Marquise > Status Update

As a reader reviewer, me half assing a review looks like: “Good book, meh ending” 😂

Stephanie’s wrote: "As a reader reviewer, me half assing a review looks like: “Good book, meh ending” 😂"

Hahaha, yeah, sometimes we're just too tired to write a longer one. 😂

But I meant this question in the sense of faking it, not in the sense of how long the review is. You can write a short one liner that is very on point, I admire those people who can say so much in. so few words.

Fakery, though?

Morts. wrote: "I have a terrible memory, if I don’t take notes sometimes mine are the equivalent of phoning in on a paper cup n string"

Not what I mean, Mortsy. <3 Maybe I've not phrased it as I should have, but I mean the question in the sense of faking it.

Ugh, I should've chosen another word.

I mean, like when a book is sent for review to, say, the NYT Review of Books, and it turns out to be a crap book. But the reviewer doesn't feel they're free to say as much so they write a 'review' that's basically like a glorified blurb, describing the contents of the book rather than assessing its quality or accuracy, etc. Basically they're phoning it in in the sense of not expressing a valuation/qualification for the book for X or Y reasons (diplomacy, not to hurt feelings, politeness, the publisher pays a lot, fakery, fear of reprisals, etc.).

Does that example make sense of the question?

Haha oh dear, not the first time I've misunderstood a question :)

(I see what you meant now, requires contemplation).

No worries! My fault for not phrasing it better. :)

I get a vibe when the words don't match the energy I get off the words.

TL *Humaning the Best She Can* wrote: "I get a vibe when the words don't match the energy I get off the words."

I have an idea of what you mean, indeed. Hard to put into words, isn't it? But you recognise that 'vibe' when you see it.

Does it happen with everyone?

Marquise wrote: "TL *Humaning the Best She Can* wrote: "I get a vibe when the words don't match the energy I get off the words."

I have an idea of what you mean, indeed. Hard to put into words, isn't it? But you r..."

In life sometimes too, people would tell me I was overreacting about someone or something and I'd turn out to be right *shrugs(

Yup, that feeling in your gut.. I call it a Knowing.

Not sure, I'm an empath and very intuitive plus neurodivergent so that's why for me personally

Been listening to my gut more and it's been right.

Influencer reviews are the worst. They never saw the plot twist coming, they connected with every single character, the bad guy was the worst bad guy ever written, etc. etc.

Would regular readers ever feel the need to write a review they didn't want to, though? How many people would really 'phone in a review' for a book they didn't care for if they don't have an audience to impress/influence?

I can notice, but I read more 20th century &/or NZ books, as do a lot of my friends. But I stopped doing read-for-reviews myself as I noticed that I was less comfortable giving my honest opinion on them

I’m not that good at recognizing when someone’s phoning it in, I fear. And I’m not going to lie, when a book hasn’t managed to make an impression in either a positive or negative way, it can be noticeable in my review.

Interesting comparison. Which reviews do you tend to like reading more in general and why, if you don’t mind me asking?

Interesting question. When reading reviews I tend to skim for the key points, so I never paid attention to whether they seemed genuine enough.

It's hard to tell for certain (for me). When it's reader reviews, and I'm trying to decide if a book may be something I might be interested in, I will read through reviews a lot. A good book usually will have reviewers pretty passionate, one way or the other. If everyone's review is mediocre, I usually don't waste my time with the book.

Definitely: overusing adjectives, or alternately, reusing the same adjectives. Or just overdoing their reaction, as if every book is going to change the world.

I'm terrible at writing reviews but trying to improve. So I usually notice if I think 'they're phoning it in'. I can't say I can tell every time

If we're talking "faking it", in reader reviews I tend to be very suspicious of compliments in an otherwise negative review. Most commonly this will be something like a "but it's very well written" after complaining about the pacing, the characterization, the handling of POV, the plotting, and so on. And I'm like, well first of all, all of those things are also writing, but when I glance at the sample the prose is in fact terrible and I suspect it's less a case of divergent taste in prose style than the reviewer pulling a canned phrase out of the compliment bucket without thinking about it because they feel compelled to say at least one nice thing about it, cuz you know, the author worked so hard.

An interesting question. I'd say "yes." It's pretty obvious when a reviewer is being too methodical, focusing on form over content. Or if they think the type of writing you see on banner ads is something to strive for. I don't get far with reviews like that.

P.S. #122? Wow! I don't remember when I came in to these, but that's a bunch.

The only target audience for my reviews is me. It is a review to tell my future self, in case I forgot, why I like, not like, and strongly dislike a book. The reason beyond it is just a reminder so I don’t read a book I dislike in the future. I don’t have similar book taste with many people, so the best professional review is not a good indicator if I like reading a book or not.

Does that make sense? Is it phone in review? Is it a common practice? Not sure.

XOX wrote: "The only target audience for my reviews is me. It is a review to tell my future self, in case I forgot, why I like, not like, and strongly dislike a book. The reason beyond it is just a reminder so..."

Love this, and is very similar to how I review things.

The Overflowing Inkwell wrote: "Would regular readers ever feel the need to write a review they didn't want to, though? How many people would really 'phone in a review' for a book they didn't care for if they don't have an audience to impress/influence?"

It's surprising, but yes. There are regular readers that phone it in. The popular ones and the ones that have an established circle are easy to see when they do it, at least for me.

But it's the most diverse group of the three, so . . . those who do it have a motive to do it.

Beth wrote: "An interesting question. I'd say "yes." It's pretty obvious when a reviewer is being too methodical, focusing on form over content.."

Methodical. Form over content.

PERFECT! How do you find a way to be so succinct and on point? I can't be as on-target in so few words like you can.

You know, I have thought of feeding a few reviews of the kind you mention to AI-detecting tools and see what they say, for the funsies. Not that I'm saying reviewers are using AI to write their reviews (thought it wouldn't shock me if there are such people here or elsewhere), but I have a few in mind that write . . . well, like AI did it for them.

Christmas Carol ꧁꧂ wrote: "I can notice, but I read more 20th century &/or NZ books, as do a lot of my friends. But I stopped doing read-for-reviews myself as I noticed that I was less comfortable giving my honest opinion on..."

Which segment do you notice doing it the most? Out of curiosity.

XOX wrote: "The only target audience for my reviews is me. It is a review to tell my future self, in case I forgot, why I like, not like, and strongly dislike a book. The reason beyond it is just a reminder so..."

It does make sense, yeah. I asked that question before (about why and who for you write reviews), and some answered as you did.

But the question is if you notice when others fake it, not what you do with your own reviews.

Beth wrote: ".P.S. #122? Wow! I don't remember when I came in to these, but that's a bunch."

Hehehe! Thank you for your loyalty, Bethsy. <3 Enjoy them whilst they're still on, next year I may be too rich and famous to have time for these. :P

Daniel wrote: "If we're talking "faking it", in reader reviews I tend to be very suspicious of compliments in an otherwise negative review."

Ah, yes . . . the famous "there's typos, the pacing sucks, I couldn't connect with that Joe the Clown character, but here, have my 4 stars anyway" reviews.

No respect for those. It's one thing to list the pros and cons of a book, that's ideal, but this is disingenuous for me.

Thibault wrote: "I’m not that good at recognizing when someone’s phoning it in,."

No? You're usually a good judge of character, Thibu. <3

Morphing_kashi wrote: "Interesting question. When reading reviews I tend to skim for the key points, so I never paid attention to whether they seemed genuine enough."

But wouldn't assessing whether it's genuine or not validate or invalidate the key points you're looking for?

Thibault wrote: "Interesting comparison. Which reviews do you tend to like reading more in general and why, if you don’t mind me asking?"

Good question! I have 20 favourite Goodreads reviewers (I had 9 more, but they became inactive or deleted their accounts), and all have very different reviewing styles. I'd have to have a deeper look at these to see what they have in common that makes them my faves. :)

Debbie wrote: "It's hard to tell for certain (for me)..."

What cinches it for you when you can finally tell? Any clues?

Betsie wrote: "Definitely: overusing adjectives, or alternately, reusing the same adjectives. Or just overdoing their reaction, as if every book is going to change the world."

Bravura storytelling. Lush prose. Unputdownable.

My three nightmares. :D

Patricia wrote: "I'm terrible at writing reviews but trying to improve. So I usually notice if I think 'they're phoning it in'. I can't say I can tell every time"

If someone can tell every single time, they must have superpowers! Or read minds. :D

TL *Humaning the Best She Can* wrote: "Not sure, I'm an empath and very intuitive plus neurodivergent so that's why for me personally."

I believe you. Neurodivergent folks are either the best judges of character, or the worst. Depends on so much which way they swing.

Content summaries are definitely phoning in. Especially when they are by so-called professional reviewers (you will remember a WSJ review I recently sent you!) I tend to ignore anyone I identify as an "influencer" as they are mostly paid shills and totally untrustworthy. Regular readers on GR are all over the map, but I usually cut them some slack unless egregiously bad. I tend to make a few observations and call it quits. I comment on what I find interesting, but rarely bother to write a proper review. Usually when I do, it is because I find the book really bad, possibly offensively so (in the case of shoddy scholarship); then I am likely to cite chapter and verse on their sins. If that is a half-assed approach, then at least I will save money on chairs!

Marquise wrote: "PERFECT! How do you find a way to be so succinct and on point? I can't be as on-target in so few words like you can."

It's embarrassing to copy and paste this, but I did want to thank you for the kind words. Here's hoping I can bring some of what you see to bear on my own nascent project.

Marquise wrote: "XOX wrote: "The only target audience for my reviews is me. It is a review to tell my future self, in case I forgot, why I like, not like, and strongly dislike a book. The reason beyond it is just a..."

When I read professional reviews, as it is so different from my own, I usually consider it as marketing reviews. It is meant to sell books. Many do write reviews on the general direction, without revealing any spoilers. It is like homework, that one could read random pages and get the general feel of the book. The skill is similar and I suspect most reviews were written this way.

Yes. I think it is a professional fake job. It is much harder to review a book that goes against personal feelings.

Fred wrote: "Content summaries are definitely phoning in. Especially when they are by so-called professional reviewers (you will remember a WSJ review I recently sent you!)"

Hehehe! Yes, that was what inspired me for this question. <3

In the BGR (before Goodreads) days when dinosaurs walked the Earth, one of my best friends reviewed professionally for a while, and that gave me a privileged view of the backstage of professional reviewing politics. You were there also, so you can imagine what I felt when I saw the man behind the curtain... So much dirt hidden by that curtain.

Beth wrote: "It's embarrassing to copy and paste this, but I did want to thank you for the kind words. Here's hoping I can bring some of what you see to bear on my own nascent project."

I'm your Huckleberry! <3

XOX wrote: "Yes. I think it is a professional fake job. It is much harder to review a book that goes against personal feelings."

You'd be surprised. :)

Marquise wrote: "Fred wrote: "Content summaries are definitely phoning in. Especially when they are by so-called professional reviewers (you will remember a WSJ review I recently sent you!)"

Hehehe! Yes, that was ..."

The amount of politics and cronyism in professional reviewing is pretty appalling. Then there is plain old laziness.

Marquise, if I understand the question correctly (a big 'if'!), I think there are a few reviewers on Goodreads who fancy themselves as "professional" reviewers, but to a significant extent could be classified as "phone-it-in" reviewers.

Some characteristics of the reviewers to whom I refer:

* They "read" many hundreds of books a year
* Their books seem mostly to be "advance (d) reader" copies, usually Fiction, from multiple book promotion sources such as NetGalley and the like
* They thank their sources fulsomely for providing the books free of charge
* In general their reviews are longer and more effusively descriptive than your average "amateur" GR review, many of them TL:DR, often quoting directly from the "blurb"
* "Phone-it-in" reviews usually expound on the history of an author's prior works, her/his writing skills and their choice of publisher(s)
* The major percentage of their "Ratings" seem to settle on a 'safe' choice of 4-Stars (not going to offend), with an occasional demurring 3-Stars, or a slightly more regular 5-Stars.

Simply a curmudgeon's early morning ramblings...🤩

@Marquise and @Fred,

It's so disappointing to hear about the corruption in the world of professional reviewing. I don't know why I keep hoping to see ethics in people at the top of institutions in the world today.......

Fred wrote: "The amount of politics and cronyism in professional reviewing is pretty appalling. Then there is plain old laziness."

Yeah! I never looked at professional reviewers the same after that experience with my friend. I was young back then and still thought there was integrity in that world.

Debbie wrote: "I don't know why I keep hoping to see ethics in people at the top of institutions..."

It's human nature, unfortunately.

My friend eventually left because she couldn't accept it when they started policing her "tone." That was back when even Amazon didn't censor reviews through "forbidden words" like they do now.

Terence M [on a brief old bloke's hiatus] wrote: "Simply a curmudgeon's early morning ramblings...🤩"

Hahaha! You're a very keen observer, Terry-san, very keen. I have noted the same and a few more patterns, and that's why I have no respect for certain respected reviewers here, but of course I won't say anything. Their free time to do as they wish. :)

Do I even read professional reviews? Would I recognize the professionalism? Maybe. But I feel like I "phone in" too many days themselves to figure all of this out, and I KNOW I phone in some of my own reviews, typically when I suspect the author phoned it in first, then got accepted somehow by a publisher such that I'm left scratching my head.

Yes. When I phone in a review, I get four times as many likes as when I try really hard.