Good or bad, I've always told my reviewers to be honest when reviewing the books they receive. If a book costs $20 as a paperback (very true with some publishers like PublishAmerica for example) and the book is only mediocre at best, I find it very hard to recommend the book for purchasing. Only if the quality is exceptional will I give it a glowing review.
With this in mind, a recent lawsuit (http://www.switched.com/2007/08/22/blogger-sued-for-negative-book-reviews/) has gained attention. In this case, a very negative review has led to a libel lawsuit. At this point the outcome is yet to be determined, but it does offer food for thought. Must reviewers sugarcoat the truth in order to save themselves from the wrath of authors?
I've never been threatened to this extreme, but I did once have an author demand I take a review down for pointing out errors made in the storyline. I was threatened with the atypical "If you don't take the review down, I will tell all of my writing groups and publisher to blacklist you." In the end, it wasn't worth the barrage of emails I got so I took it down, but the authors who emailed me defending the original author and the author herself were added to my list of authors I would never review again.
Another time, I had an author (he was a retired cop) make a comment that I better hope I was never in his former jurisdiction because he'd told his friends my name. A quick note to that publisher guaranteed he would never talk to me again and that I would never review his books again.
In all of my 7 years reviewing, two incidents really isn't surprising. However, I now wonder how many emails someone like Mrs. Giggles receives. Her book and music reviews are usually very honest, and refreshingly funny.
At what point do negative reviews become libel? It's hard to say, what's hurtful to the author may never have been intended that way. It all makes me wonder how far this lawsuit will go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment