Cecilia Lavez thought her debut novel Everything’s Fine would provoke criticism. Her story centers around a young black woman who works at Goldman Sachs and falls in love with a conservative white co-worker with big ideas.
But she didn’t expect the backlash six months before the book was published.
In January, after a Goodreads user who had received the pre-print posted a synopsis that went viral on Twitter, review sites were inundated with negative comments and one-star reviews, with many criticizing the book. was criticized as anti-black and racist. Some of the comments were left by users who had never read the book but disagreed with its premise.
“While they may look like a bunch of one-star reviews on Goodreads, these are widespread hate campaigns,” Laves said. “People were very intent on attacking me, not just attacking the work.”
In an era when reaching readers online is an immediate challenge for publishers, Goodreads has become an essential way to reach readers. Combining a social media platform with a review site like Yelp, the site has been a boon to publishers looking to create excitement for their books.
But the same features that get users to talk about books and authors can backfire. Reviews are used as a weapon, sometimes derailing a book’s publication long before it goes on sale.
“It can be incredibly hurtful, and it’s frustrating that non-readers are allowed to review books in this way,” said the author, who also posted a review on Goodreads. said co-editor Roxanne Gay. “Worse, they’re allowed to review books that haven’t been written yet. I’m reviewing books that are out there, but I haven’t finished reading them yet.”
Laves, who quit her job as a data scientist at Google to focus on writing after selling her novel to Simon & Schuster, said the online ambush had turned people against her book. I was worried.
“I was worried about the risk of contagion and that readers and critics would ignore the work without any involvement,” she said. “I felt particularly vulnerable, not only as a debutant, but also as a black woman writer.”
Her novel got off to a slow start despite several accolades, including being named Summerlist’s “Most Anticipated” book and Good Morning America’s “Topic”. . According to Circana BookScan, after its release on June 6, the book sold her 1,000 hardcover copies in her first ten days.
Prominent authors have also been targeted by book review bombing campaigns. Earlier this month, best-selling author of Eat, Pray, Love, Elizabeth Gilbert, wrote hundreds on Goodreads for her upcoming novel, The Snow Forest, set in mid-20th-century Siberia. received a negative evaluation. . In her case, her reviewers were not attacking the book itself or its premise: a Russian family seeking refuge from Soviet oppression in the wilderness. Critics objected to the fact that Gilbert wrote the novel in Russia while Russia was at war with Ukraine, and accused Gilbert of indifference to the plight of Ukrainians.
Gilbert’s reaction surprised the literary world. She responded immediately to critics, announcing that she was postponing her book, which was due to be published in February by Riverhead. Riverhead had not yet printed a pre-review edition.
Gilbert wasn’t the first writer to delay a novel in the face of a tidal wave of criticism. Young adult authors Keira Drake and Amelie Wen Zhao postponed the publication of their novels after facing criticism on Twitter and Goodreads that their depictions of fantasy worlds were racially insensitive. In 2019, young adult novelist Kosoko Jackson canceled her debut novel, a love story about two teenage boys set in the late 1990s during the Kosovo War, after drawing a withering critique on Goodreads. bottom.
In a statement, Goodreads said it “takes its responsibility to maintain the credibility and integrity of its ratings and protect its community of readers and authors very seriously,” making it easier for users to report questionable reviews. said it was.
Goodreads also detects and removes content that violates the site’s community guidelines, which prohibit multiple reviews by a single user that abuses the rating system, reviews that attack authors personally, reviews that attack other reviewers, and abuses the rating system. It said it had taken steps to improve its capacity.
On Amazon, book reviews indicate whether someone has purchased the title, but Amazon generally does not allow reviews of books that have not yet been released, with some exceptions. Movie review site Rotten Tomatoes says users who leave verified reviews must prove they purchased a ticket. But Goodreads, which was acquired by Amazon in 2013, allows any registered user to review and rate books.
You can even review books while still pregnant. The long-awaited sequel to George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series, Winter Wind doesn’t even have an official release date, but it’s amassed over 10,800 ratings and nearly 500 reviews. there is good lead.
It’s unclear what Amazon will do with the data generated by Goodreads, which provides insights into reader preferences and consumer behavior. The company said Goodreads reviews and ratings don’t influence its decisions about which books to buy and how many copies to buy from publishers.
Given its influence, some authors have come to think of Goodreads as a necessary evil, a minefield.
Lincoln Michelle, author of science fiction novel “The Body Scout,” said he fears his book reviews will bomb when he engages with people online.
“If you’re a writer with a moderate amount of publicity and you get into an argument with someone on Twitter about politics, sports, or even a Marvel movie, do you expect angry fans to retaliate by leaving a one-star review? I will always worry about it,” he said.
The occasional critical pile-on may not be a bad thing for Goodreads per se. As a social platform, part of what Goodreads offers is conversation and user engagement, and controversies and discussions can increase comments and time spent on the platform.
Vitriol can also fly in the opposite direction. Recently, author Sarah Stusek posted a video on TikTok criticizing Goodread reviewers for leaving a four-star review on her upcoming novel Three Rivers. In the video, which was later removed for violating the platform’s community standards, Stusek accused reviewers of ruining her own five-star average. After a Goodreads user corrected her review to point out that her author was attacking her, her fellow Goodreads members defended her, writing about her 1 of her nearly 600 articles. ‘Three Rivers’ has been flooded with star reviews.
Stusek’s publisher, Spark Press, announced on Twitter that it was parting ways with the author, and the novel, which was due for publication in September, disappeared from the publisher’s website. Stusek said in an email that the video was meant as a joke and that he plans to self-publish a novel this fall.
But often a negative spiral is triggered by readers.
When Gretchen Felker-Martin sells her debut novel, “Manhunt,” about a trans woman trying to survive in a world where the virus is prevalent among people with high testosterone levels, some people find the horror story offensive. she knew it would. But she’s been blindsided by a sort of coordinated review attack campaign against Goodreads, she said.
Those who opposed the novel’s premise “furiously bombarded the novel with hundreds of negative reviews before anyone read it,” she said. Transgender Felker Martin said he asked Goodreads to remove some of the personal attacks and asked his friends to report the hateful comments, but did not receive a response (some (although the review was deleted).
“I don’t think Goodreads has any financial incentive to do better,” she says. “It would be a daunting task to thoroughly monitor the kinds of abuse that befall people every day, but there is certainly a middle ground between stooping to deal with it all and not dealing with it at all. there is a point.”
