I wonder if this isn’t much of a problem for me because (a) I sometimes read the ends of romances anyway, to find out what’s going to happen (other than the happy ending, which is a given) and (b) I don’t read romances for their plots. It’s the characterisation which really engages my interest, and that’s not something that can be “spoilered” because I build up my impression of the characters over the course of the book. That said, if the review revealed that the hero or heroine did something I find morally repugnant or just yucky, I might be put off reading the book altogether, but that’s different, I think, from getting the book and feeling the experience has been spoiled by knowing a plot turn in advance.

At Uniquely Pleasurable, the guidelines I give our team is never to reveal more of the plot than the book’s blurb does. Of course, you get people who whinge about a review mentioning that the couple in question end up together, but if you’re reviewing romance, that’s kind of a given.

If a reviewer can’t be objective, then they have no business reviewing

There is no such thing as an objective reviewer. There are only reviewers who do or do not own up to their biases. A consumer review of a literary work must include a subjective judgement, or it’s not doing its job. Even academic reviews only offer an illusion of objectivity.

in general when I read something that looks like a review I do so in the hope that I’ll find recommendations for books I’d enjoy reading and which I’d like to buy. Isn’t that the ostensible purpose of a review?

Yes, you’re right — the reviewers’ take on the book, and her opinion of it, matter, but there may be things in the review that lead me to read a book even if the reviewer did not care for it. My decision to read the book is, in a sense, “based on the review”, because the review brought the existence of the book to my attention and gave me information about it that piqued my interest. It’s nice if the reviewer ALSO really liked the book, but not necessary.

Plus, in an OT note … since I started this blog I haven’t been reading many reviews of books I haven’t read. I find it is really hard to find good reviews — reviews that are comprehensive without being so detailed (with or without spoilers) that they effectively ruin the book for me. I think AAR and TRR probably have the best reviews in this sense, but they often don’t review the books I want to read. DA reviews are fantastic but often too spoilerish/detailed for me. I love to read them AFTER I’ve read the book.

I have the impression that DA is a review site, AAR is a review site and there are others. What’s posted there is mainly reviews (with a bit of industry news, polls etc).

A lot of other places feel like romance blogs, written by romance bloggers who may well not think of themselves as “‘serious’ reviewers.” Their remit can be to review themes/issues in the genre, and they sometimes do that through writing a book review, but their main focus isn’t on writing lots of reviews of individual books, even if they do produce quite a lot of reviews.

I’m not sure I’ve explained that well, but it’s hard to define because these blogs/sites haven’t made that distinction themselves so I’m just expressing a general impression that I have of them.

Like you and Mojo, I also have yet to find a reviewer whose opinions track mine, but I’m not sure that’s why I read reviews. Is it why you read them?

If someone writes a not-really-a-review sort of post I’ll enjoy reading that for the analysis, but in general when I read something that looks like a review I do so in the hope that I’ll find recommendations for books I’d enjoy reading and which I’d like to buy. Isn’t that the ostensible purpose of a review?

Unfortunately, so far I only seem to have found a few reviewers whose favourites are ones I know to steer well clear of, because they’ll undoubtedly leave me traumatised With most other reviewers it’s very hit and miss and usually I don’t buy books based on their reviews. Part of the problem is that if I want to buy single-titles, I’d probably have to buy them without being able to browse in a shop first. I could browse the selection of Mills & Boons, because those are available in one shop near me, but M&Bs don’t get reviewed on romance sites so often. And with some of the lines I still have the same problem as with the single-titles, because the lines aren’t published in the UK.

I’ve only been reviewing for about a year and have become friendly with authors thru my reviews, but I’m always upfront about the fact that I am going to review a book truthfully. It’s going to have both the good and the bad.

If a reviewer can’t be objective, then they have no business reviewing, especially if they’re wanting to be considered “serious” reviewers (if that makes sense).

Just my two cents.

This is a problem I face all the time, because I write in a genre which is incestuous beyond belief. … But it seems many sites aren’t that scrupulous. … The same question might be asked about reviewing writers from the same publisher. … I don’t review *those* people because I know I can’t be unbiased. … So it’s a tricky one. I believe the only option is transparency, and to otherwise build a reputation for absolute honesty in reviews, so readers trust you, and will be inclined to give reviews of friends material more than a passing, cynical glance.

You know, my husband was just saying the same thing about his area of history: they all know each other, so there’s no way to avoid the issue. It sounds like you have developed a coherent set of rules for keeping both your integrity and your friendships intact.

The point about negative bias is just the flip side of this issue: I wanted to stick to friendships in this post, but I could easily have asked whether you should review folks you are biased AGAINST as FOR. I thought it interesting that the Slate article I quote says “YES, makes for an interesting review.”

Either way, I am with you on transparency.

Lori wrote:

It’s one of the reasons that I actually make the concerted effort to avoid reading author blogs on a regular basis

I know that I would be affected in the same way, and I usually try to avoid commenting on author blogs as well, or even reading them.

Nicola O. wrote:

what I say online is firmly anchored in the knowledge that there are real people behind the posts, behind the books, and if I wouldn’t say it to their face, I won’t post it online.
I do occasionally snark on very well-known, very successful best-selling authors. I figure they probably have a tough hide and whatever impact one small blogger might have would be negligible.

I agree with both points, although, like you, I can’t always hold back the snark.

Sybil wrote:

I am of the mind that if you can’t say it to them you shouldn’t write it. But there is very little I wouldn’t say to anyone. …
If someone is your friend and you are theirs and you expect them to lie to you and tell them your writing is golden even if it isn’t – you aren’t their friend and they aren’t yours.
… Tis your blog, do what makes you happy and fuck em if they can’t take a joke.

I like all of these points, especially the one about friendship requiring honesty. although … my honesty to friends is not usually blunt or snarky if it’s something negative about them or their lives — the content is there, but the style is very different.

Maya M. wrote:

dying of envy #2: someone has a cat who reads their blog! …
now that that’s out of my system -
if I’m an aspiring author, do I owe all members of my writing group stellar reviews?

Yes, the cat (one of them) loves the blog, especially the sitting on the warm keyboard and the batting of the typing fingers.

You raise an interesting question: it might not only not be WRONG to give only glowing reviews to friends, it might be your OBLIGATION to do it.

Kate wrote:

For me, with a small blog with no real connections anywhere, … I’m not a big name. I don’t do this for a living. My integrity is all I’ve got in the blogosphere.

There are a lot of “review” sites out there that aren’t worth their salt and exist merely for the praising of ARCs that they’re fortunate enough to receive.

I’m in the same blogging boat, and I agree with you. On the question of some of these review sites (the “5 thong” sites as Sybil mentioned), I agree they are not for readers — they are part of the publishing machine, the promotional machine and do not have my interests as a consumer in mind. It’s another issue whether receiving ARCs alone distinguishes these kinds of promotional sites from real review sites –I think not — but certainly it’s worth thinking about.

Mistress wrote:

think every book reviewed is a test of our merit as bloggers. We can’t claim to love books, and then with biased praise add to the creation of more trash (which is the result of slanted reviews).

I agree with you — these fake reviews do nothing for the genre. On the ARC question, since two of you brought it up, maybe I’ll post on it, I thought I was the only blogger who didn’t accept them — typical egocentric me. (And good luck with your friend!)

Laura Vivanco wrote:

That said, I’m not sure this method would work for you, Jessica, since the title of your site includes the word “reviews.” Then again, not all your posts are reviews, so maybe you could post that kind of non-review response to a novel from time to time.

As far as writing reviews is concerned, I’d be more worried about the impact on my friendship than the impact on the possible readers. That may sound selfish and unethical, but the fact is that I’ve yet to come across any reviewer whose reviews will reliably indicate to me that I’ll enjoy the book.

Yes, damn the title of this blog. If only I had known how it would brand it, I would have called it something else.

I agree with you that friendship is more important than reviews, but there are a few ways of doing that. One is to write dishonest reviews when necessary, two, refuse to review friends (or only review their good books), or three, only make friends with thick skinned or fairminded people (Katiebabs’ and Sybil’s approach).

Like you and Mojo, I also have yet to find a reviewer whose opinions track mine, but I’m not sure that’s why I read reviews. Is it why you read them? Have to think more about that one.

Victoria Janssen wrote:

So far as the “small community” of romancelandia goes, I think that is an issue that should be considered on all sides, as humans tend to feel a sense of community when there’s opportunity. The smallness of the community can lead one to feel one’s closer to one’s fellow romancelandians than is actually the case, or more distant from them than is actually the case. Disclosure helps to alleviate this problem.

I agree that the feeling of closeness online can be very misleading — one of the reasons I asked whom you consider a “friend”. I actually sort of don’t want to meet any of my regular blog pals in RL because I like them so much online and I’m afraid we wouldn’t hit it off at all.

Janine wrote:

One of the reasons I decided to review on Dear Author (and this might sound a little pompous or self-important) was because I wanted to contribute to the growth of quality writing in the genre. I do think honest reviews do that, by getting a conversation going about what makes a strong book strong, and a weak book weak. …

So that’s my long winded way of saying: the confusion and the ethical dilemmas won’t necessarily go away, but over time and with practice, you can get to know how your moral compass works, and how to listen to it.

Janine — thanks for your contributions here and your thoughtful response to Maya’s equally thoughtful questions, I don’t think it’s self-important or pompous at all. If intelligent well-written reviews are getting written, the genre must have something to offer.

And I agree that we need to listen to our intuition, or conscience or whatever we’re feeling as it provides a good sign that we are too close to someone to write an objective review. Perhaps using Laura’s strategy would work in those cases, or calling ti something else, or acknowledging the bias (as I did in my non-review of Megan Hart’s Dirty).

Tumperkin wrote:

That’s one of the benefits of being an enthusiastic amateur: I can choose what to blog about.

Amen to that, sister!

But you raise an interesting question, and I agree with you that I have different expectations of different sites. What it means to uphold the “contract” as you refer to it will be different from blog to blog.

As Janine says, DA is still an amateur blog — they all have day jobs as far as I know and Jane has not yet started selling DA t-shirts. On the other hand, I think it is the one everyone reads, and is influential in some ways, and with more power, as Spiderman knows, comes more responsibility.

I haven’t done justice to all of these comments, which have been so helpful to me, and, even better, given me at least three ideas for new things to post about! Thank you!

I agree with some of the other commenters in that I don’t think there is one set of ethical standards that applies to all romance blogger sites. Blogs vary from the likes of Dear Author which I would expect to maintain high ethical standards to the much more amateur sites that are really about readers expressing unapologetically subjective views.

I always find these types of comments interesting. I take it as a compliment that so many readers view Dear Author in a different light and expect us to maintain high ethical standards. We try to do that because we care about ethics.

But when Jane and Jayne started Dear Author in the spring of 2006, I don’t believe they thought they were starting anything more than an amateur site for expressing their unapologetically subjective views.

I know that Jane has said more than once she only started Dear Author for herself and a few friends. That it grew into more than that is a tribute to Jane and Jayne’s creativity and ability to articulate their likes and dislikes in a perceptive and entertaining way.

So, while it may be true that not all blogs are equal, or should be held to equal standards, I think the line between the “amateur” blog and blog that is considered something other than “amateur” is a lot more blurry than many people realize.

I agree with some of the other commenters in that I don’t think there is one set of ethical standards that applies to all romance blogger sites. Blogs vary from the likes of Dear Author which I would expect to maintain high ethical standards to the much more amateur sites that are really about readers expressing unapologetically subjective views.

I think bloggers have a sort of ‘contract’ with their readers. I expect a thorough, professional review from DA and I know that I might get that from one of a number of people who all review for DA. On other blogs I expect something much more subjective and I will often be well aware of the blogger’s preferences and triggers and will judge their reviews accordingly. Part of that ‘judgement’ by me will be a recognition that the process of blogging may mean that the blogger in question knows lots of authors, particularly where they blog in niche areas such as M/M romance as mentioned by one the commenters above. I suspect many bloggers ‘end up’ having online friendships (for want of a better word) with authors who have responded to a review and then kept visiting. That can put the blogger in a difficult position if they don’t like the next release (and to my mind is something that authors should be as aware of as the blogger).

You posed the question of ‘when is friendship friendship’ – I think that is my concern about this issue of ‘disclosure’: where do you draw the line? When is judgement affected? For some people it might just be when someone visits their blog, for others they’d have to meet them before that would occur, for others their judgement wouldn’t be affected by casual friendships. For me, I think the ‘names of the author’s children’ rule looks to be a pretty good one. But I’m with Laura : if a friend asked me to review their book and I didn’t like it, I’d simply decline. In fact, I might well decline even if I did like it because of how I consider it might be perceived (e.g. if we visit each other’s blogs a lot or have collaborated on something). That’s one of the benefits of being an enthusiastic amateur: I can choose what to blog about.