I wanted to give James Bailey’s well-stated comment on my post about reviewing “up front” treatment:
Ron, Just to clarify, I do think we have a greater responsibility to the reader. A reviewer’s responsibility to an author is to be fair, not to be positive. The books I’ve passed on reviewing were typically bad books that most readers would not likely stumble onto on their own. Though there is no limitation on space in the internet world as there is in print, it kind of boils down to a judgment call on whether something is newsworthy enough to make it. A good book from a small press deserves coverage. A bad book from a small press deserves to be overlooked, which is why I may make the decision on occasion to just skip it.
Your point about us actually having first-hand (or at least direct e-mail) contact with the authors is an important one. It’s so much easier to fire away when there has been no connection like that. It’s human nature, I suppose, to be more reluctant to open up with both barrels when an author has e-mailed and asked for a review. Of course, it’s not easy to write them and explain you can’t review their book either. It’s like the girl in high school whose feelings you don’t want to hurt (or how they were with me): You make up excuses like you’ve got too much else to review right now and can’t fit it in.
is available on Amazon.com,
Comments on this entry are closed.