The Dark Side of Goodreads: A Struggle for Authors

Negative Reviews that target authors can be toxic!

Understanding the Goodreads Experience for Authors

Goodreads is a titan in the online literary world. It serves as a vibrant community where readers can discover books and share their thoughts. However, beneath its surface lies a darker narrative for many authors: a persistent struggle with review bullying, targeted harassment, and policies that leave creators vulnerable. According to Wikipedia, Goodreads has grappled with these challenges for years, struggling to rein in reviewers who can significantly impact an author's reputation and sales.

The Anonymity Problem

The core of the problem lies in the anonymity and perceived impunity afforded to some users. This leads to weaponized reviews and coordinated attacks. One author, who wishes to remain anonymous due to fear of further retribution, recently shared a harrowing account of such an experience. Their books were suddenly review-bombed with one-star ratings, accompanied by dismissive comments like "AI bullshit." The perpetrators, operating under false names and avatars, didn't stop there. They targeted legitimate reviewers of the books, posting sarcastic comments about blog posts and awards the author had received.

The Audit Revelation

When nine of the lists made by these reviewers were audited, it was found that one of the primary individuals involved in the bullying had created five of the Listopia lists on Goodreads. These lists targeted the supposed use of Artificial Intelligence in creating book covers or writing the books. Authors are not given the chance to defend themselves, while these reviewers can keep posting negative comments about the authors they target.

Frustrating Responses from Goodreads

Authors, understandably harassed and bullied, reported these incidents to Goodreads. The response, however, was startlingly unhelpful. Authors were told they are not permitted to reply or comment on posts, even if those posts are demonstrably false. When a fellow author generously stepped in to support their peer, they too became a target. They faced accusations of being a "sockpuppet," and their reviews were deemed "illegitimate." While a few of these malicious reviews were eventually removed after repeated reporting, the author remains in a frustrating bind. They feel powerless over who leaves reviews, as Goodreads stated in an email. The sentiment from these negative, hateful bullies seems to be pure anger that anyone would dare to enjoy the author's work, leading to a relentless campaign of negativity. One such comment alleges that all the reviews are fake because no one read this slop.

Historical Context

This isn't a new phenomenon. In 2012, author Kiera Cass faced public outrage when she encouraged her Twitter followers to "knock off" a poor review of her novel, The Selection, from the Goodreads front page. This incident sparked a widespread discussion about the often-fraught relationship between authors and reviewers. That same year, Goodreads drew criticism from users regarding the tone and availability of reviews, with reports of harassment and targeted attacks on authors. In response, Goodreads publicly posted its review guidelines in August 2012. Following Amazon's acquisition, this policy was further modified to include the deletion of reviews containing "an ad hominem attack or an off-topic comment."

Ongoing Issues and Implications

Despite these adjustments, news sources at the time highlighted the business implications and ongoing user dissatisfaction. As Mercy Pilkington of Good E-Reader News observed: "Where authors were threatening a mass account cancellation to protest the bullying, many of the reader users who commented on the announcement are now threatening the same thing." While much of this might seem like petty playground behavior, it has real-world implications. Several e-book retailers incorporate the Goodreads API into their sales pages, effectively posting book reviews that many in the Goodreads community know to be false. Real-world sales decisions have been made by consumers based on these reviews.

Systemic Issues Affecting Authors

The insidious nature of Goodreads' challenges to authors stems from several systemic issues:

• Review Prioritization: The platform's algorithm often elevates reviews with the most likes and comments. This can disproportionately amplify negative or malicious content, even if it represents a minority opinion.

• Review Bombing: The platform remains susceptible to coordinated efforts to flood a book with negative reviews, artificially deflating its overall rating.

• Lack of Content Moderation: Authors often report a perceived lack of robust and proactive content moderation. This makes it easier for abusive and malicious reviews to gain traction before being addressed.

• Author Vulnerability: Authors are uniquely exposed to personal attacks and harassment through the review system. This is exacerbated by the policy preventing authors from direct engagement.

  
  

The Profound Impact on Authors

The impact on authors is profound and multi-faceted:

• Psychological Toll: Negative reviews—especially those fueled by malice or containing personal attacks—can severely impact an author's mental health, motivation, and creative drive. Discussions in various online forums, including Reddit threads, highlight this issue.

  
  

• Reputational Damage: Artificial manipulation of ratings or the pervasive presence of negative, sometimes false, reviews can significantly harm an author's reputation. This affects their perceived success within the literary community and among potential readers.

  
  

• Marketing Challenges: The overwhelming focus on reviews on Goodreads can overshadow other crucial marketing efforts for authors. This diverts attention from building buzz for new releases or utilizing other promotional channels like blog posts and paid advertising.

  
  

The Need for Change

The current policy, which forbids authors from responding to hurtful or false reviews, leaves them essentially defenseless. This is further complicated by unsettling questions raised by the anonymous author: Are members of the Goodreads "librarian" group—who are supposed to ensure the accuracy and integrity of book information—potentially involved in these attacks, or even sending dismissive emails?

Conclusion: A Call for Action

For many authors, Goodreads, while a powerful tool for reader connection, has become a minefield. The call for more robust moderation, greater accountability for anonymous bullies, and a re-evaluation of policies that currently silence the very creators the platform is meant to celebrate grows louder. Authors grapple with a system that can, at times, feel designed to hurt them.

In this environment, it is crucial for the literary community to advocate for change. Only through collective action can we hope to create a more supportive and fair platform for all authors.

---

For more insights on this topic, consider reading about the impact of negative reviews on authors and their works.