We have recently witnessed a disturbance in the JAFF community and, presumably, in other fan fiction and indie writers’ communities. People who have placed their work for review and comment on Goodreads were particularly exposed and involved. Rather than rehashing all the gory details here, I would refer you to a recent article in The Mary Sue. In summary, a fantasy fiction author created for herself a nice little farm of fake accounts. When people left reviews of similar books by other authors, a fake reviewer would leave a one-star review with a comment that urged the reader to consider the author’s novel instead. I am reluctant to provide her with screen space or bandwidth. There is a short bibliography at the end of this entry, and I heartily recommend that you read as much as you like—or can stand. It is important to note that this author had an agent and a two-book deal with a mainstream publishing company: Del Rey, the sci-fi and fantasy imprint of Penguin.
I first learned of this sordid little story on Facebook group “Mr. Darcy’s Extensive Readers.” A Top Contributor to the group, Catherine Bilson, related the bare bones of the event, provided the link to The Mary Sue, and ended with an astute observation that surprised and resonated with me:
“. . . certain JAFF authors might want to reconsider their stance on leaving one-star ratings on other JAFF authors’ books in light of the Cait Corrain scandal . . .
“To the JAFF authors who do this; we know who you are. It’s not nice, it’s not clever, and it definitely doesn’t get you invited to join group promotions or other nice things.
“And to the beautiful readers who DO take the time to leave a rating and/or a review when you enjoyed our books, THANK YOU. You are the reason we do what we do.”
I can highly recommend reading this FB thread if you are an author or a reader. There are a number of different opinions expressed both by established authors, less-known authors, and readers. The opinions expressed vary widely, and all have value.
My take-aways from this informative conversation thread were uniformly revealing. In some cases they were mind-blowing:
- There are said to be well established JAFF authors who follow this practice—that of giving faint-praise, overtly critical, or overblown poor reviews to their fellow JAFF authors. People with a wider exposure to the field know more about this than I do and might name names if they so chose.
- There are at the same time authors who defame their guiltless fellow authors by quietly accusing them of this practice. Sometimes they can get away with this for years according to one commenter.
- There is an unwritten rule which many authors follow that they do not give reviews at all—good or bad. This is said to be in line with Amazon’s requirements. Amazon owns both own publishing establishment, which is of course, huge. It also owns Goodreads.
- Goodreads seems to be regarded as less well policed than Amazon’s own site. It may be easier to set up a “review bombing” run on Goodreads.
- Many authors are persecuted more by readers who have formed some sort of grudge against them in real life, as opposed to other authors running wild.
- The lack of an appeals process, formal or informal, is widely regarded as unjust.
- Some readers seem to establish their own criteria for review. They don’t always cite these. Therefore it’s possible to get a low review because “I don’t like Jane Austen.” (The logical question, “Then why did you read the book?” often remains unanswered.
- There are plenty of talented authors who avoid Amazon and/or Goodreads for these very reasons. They are reluctant to expose their work to unfettered mischief.
What to make of all this? The woman who perpetrated the troubles outlined in the message thread and the cited news items had one more strike against her: The Goodreads dummy accounts she set up directed the fake reviews at minority authors, especially women and men of color. That lends an even more unsavory aspect to her actions. She claims mental problems and substance abuse led her down this path. Most people will end up by finding this to be a rather worn-out excuse, used to get out of everything from murder to petty shoplifting.
What can we, as JAFF fans and authors, do to combat this sort of thing? It’s a tough question. It would certainly be inappropriate and dangerous to begin outing authors who are suspected of doing this. I believe it may be a case of “When they go low, we go high,” as Mrs. Obama has said. Support of authors, especially new ones, costs nothing and may make the difference between a talented author giving up or soldiering on. Secondly, as a commenter in the thread observed, “A rising tide floats everyone’s boat.” Promoting JAFF in general will bring more fans, and that is to everyone’s benefit.
Finally, if you are preparing a review, put your best foot forward. Everyone from Plato to The Buddha has been credited with the Threefold Gate. But whoever said it, the practice of using it is beneficial to you and to everyone who reads what you have written. Before you turn your review loose upon the world, and after you’ve checked for grammar and spelling, run one last check:
- Is it true?
- Is it necessary?
- Is it kind?
I want to wish all who read this a very happy holiday season—whatever you may be celebrating. Thanks for being with us this past year, and I know we are all looking forward to a productive and enjoyable new year in our world of JAFF.
For Further Reading: List of References Cited
“Culture and Trends,” Angela Yang. NBC News. December 11, 2023. (Accessed December 14, 2023, https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/author-cait-corrain-goodreads-review-bombing-allegations-fallout-rcna129134)
Associated Press. “Novelist’s book is canceled after she acknowledges ‘review bombs’ of other writers.” The Washington Post. December 12, 2023. (Accessed December 14, 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/12/12/cait-corrain-fake-accounts-novel-canceled/55c03d46-995a-11ee-82d9-be1b5ea041ab_story.html)
Timothy Bella. “First time author loses book deal for ‘review bombing’ authors on Goodreads.” The Washington Post. December 12, 2023. (Accessed December 14, 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2023/12/12/author-cait-corrain-goodreads-review-bombing-controversy/)
12 responses to “A Disturbance in the Force”
It was indeed an eye-opening discussion.
Thank you!
Authors who attack one another in this matter are simply being malicious. Non-author reviewers who don’t state their criteria for giving low ratings are likewise being perverse.
There’s an old proverb that states, “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.” Your statement suggests that both of these forces are at work, depending on who’s doing the reviewing. I think that’s a good observation. The inept review can be shrugged off as being of little value. The author attack can swiftly undo one’s faith in human nature. Both kinds of review weigh equally according to Amazon and Goodreads. And both can undermine an author’s careful work if they gain any sort of traction at all. Thanks for your response!
I agree about the stupidity angle. I also do not like readers who read with a red pen in hand. As to reviews, I will review a book to give an author a pat on the back. If I cannot do that, I will not hurt them by giving a negative review. If I have a big criticism about their book, I’ll contact them privately or wish them well in my heart if I have no contact info.
And what reviewers read with a red pen in hand? Look at the past reviews they have done on Amazon or Goodreads. If most or none of their reviews are positive, they read with a red pen handy.
The last thing I want to do is discourage a novice writer. All of us who start from the beginning still have a lot to learn. Even editing someone’s book demands that we not rewrite it for them. It’s their book, their plot, their idea about how to bring it about. And that needs to be honored. If I’m doing an editing, I might make suggestions, but I try to do it in a kind manner and allow them to decide what they should do, if anything.
A cutting review or one written to undermine an author—old or new—should never be acceptable. It is unkind and of malicious intent because it is always negative and wounding. Unfortunately, they will probably continue.
Some people are just rude and don’t realize how words hurt! You have to be careful what you say or write!
Thanks for your reply! I think that’s why I like the Threefold Gate idea.
I agree, Cindie, that we have to be careful what we say or write. If we aren’t, we may discourage permanently a future Jane Austen. 🙁
It makes me sad that this happens at all. I try to do reviews on the books that I read but I know that I don’t always do so & its bad on me. I rarely leave a low review but sometimes I need to. I just did one yesterday but I felt that I needed to do it. It was a review of an audiobook that was done by AI and I listed for a little bit but the AI ruined any chance I might have had for the book and I was not impressed with the book itself. I had read other books by the same author and they were good and I made sure to mention that but said that this was a miss in the book but more importantly because of the AI narration. When I look at reviews for books I do read a variety of them to get a better feel of the book (especially if I am only getting one or two at that time & have to pick wisely). I hope that AI narration does not increase as I love the real narrators as they can truly bring a book to life and I have decided that I will avoid any AI book even if it is from an author I like but I think authors need to be aware of this too.
Interesting! If you’ve purchased an audiobook and found it impossible to follow, I’d put that in the same category as “You’ve got spinach in your teeth.” In other words, an occasion when a criticism is doing someone a favor. It has signaled the author to take a close look at what’s going on. You can try contacting an author privately, but Amazon doesn’t make that too easy. Thanks for your reply!
Thank you, Anne, for an interesting post. I didn’t realize reviews were being abused to that extent. And I will definitely check out the references you made.
I guess I am just naive. It would never occur to me to do something like that. I was brought up that if you couldn’t say something nice, then don’t say anything cruel or egregiously terrible. I think the worst I have ever criticised was perhaps the many typos or maye grammatical errors. As we saw in Texas, “well bless their hearts” – it must be the size of the Grinch’s. 🙁