Review Group discussion

A group member has adding their own book links to their review on amazon as a promotional vehicle for their own work.

Should we add a group rule to include prohibiting this behaviour?

PS the links have now been removed.

That's a bit naughty. Yes, I think there should be a rule prohibiting this.

Brenda

Later edit: "What I meant was that, when you sign your review, you can add under your name Author of - link to your book."

Why prohibit it? It's allowed by amazon so why should you forbid it?
It's actually a good social media marketing technique. And it's not hurting the author who gets the review.

This kind of ideas about prohibiting behavior just for the fun of it do nothing but alienate writers. I thought this was a group about writers supporting each other.

I don't object to people adding their book link. I do, however, get annoyed when the reviewer promotes their book within the context of the actual review. That part is not about them. I have my book name in my Reviewer name since I've seen others do that. I haven't added a link to my book, though, in reviews I give to other people.

I agree. In the content of the review it's unethical to add a link to another book.

What I meant was that, when you sign your review, you can add under your name Author of - link to your book.

Ronesa wrote: "I don't object to people adding their book link. I do, however, get annoyed when the reviewer promotes their book within the context of the actual review. That part is not about them. I have my boo..."

Would you feel the same if the person reviewing your work, and was promoting their's, didn't give you a glowing review?

I see Emanuel's point, but my instinct is, don't do it, even at the bottom of the review. A review's purpose is to tell a reader about a book in which they are interested, not to push another at them, or to promote yourself. In any case, I think readers might be getting a bit sick of being marketed to all the time.

Everybody is getting sick of other people marketing while trying to market better their own books...

I think a signature is something that gives authority and authenticity to a review, the same that it gives to an email. We use signatures on everything since people starting communicating in writing.

I follow the phenomenon of amazon reviews for a while now and I can tell you there are a lot of fake reviews from ID's you can identify. I would rather have a review from someone that can be verified as a real person with one simple click.

An author will not only give me an honest review from which I will learn how to improve my book, but is also a review from somebody which has no interest in promoting something that he doesn't believe in.

I think that there is a wider issue at stake.

Amazon is very Big Brotherish about reviews. What if it begins to suspect that Goodreads authors are colluding with each other; one gets a good review in exchange for the promotion of the other's material within the review? Amazon may begin to view such reviews in the same light as reciprocal reviews, or paid reviews, and remove them.

And if it perceives that Goodreads itself is condoning this practice, Amazon might decide to simply disallow all reviews generated through Goodreads. Even if it doesn't go that far, the benefit of offering one's work for review through a group like Goodreads is to get reviews which are seen to be honest. As the authors who benefit from Goodreads Review Group, we run the risk of compromising the credibility of the reviews we rely on to promote our books.

I realise that this is not what Emanuel is advocating, but I think we should be careful of the potential unintended consequences of what appears to be a harmless idea.

Emma wrote: "Ronesa wrote: "I don't object to people adding their book link. I do, however, get annoyed when the reviewer promotes their book within the context of the actual review. That part is not about them..."

I think people reading it might get the impression the person writing the review might be trying to discredit the author (me) so that they would buy the reviewer's book instead. This would then have the opposite effect the person was going for.

At least that's how I, as a potential reader, feel when I read reviews that someone has their link at the bottom and they have given either a good or bad review. I think they are more interested in promoting their book than in writing an honest review.

If you are an author giving reviews, you were two hats. You are not just a reader, therefore you might not give a review like just a reader.

No matter what each of us think, the idea of this discussion is if a group that helps authors promote their work using an Amazon tool - reviews - can forbid or only recommend to its members the use of another Amazon tool, respectively the function of introducing a link to another product/book sold on Amazon in a review.

Hmm. It's an interesting question. I've never added a link to my own work when writing a review, and I've never had someone else's link appear in a review I've received. I think it would annoy me to have someone link their work to a review of my book - I would worry that it would look like a reciprocal review!

I am of two minds on this. Personally, I would not place my book link in a review of someone else's work. I'm reporting my opinion of a book, not marketing my own. That said, is there a difference between an author signing with a book link and say a blogger signing with a link to their site, or a journalist signing with a link to their column? I think it should be a matter of personal ethics.
With regard to Warren's "Big Brother" point, since Amazon owns GR, I doubt Mr Bezos would completely alienate one of his subsidiaries.

Where have I ever seen a review to which the reviewer's own book is mentioned?
On the back cover of books and the purpose is clearly that the author wants those who say positive things about the book to appear to be a serious person.

My two cents to this fascinating discussion.

The "marketing" part of an online page devoted to a book --- whether it's on Amazon, Goodreads or somewhere else --- is there for the book featured on that page. Any deviation from that should happen only with the consent of the author/publisher of the book featured on that page, or else whatever entity actually owns the site (as with a paid banner ad on Amazon or GR).

Most of us are pressed for time. So we already face the temptation to "phone in" the next review after only a brief skim of an assigned book. Giving everyone carte blanche to push their own work so blatantly in their reviews will inevitably result in some taking advantage: rushing through reviews to rack up free ad links as fast as possible. And rushed reviews don't help anyone: not the author of the reviewed book, and not the readers trying to decide what book to read next.

Every time I join a review group, I'm already participating in one of the most powerful tools I've come across to market my book. I'm going to get four reviews published on Amazon. Where else could I get that? And I ask that question rhetorically because I already know the answer. So since I'm already reaping a substantial benefit, would I cheapen my review of another author's work by adding a plug for my own at the end?

Not bloody likely - but that's just me, trying to retain some semblance of dignity as I do (almost) everything I can to get people to find my book!

Hock wrote: "Where have I ever seen a review to which the reviewer's own book is mentioned?
On the back cover of books and the purpose is clearly that the author wants those who say positive things about the b..."

Good point John, you would be marketing yourself on a page that is actually supposed to be about someone else's work.

In the end it's a matter of opinion. What I don't want is for the Review Group to forbid an action that is allowed by Amazon.

Personally, I will invite every author that reviews my book to add his name and the link to his book to the end of the review he/she writes for me.
I will be happy to help him/her promote a book this way.

I'm not sure to be honest, its nots something I have come across. Why not just change your name on Amazon to: BLAH BLAH, Author of BLAH BLAH, then there would be no need to add a link?

My name is Tyshawn Knight and if you review my book link it to your book or website. We all know why we are here. It is to sell our books. I think we should support one another. I think ethically however, we should only review books we really like. I don't think it is ethical or wise to post a bad review and then tack our name onto it. The February 2015 issue of Writer's Digest talks about promoting books on goodreads. I suggest everyone here read it.

Tyshawn wrote: "My name is Tyshawn Knight and if you review my book link it to your book or website. We all know why we are here. It is to sell our books. I think we should support one another. I think ethical..."

Hello Tyshawn,

With respect to only reviewing books that you like ... when you join a review group here at Goodreads, you are committed to review four authors' books in return for four authors reviewing yours. You have to review them whether you like them or not. Not including a pitch for your own book at the end of your review relieves you of any ethical difficulties in posting a less then glowing (but honest) review.

I didn't sign up for a group where everyone agrees to support each other unconditionally. Most of us don't know each other, and most of us haven't read each other's books.

I can't ethically ask any of you to support a book of mine you've never read by putting my book's links on your book's Amazon page -- in exchange for my review.

Can we at least agree that no one should sneak their book links into their review without the reviewed author's consent? I think Emanuel might have been referring to this upthread in message #5. Maybe we can find some common ground.

I think it's fair to ask people NOT to post their link, whether the review is good or bad. If you do an independent review of a book you actually purchased, you can do anything that Amazon allows.

Wow! Emma, Hock, what a wave my small ripple of a "link" seems to have caused!

I cannot tell a lie - it was me! It's a fair cop, guv! If it was John I offended then I apologise. The link has been removed. The idea was recommended to me through a promo site and seemed to be quite a practical one at the time. :-/

I have to say that, personally, I would not be "offended" if another author linked their work to mine in what was an objective and constructive review of my book. And I agree that we should be aware of the mischief makers and/or the back scratchers whenever we can.

In a "freedom of speech" culture I worry about banning things that are done in good faith and without prejudice or favour. "Je suis Charlie - but only when the majority approves" seems to be a slightly distorted concept/mantra to me.

Maybe I should have asked the author's permission first, because the last thing I wanted to do was cause them offence. Hopefully, as has been said above, fellow authors do try to support each other when they can. It is very tough out there after all!

Still learning in my sixth decade of survival,
G.J.

I'll also add that I seriously doubt that adding your clickable link to the end of your reviews does any significant book-promotion good, and may turn people off. In reading thousands of threads, it's become obvious to me that in general, people prefer authors who don't try to stuff ads in their face OR sneak them in. Ads belong in ad spaces. Don't think people don't notice. It's a big dilemma for Indie and self-pub authors, to be sure, because we have to promote out own work, but we need to do it graciously.

In a review group you give and receive reviews from other authors. They are not just readers. They read as writers, they give reviews as writers. It's their profession, their brand.

It means that when I sign a review, I don't sign it as just a reader. I sign it as a writer, as a brand. It seems only natural to certify this by adding my name and a link to my book.
It gives authority to that review. It shows that I stand by my review of that book and you can see who gave that review. It's not just a name behind that review. It's me, a writer.

I bet if somebody like Hugh Howey or Salman Rushdie will give a review to your book and sign it with a link, you will be filled with joy and count your blessings.

No worries, G.J.

I don't think any of us saw this coming. As this conversation shows, a lot of other people would have thought nothing of it.

Your gracious apology, while not required, is appreciated. Thanks for your review!

John

When I first started out in self-publishing (Jan 2012), a "how to promote your book on Amazon" guide advocated doing this very thing. It said you should review every book you can find that is similar to your book (especially the good sellers!), and add a link to your own book in your review. So I did, although it felt like cheating and I kept expecting Big Brother Amazon to pull me up for it.
After a while, though, as I got more involved in self-publishing, I couldn't accept that behaviour: I don't want to see other authors promoting their books on my page, and I don't want Amazon to think there is collusion.
So I went back to all those reviews some time ago and removed the link. I think I got them all!

For some insight into what Amazon does/will do about reviews, check this out--
http://www.amarketingexpert.com/amazo...

(I followed a link on another post in this group to find this.)

D.M. wrote: "I'm not sure to be honest, its nots something I have come across. Why not just change your name on Amazon to: BLAH BLAH, Author of BLAH BLAH, then there would be no need to add a link?"

Mine already come up as Lisa Marie Gabriel "Composer, singer, songwriter" the tag is historical and probably helps from the independent angle. I would not use a review to promote my book. The danger is that both writers could have good reviews removed.

I found the last bit of this discussion interesting and helpful even though I don't have this problem at the moment.

Wow! Didn't know this was happening! The discussion is now closed but I'd say when we post, whether as authors or bloggers, the name tag pretty much certifies who we are! So there should be no need to 'stamp' one's self at the bottom of the review. It's a plug and a review is supposed to be about the other author, not one's own work! Wow!