![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Amazon Reviews and Revisions
Jul. 4th, 2015 08:45 amOK so Amazon has done a couple of things in the past couple of weeks that makes the lives of authors that much harder especially those who are self-publishing using the various means that Amazon allows for such activity.
The first has to do with a change that as of July 1st, Amazon will be paying its authors by pages read rather than the number of time the book was downloaded when the customer uses the Kindle Library feature. Amazon’s announcement only says that the new formula applies to Kindle Select books that are self-published and distributed through Amazon’s Kindle Direct Publishing program. One assumes that the deals they have in place with publishers still are in play.
Which is an interesting idea with the logic that one should be recompensed by the amount of entertainment that one provides rather than the number of times that their tome has been downloaded.
Show of hands, who has bought James Joyce’s Ulysses? OK. Now how many of you have actually read the thing? Hmmm, more than I was expecting.
There are physical books that everyone seems to buy, especially those considered the classics, but never seem to get around to actually reading. Coffee table books are a good example of this. I know I am guilty of that behavior with the magic words, I’ll get around to it.
So Amazon is listening to those people who took part of the pool of money that was split amongst the authors. Authors with longer books, much much longer books, were complaining that they were being compensated at the same rate as someone who took a blog entry and posted it as a book. So Amazon upped the ante and said OK we’ll pay when people actually read rather than just download.
And there was much consternation to be had.
I think it is an interesting idea and does put the pressure on the author to create something that people want to continue to read rather than convincing people to download their work.
The other change is something I think is a bad idea because of previous behavior of reviewers who have used their reviews to take out their personal issues on various authors.
Getting rid of a review that is very negative not because the reviewer read the book, but because they have an axe to grind is nigh impossible. Even when within the review they say that they haven’t read the book, which just baffles me.
So now if you, the reviewer, has any form of relationship with the author, you may not review their works. And apparently there is some algorithm being used to determine if the reviewer and author are in cahoots or knew each other in elementary school or whatever Amazon thinks is too close to the author.
They say it is to cut down on review padding, which, I will admit, has been a bit of the problem especially with the self-publishing group. Trying to boost the book’s public face by using those close to you is not a new thing on Amazon.
But it goes a bit too far where people can’t review books of people that they don’t know but whatever logic Amazon is using is says that they do know each other.
By the logic they are using, I can’t review any books of authors that I know. And considering my reading taste, that a lot of books that I can’t say anything about.
And for the most part I don’t review books of people that I know well. If I have been on a panel with them at a convention, I don’t count that as knowing someone.
I flat out don’t review Peter’s books publicly. He knows what I think of them because I read them and tell him.
But say I wanted to review Kevin J. Anderson’s latest tome. I know Kevin and have for some time now. But he knows that I will give my honest opinion on his writing because I have done so in the past. He doesn’t get five stars automatically and in fact I probably judge his work harder than I might a first time author because I know that he knows better.
According to Amazon, I can’t say boo because I know the author personally.
Where it really breaks down is when a review is taken down and the two parties don’t know each other at all other than one wrote the book that the other read. It is assumed knowledge rather than actually knowledge.
There is no appeals process for this one. The review vanishes never to be seen again.
But there is not much of an appeals process for negative reviews either.
So one can hate but not love?
How screwed up is that?
Amazon is using a very large hammer to get rid of a fly sized problem and in doing so is poking some rather large holes in their review credibility.
I am grateful for positive reviews be it from friends or strangers.
The first has to do with a change that as of July 1st, Amazon will be paying its authors by pages read rather than the number of time the book was downloaded when the customer uses the Kindle Library feature. Amazon’s announcement only says that the new formula applies to Kindle Select books that are self-published and distributed through Amazon’s Kindle Direct Publishing program. One assumes that the deals they have in place with publishers still are in play.
Which is an interesting idea with the logic that one should be recompensed by the amount of entertainment that one provides rather than the number of times that their tome has been downloaded.
Show of hands, who has bought James Joyce’s Ulysses? OK. Now how many of you have actually read the thing? Hmmm, more than I was expecting.
There are physical books that everyone seems to buy, especially those considered the classics, but never seem to get around to actually reading. Coffee table books are a good example of this. I know I am guilty of that behavior with the magic words, I’ll get around to it.
So Amazon is listening to those people who took part of the pool of money that was split amongst the authors. Authors with longer books, much much longer books, were complaining that they were being compensated at the same rate as someone who took a blog entry and posted it as a book. So Amazon upped the ante and said OK we’ll pay when people actually read rather than just download.
And there was much consternation to be had.
I think it is an interesting idea and does put the pressure on the author to create something that people want to continue to read rather than convincing people to download their work.
The other change is something I think is a bad idea because of previous behavior of reviewers who have used their reviews to take out their personal issues on various authors.
Getting rid of a review that is very negative not because the reviewer read the book, but because they have an axe to grind is nigh impossible. Even when within the review they say that they haven’t read the book, which just baffles me.
So now if you, the reviewer, has any form of relationship with the author, you may not review their works. And apparently there is some algorithm being used to determine if the reviewer and author are in cahoots or knew each other in elementary school or whatever Amazon thinks is too close to the author.
They say it is to cut down on review padding, which, I will admit, has been a bit of the problem especially with the self-publishing group. Trying to boost the book’s public face by using those close to you is not a new thing on Amazon.
But it goes a bit too far where people can’t review books of people that they don’t know but whatever logic Amazon is using is says that they do know each other.
By the logic they are using, I can’t review any books of authors that I know. And considering my reading taste, that a lot of books that I can’t say anything about.
And for the most part I don’t review books of people that I know well. If I have been on a panel with them at a convention, I don’t count that as knowing someone.
I flat out don’t review Peter’s books publicly. He knows what I think of them because I read them and tell him.
But say I wanted to review Kevin J. Anderson’s latest tome. I know Kevin and have for some time now. But he knows that I will give my honest opinion on his writing because I have done so in the past. He doesn’t get five stars automatically and in fact I probably judge his work harder than I might a first time author because I know that he knows better.
According to Amazon, I can’t say boo because I know the author personally.
Where it really breaks down is when a review is taken down and the two parties don’t know each other at all other than one wrote the book that the other read. It is assumed knowledge rather than actually knowledge.
There is no appeals process for this one. The review vanishes never to be seen again.
But there is not much of an appeals process for negative reviews either.
So one can hate but not love?
How screwed up is that?
Amazon is using a very large hammer to get rid of a fly sized problem and in doing so is poking some rather large holes in their review credibility.
I am grateful for positive reviews be it from friends or strangers.
