazon.com and those from a control subject.

You posted a link to an abstract of a study that appears to compare Amazon helpfulness ratings to a 'simulated online shopper population'. I can't read the study and I don't know what a 'simulated online shopper population' even is. Also, 'helpfulness ratings' are, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, inherently biased, because I only ever use them to neg reviews that completely miss the point of what reviews are; I simply don't think they are remotely significant.

“Anyway, that is an interpretation that can be made of it, but I wont mistake you for going halfway to putting words in my mouth as though you are implying that's what I think.”

I'm really having difficulty parsing this.

You made an over-the-top statement about Amazon reviews (they're mostly fake) and Amazon customers (they're stupid.) Then you retracted it as going too far. When I said, in effect, 'yes, it is more complex than that, isn't it?' you responded by - and I hope I'm navigating the syntax correctly - saying that I was going halfway to putting words in your mouth. But I was only quoting your own words back at you, so... I'm confused and bored.

Arpeggio · May 10, 2013

Torgo said:
So you agree that Amazon encouraging and spotlighting the review feature is one reason that accounts for there being more proportionally more reviews on Amazon than on websites that don't do those things? Good. And you say that those reviews are equally as likely to be bona fide as fake? Good. So the statement that you initially made about most of them being fake was an oversimplification of a complex issue? Cool.

Yes I agree that Amazon encouraging and spotlighting the review feature is one reason that accounts for there being more proportionally more reviews on Amazon than on websites that don't do those things. I’d also agree with you if you said the sky is blue.

It is quite clear on this thread that I haven’t said anything about “websites that don’t do those things” and was not saying otherwise, such as where I said: “I don't think Amazons review system is that unique”.

The way you write that is as though I have said Amazon reviews are as likely to be fake as anywhere else. What I said, quite literally was that the encouragement of reviews is equally as much a reason for there to be fake ones. If that can be applied to websites other than Amazon that do the same, then the disproportion carries over equally as well.

Torgo said:
You posted a link to an abstract of a study that appears to compare Amazon helpfulness ratings to a 'simulated online shopper population'. I can't read the study and I don't know what a 'simulated online shopper population' even is. Also, 'helpfulness ratings' are, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, inherently biased, because I only ever use them to neg reviews that completely miss the point of what reviews are; I simply don't think they are remotely significant.

Obviously not good enough for you, I can’t complain about that or try to make you feel otherwise. To me it’s an abstract that was good enough to give the conclusion of research by a professor of computer science with a very relevant background in marketing and online consumer behaviour. If I am to engage in any sort of serious conversation I prefer to give links also rather than it just be words on a forum.

Torgo said:
Also, 'helpfulness ratings' are, in my admittedly anecdotal experience, inherently biased

Thanks for sharing.

Torgo said:
I'm confused and bored.

I’m just bored. How do I delete my profile please?

Terie · May 10, 2013

Arpeggio said:
How do I delete my profile please?

A trip to the FAQ section would've provided this link, if you'd looked.

iwannabepublished · May 10, 2013

Not the first time a post of mine got hijacked

My original post was a question about ethics. Someone suggested that I check out what Amazon says and I did.

Here is their website on the topic:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custo...422290442&pf_rd_i=customer-reviews-guidelines

and here is a little of what it says:

[FONT=&quot]To help illustrate, here are a few examples of customer reviews that we don't allow: [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]A product manufacturer posts a review of their own product, posing as an unbiased shopper [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A customer posts a review in exchange for $5 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A family member of the product creator posts a five-star customer review to help boost sales [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A seller posts negative reviews on his competitor's product [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]An artist posts a positive review on a peer's album in exchange for receiving a positive review from them[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Are paid customer reviews allowed?[/FONT]
· [FONT=&quot]No. We do not allow any compensation for a customer review other than a free copy of the product (provided up front). If we find evidence that a customer was paid for a review, we will remove it.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Are authors and artists allowed to review other authors/artists' works?[/FONT]
· [FONT=&quot]Authors and artists can add a unique perspective and we very much welcome their customer reviews. However, we don't allow anyone to write customer reviews as a form of promotion. If you have a direct or indirect financial interest in a product, or perceived to have a close personal relationship with its author or artist, we will likely remove your review.[/FONT]

Maybe I'm naive but I do believe that reviews, especially positive ones, do help sell products. When I look for something on Amazon, I always read reviews, especially the negative ones. I make an effort to interpret the 1 star reviews to determine if they apply to my purchasing decision. A high percentage of positive reviews does help me make a buying decision.

The first book of my series, The Alkano Letters has received 4 reviews, 1 4 star and 3 5 star. I think this is a good start for me and hope it helps generate some sales.

I won't ask people I know or people that have helped with my book to write a review for me. If they do, that is there decision.

a question about ethics

working hard - hard at work?

Mushroom

volitare nequeo

Boldly going nowhere in particular.

Old Fish

working hard - hard at work?

all out of fucks to give

Writing! Writing! Writing!

Old Fish

Such a nasty woman

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Thought I'd stop by

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Writer is as Writer does

working hard - hard at work?