Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

Harriet irks me, but, on the whole, I don’t really care. I do notice, though, when her reviews are quoted in book promos or blurbs. Then I lose just a little bit of respect for that book.

Oooohhhh. First to comment. I love fresh snow.

A couple of clarifications…

It occurred to me after I wrote to you that while she’s been known to post 40+ reviews in a day, I don’t think she writes 40 in a day. She just posts them. Still, even if she posts 40+ reviews once a week, we’re still talking major freakazoid territory here. My theory is that she doesn’t read the book; she reads the back cover copy, skims the first and last chapters, and then wings it from there.

Which is wrpng. I agree. I just don’t think it warrants the vitriol it’s inspiring.

Second, I was mostly kidding about not picking on librarians. I don’t think people should leave her alone because she’s a librarian. I just think there’s no call to be that vicious to a woman who didn’t kill anyone’s dog. I used to be really bugged by her, too, but then I heard that she’d had a stroke, and I felt mean and petty getting riled up about it. She’s just a lady out there trying to do something with her time. Who cares if she’s cheating her way to the #1 Amazon Reviewer spot? What is taking her down in such a public and vicious manner going to do for anyone? There are battles worth fighting, and there are times when grace is the better part of valor. If her big moment in the sun is being the #1 Amazon Reviewer, hell, let her have it. She’s not hurting anyone, least of all the authors she reviews. I highly doubt I’ve gained or lost a sale because Harriet Klausner got my hero’s name wrong.

Sometimes, you look the other way, not because you’re not right, but because kindness matters more. I won’t argue that she’s not full of crap, I just don’t think it’s becoming to body tackle the librarian. And I stand by that.

I wrote: “Which is wrpng.”

Of course, that was supposed to be, “Which is wrong.” My apologies. Continue on.

I can read 20 books in a week max, that’s not counting weekends because I rarely get any reading done on weekends, and I couldn’t even imagine that many reviews.

I’m a freaky-fast speed reader, too.  I typically read a book every night between my kids’ bedtime at 9pm and mine at 11.  That being said, there’s no way I could write reviews of that many books a week.  Yeah, she’s more fullashit than the only outhouse in Backwater County, and I dread the day she hits my vampire books on Amazon.  (Damn that Time article for telling me that her ambition is to read all the vampire books ever written!)

Klausner’s been at it for years—she used to post multiple reviews a day on a number of different listservs; I recall a giant flamewar on DOROTHY-L about 9 years ago over whether or not she was one person or a conglomerate—the argument that she’s not just one person isn’t new.  The overseas outsourcing is, however, a new twist.

It’s disrespectful to both the writers and readers of the books in question to turn out such a shoddy product for what seem to be such self-serving goals. She claims to love books and sharing her love of books with other people.  If she really does, why can’t she be bothered to actually read the books in question?  Why the 10+ year emphasis on quantity over quality?

I can read fast as well, but there is no way that I can work, read, raise a family, and write a review.

Also, you almost always catch more flies with honey.  Some need to be slapped and reminded that they want the damn honey, but once they get it, they forget why they were ornery.

Wait, what was I talking about…

I haven’t taken part in any Harriet bashing on the forums, but when I see one of her reviews I mark them as unhelpful - because they’re unhelpful.

I’ve never seen a review of hers that was less than 4 stars, and quite often (if you’re familiar with the authors work) you can tell that she hasn’t read the book.

When I read Amazon reviews I’m looking for a balanced review of the book - this is what worked, this is what didn’t, this is one for the fans - etc. If she’s going to give a book a great review, regardless of whether the book is worth reading then her reviews aren’t helpful.

I first started reading romance books about 2 years ago. Alas I knew nothing about Harriet Klausner and bought quite a few books on her recommendation. Needless to say quite a lot of her 5 stars reads were rubbish.

Have since learned to avoid her reviews (like the plague), however what about other novices to the romance genre.

I don’t know if it’s fair to say that the reviews are lies, but her reviews are more an advertisement for a book rather than a fair and honest critique.

I stopped reading Harriet’s reviews of my books (and others) a long time ago because banging my head on the desk causes a weird ringing in my ears.

Her inaccuracies and spoilers irritate and frustrate, and while I wish—oh, I wish—she’d stop, this gang-banging on her gives me the icks. It feels like a mob kicking an over-eager puppy.

And damn it, I don’t WANT to feel sorry for Harriet. I LIKE being irritated by her. So now I wish the mob would stop.

On another note, why—I always wonder—does anyone want to catch flies?

On another note, why—I always wonder—does anyone want to catch flies?

Ask Willie Mays.

Nora wrote:
Her inaccuracies and spoilers irritate and frustrate, and while I wish—oh, I wish—she’d stop, this gang-banging on her gives me the icks. It feels like a mob kicking an over-eager puppy.

Exactly. The more I thought about what I’ve said about it, the more I realized that none of my reasons were really the reason it bothered me. She’s in her fifties - who cares? I know women in their sixties and seventies who could take on the Harriet mob and leave them huddled and weeping in their wake. She’s a librarian - well, librarians can be stupid, too, and have as much a right to a solid ass-kicking as anyone else. I just have a soft spot for librarians. She had a stroke - well, that may be rumor. She writes like she had a stroke; I can easily see someone jumping to a conclusion and me receiving false information.

But what Nora said is exactly it - it just gives me the icks. And I don’t think the punishment is fitting the crime. By all means, mark her reviews as unhelpful. They are, oh, they are. But the vicious attacks? It’s just mean-spirited.

I just wonder who are these people that they have this kind of nastiness and time?  And yes, I think we’d all much prefer that she doesn’t review our books.  Maybe we should ask our publishers not send them.  But as authors we don’t have any control over who reviews the books, and these trolls are making it look like it’s some sort of Harriet-author conspiracy.  Trust me, that is SO not the case.

Well, that’s even funnier.  The publisher marketing departments aren’t NEARLY organized enough to be involved in a conspiracy.  lol.

I must admit that I’ve never really read an HK review before. And I’ll be damned if I don’t totally get the rabid anti-HK pack’s point. I don’t care enough to get involved, but my brain hurts after reading just two reviews. Urgh.

This is what I have to look forward to. *le sigh*

Yes, Harriet’s reviews are so full of errors that they are laughable…which should be proof that there is no Harriet/publisher/author conspiracy. Who in the world would want the novel’s details to be mangled for a four or five star review?

Even in The Netherlands we know Harriet and we don’t care about her reviews.
Me, I have a list of authors that are autobuys (love you Nora) and I would buy books from those authors even is they just re-write the telephonebook.
I don’t even take the reviews from Romantic Times Book Reviews serious.
Most books are a hit because you know what you buy and sometimes you buy a stinker. Hé, thats life !

And Lani and the others who share her opinion. I think your great.
And I have great respect for the things you say and the way you say it.
Chapeau ladies !

This is so weird. So I read this post yesterday and though, “You know, I’m not going to chime in. I don’t want to trash Harriet because well, you know, she’s old and has had a stroke, and trashing is only fun when you do it with your sister over martinis and youre talking about old boyfriends.”

And then…I’m on the phone this fine spring morn with my crit partner and she says, “Have you seen that great review by Harriet on Amazon?”

“What review?” I ask.

“Your book, stupid!” My cp is mean, but in a good way. “MOON SHADOW!”

So I flip on the computer and there is a HK review of MOON SHADOW, my most recent release, and it’s great!

So I’ve found religion. Or karma. Or something. See, I thought about trashing the old gal, and I didn’t, and what do I get for my great effort? A very nice review!

(Of course I didn’t check the spelling of the review, but at least she got the names of my characters right—that’s nto always the case with her!)

SWAK,
Lucinda

Wow, I had no idea this controversy had even started up again until Alesia mentioned it!

I’m with Nora.  There’s just an icky, mean girl mob aspect to beating up on someone who, despite all those inaccuracies and migraine-causing spoilers, in the great scheme of all that’s happening in the world, is pretty harmless.

Kat, authors very seldom get to choose what goes on our books or in the advertising copy. In a perfect world, all my covers would have Oprah instructing her legions to BUY THIS BOOK!!!  NOW!!!  lol

And the idea of a marketing conspiracy cracks me up.  Either the people suggesting that have never worked with a publisher’s marketing department, or they also believe Harriet was the second gunman on that grassy knoll.  And is single-handedly responsible for global warming.

Believe me, I can’t see any publisher or their marketing and publicity departments boxing up arcs with the cry: Get these to HK, men! We need those mangled, spoiler-filled, inaccurate five-star reviews, stat!!

I’d say she’s on the reviewer list—and it’s as simple (and perhaps unfortunate) as that.

I took a few minutes and went over and read some of the comments on some of her reviews. (Still protecting my eyes and nervous system from the reviews themselves.) Jeez! Yeah, definitely mean, however accurate some of them might be. But they also struck me as over the top in many cases. And written by some who enjoyed trashing genre books along with HK. People, it was claimed, should be reading Dickens and GWTW, etc, not romance and vampire books.

So it’s baby, bathwater and the whole tub getting tossed out.

Anyway.

Hi, JoAnn, long time no see!

Harriet’s reviews are often misspelled, odd to the point of head-scratching, but I’d rather have her review up than some of the trash-talkers who delight in ripping books to shreds just because of something they disagreed with. 

However, for some self-appointed Reviewer Posse to go around stalking her on Amazon, acting like they’re the gods’ gift to critics, is beyond the pale.  Their comments are so nasty it leads me to wonder just how screwed up their lives are, to make them so angry. 

It’s just a shopping site, folks!  It’s online, not your local bookstore.  It’s one person writing reviews—who gives a damn?  Unless, of course, somebody’s miffed they don’t have the #1 reviewer label, which is rather pathetic to think about.

And I don’t notice them going after the really NASTY inaccurate reviewers. 

Harriet’s misspelled my character names, left words out of sentences, and missed the point on some of the reviews she’s given my books, yes.  But I’ve never seen ehr belittle anyone the way her stalker posse has, and that’s rather telling of character.

Yasmine

I’m of the mind, when I see her reviews, that the book isn’t as good as I was hoping it would be.  If HK is reading it and smacking a review up then it just might not interest me.

I know, I know, I shouldn’t let reviewers influence me but it’s true.  I see blurbs like “Like Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter!” and I steer clear.  I read reviews by Klausner and suddenly the book is less appealing.

And that could hurt the author.

I guess people just want some honesty instead of feeling like they are being fed bullshit by a person.  Which is understandable.

“I guess people just want some honesty instead of feeling like they are being fed bullshit by a person.  Which is understandable.”

I think we all feel that way, Flo, about news, about movies, about anything.  Trouble is, all reviews are subjective—all reviews are based on the reviewer’s bias and therefore, none can be truly objective and clear.  One person’s masterpiece is another person’s trash.

Hey Nora, it has been a while. . . BAM in Birmingham last spring, I think. 

As for the HK stalker reviewer posse —and wow, I just checked, and you’re right, some of them are vicious!— perhaps they need to get a life.  Or better yet, curl up with a nice genre book.

Why is it such a big deal?  Are we not all allowed our opinions?  And as far as I know you can post an opinion on Amazon about a book.  It seems everyone is wasting a ton of energy on something that is clearly insignificant.

“Trouble is, all reviews are subjective—all reviews are based on the reviewer’s bias and therefore, none can be truly objective and clear.  One person’s masterpiece is another person’s trash.”

I think the trick is to try and find a reviewer whose views mesh with your own.

“Why is it such a big deal?  Are we not all allowed our opinions?  And as far as I know you can post an opinion on Amazon about a book.”

I don’t think it’s a big deal, more an annoyance, like the splinter in your finger you just can’t seem to get out, or the dripping tap you can’t turn off no matter HOW tightly you turn it. For some people the annoyance gets so much that they just crack - hence the backlash.

The only problem I have is that people may be buying based on her reviews, and as someone has pointed out, they are more (sometimes inaccurate) summaries with spoilers.

I write reviews on RN in The Netherlands. I never write a review about a book I did not read. Of course not ! But I also never write about a book I don’t like.
I think a reviewer has to realise what the impact of a bad review can be.
The problem is that I am the only one in The Netherlands and Belgium with a Dutch review website on English Romance Novels. Weird but true. And people believe what I write and that gives a person some power and you have to be very carefull with power. But they also read between the lines. I am a big fan of Nora and my Dutch websites has a lot of information about her books and even about Dutch translations. So if I do not write about one of her new books (as I did not do about the Circle Trilogy) they just know that I did not like it.
But I refuse to trash it. Who am I to do that? Show some respect for an author!
I think its my duty as a reviewer of romance novels to get people to read and love the genre. Not to chase them away.

I hope Harriet stays. I don’t care what she writes. I just hope she doesn’t hurt people and that people stop hurting her.

However, for some self-appointed Reviewer Posse to go around stalking her on Amazon, acting like they’re the gods’ gift to critics, is beyond the pale.  Their comments are so nasty it leads me to wonder just how screwed up their lives are, to make them so angry.

I wonder that about a lot of what goes on these days in Internet interactions.  Seriously.  Because the Klausner-killers are so concentrated and their target so seemingly benign, it’s easier to identify, but I think there’s a lot of road-rage type stuff that goes on in exchanges that similarly don’t seem to warrant it. 

In my experience, when people are honestly offended by something they view as important, they express that outrage or offense differently than what comes across in those Klausner-comments.  I can see many reasons to be offended at what Klausner represents of genre fiction “reviewing”—sloppy craftsmanship, absence of critical evaluation, obliviousness to accuracy—but if you really care about all that stuff, are those the comments you’re going to make?  Like those folks are making genre fiction look *better* via those bilious streams?

” think there’s a lot of road-rage type stuff that goes on in exchanges that similarly don’t seem to warrant it…”

Robin, I totally agree.  I’ve noticed I’m getting so weary of dealing with things on the net because of the rudeness I see.  I’ve met a lot of wonderful people—readers, friends, other authors—on the net and I’m very grateful for those opportunities, but I’ve also seen so much anger and crudeness.  I’ve been cyberstalked in the past, my work’s been trashed on blogs (and I’m not just talking a balanced review—I mean trashed)...I’ve seen other authors torn apart. 

And it goes beyond the writing community—it’s net-wide.  Even on fun forums, I’ve seen a lot of carnage.

People can by anonymous on the net, they can act out their aggression without getting called on it—without ramifications.  And some do.

It makes me want to retreat sometimes.  I have no problem with speaking my mind, but I DO have a problem with vicious attacks and flamewars.  I don’t know if anything can be done about it, but the whole issue’s disillusioned me a lot about how thin the veneer of civility actually can be with some folks.

Yasmine

Help! I’ve been Klausnered!

So Harriet just posted a great review on Amazon about my latest release, MOON SHADOW (which has been getting great reviews everywhere, including RT—so don’t avoid it just because she liked it!) ((See my earlier post for now-regretted smugness…)

Now people are slamming her review by slamming my book! Wait! My book is collateral damage! I don’t think the gal reviewing the review (???) even READ my book!

Just in case you can’t hear it, I am laughing. I’m laughing so hard that tears are running down my face. Theyre going to jam my keyboard. Maybe soon I’ll be abke to write a review of the review of the review!

SWAK,
Lucinda

I’ve been cyberstalked in the past, my work’s been trashed on blogs (and I’m not just talking a balanced review—I mean trashed)...I’ve seen other authors torn apart.

It happens between readers, too, Yasmine.  I’m sure anonymity has *something* to do with it, but you don’t see every angry or frustrated person letting loose on the Internet (and seriously, would most of it seem more palatable delivered face to face?).  I don’t know what’s up with all the boil-overs, but a lot of it looks to me like plain old-fashioned bullying, especially when it’s persistent. I’ve seen a number of people say that they’re hesitant about commenting on blogs, etc. because they don’t want to subject themselves to ridicule and mean comments.  And that’s really too bad, IMO, because I’d love to see more reader involvement in these venues.  I don’t even see it as a honey/vinegar dilemma, because we all have a slightly different palate, and lots of people have a taste for good, strong vinegar.  For me, at least, it’s the side of hostility that creates the sour note.

Candy:  there’s another difference, IMO, which has to do with *intent*.  When someone gets authentically pissed off about something that matters to them, and they can discern the difference between what they’re pissed off about and everything else that might pop up before their eyes, it creates a whole different ranting vibe. 

This is a particularly interesting conversation along side today’s RTB post, in which Barbara Samuel wonders aloud why more readers don’t take the RITA seriously.  Comparisons between the RITA and the Oscars and the Pulitzer are being forwarded.  At least no one’s proposed the Nobel prize in literature yet, else my head might explode right there online.

I don’t take the RITAs seriously because by and large, it doesn’t award excellence in writing, it awards popularity.

I’m waiting to be flayed over at RTB for making the long version of this point.

IMO, until the Romance community welcomes critique of craftsmanship as one of its cultural values, “excellence” won’t have much meaning when it comes to evaluating outstanding contributions to the genre.  And unfortunately, Samuel made the Pulitzer comparison.  That readers don’t take the RITA seriously isn’t, IMO, the worst thing in the world, even if it doesn’t reflect a universal desire for better written books.

I wouldn’t compare the Ritas to Pulitzer’s. I would compare them to the Oscars in that movies are an entertainment industry, Romance Novels are an entertainment industry, and each are industry awards.

And they’re both gold statues.

I can’t see them as popularity contests—not only because I’ve won several and I’d have a very hard time thinking the books that won didn’t earn it. Obviously. But also because I’ve been a Rita judge for years. The authors’ popularity means nothing to me during the judging process. It’s all about the books. I can’t speak for all the judges, of course, but those I know who’ve judged take the process very seriously.

As to if readers should get juiced up about them, I’d say that’s up to the reader.

I wouldn’t compare the Ritas to Pulitzer’s. I would compare them to the Oscars in that movies are an entertainment industry, Romance Novels are an entertainment industry, and each are industry awards.

True enough.  One big difference I see is that in the film industry, honest and rigorous critique is both expected and valued within the community, whereas it’s not in Romance.  So I think the context for judging excellence is substantively different at the outset.

My theory is that HK’s reviews are amalgamations of back cover copy, first chapters, and reviews written by other people. Her review of my first book quotes practically word for word from the reviews in the trade journals, occasionally switching in a synonym or mangling the sentence structure.

I don’t think about industry v art as being held to different standards. This is too analytical for me. And I don’t think I could being to figure it. I can already feel my head start to ache.

I don’t think about that stuff, or about the Ritas, for that matter when I’m working. I’m focused on the work. The work is my art, my craft, my job, and hopefully falls nicely into my industry. But it’s got to be all about the story.

The Ritas are an industry award, judged by members of the industry. It’s an important award for those inside that industry. I certainly value mine, and I—of course—don’t think I own any for mediocre work. But, after all, why would I? My ego’s healthy enough.

I can only say, on a personal basis, that I’ve judged books by writers whose names I recognized, and by writers whose names I didn’t. Recognition never factored into the score I gave the book.

In fact out of the seven I judged this year, my favorite and the one which earned the highest marks from me, was from a writer I’d never read before, or heard of. I think, according to the inside page, it was her second or third book.

I don’t know about the Kleypas book as a for instance, and whether Dreaming Of You was entered, made the finals, what books—if it was and did—it was against that year. These things play a big part. As I imagine while you found that title particularly good, others (readers and judges) found her Rita winner a wonderful book.

Years ago, I worked in a bookstore devoted to mysteries, where customers relied quite heavily on our recommendations and on written reviews. When asked, I would have to say truthfully that a glowing Harriet Klausner review of any book was a guarantee of absolutely nothing; the woman has never met a book she didn’t like. While the unsuspecting reader may think they’d just been shown the way to the best book evah, the reality was too frequently something else.

A book could be bad, but you’d never hear it from HK. A book could honestly be good, but do you trust that this time she got it right? And that one-in-a-million great book, how could you tell when all of her reviews follow the same formula and sound nearly identical? Hers are non-critical summaries and spoiler-revealing contributions, but by no stretch are they remotely reviews.

Obviously we are all responsible for our own reading experience, for consulting critical sources we respect, a la the SBs, but crowning her Amazon’s #1 Reviewer lends weight and authority to her words, which is neither realistic or deserved. Is it sufficient to simply ignore her as I did the fangirl who squealed that one of my favorite paranormal books should be awarded the Pulitzer? If everyone knows that HK’s blurbs are too often meaningless (let alone wrong) then what is the point of giving her greater status than the fangirl?

Having said all this, however, in no way does Harriet Klausner deserve the humiliation and vilification that are barreling in her direction.

I hate HK reviews. In part because when I first discovered the rating system at Amazon.com, her glowing reviews suckered me (and how many others) into purchasing some real stinkers. 

Like some others above, now a glowing HK review makes me hesitate to purchase.  IN RESPONSE to my frustration, I always make the effort to check the box “no, this review was not helpful.” In the hopes tha Amazon will encourage her to stop the spamming.  I see no reason to viciously attack the woman.

Nora…yeah, but you’r the exception to most of the rules!

I love her.  Besides my grandmother’s, hers is the only civil review on amazon.com for my second book. ^_^

I generally ignore her reviews, which are usually inaccurate anyway.

I saw this weird “HK is the head of a sekrit cabal with Amazon and the publishing industry” stuff in some comments not too long ago at Amazon and it made me laugh and reminded me of that scene in So I Married and Ax Murderer when Mike Meyers plays his Scottish father who’s ranting about “The Pentaverrrrate”

I suppose if we can’t find other conspiracies we have a need to create one with HK at the helm and sekrit code words and stuff between Amazon and the publishers.

Apparently Colonel Sanders was involved before he went tits up.

Amazon is a very weird community.  Every time some server burps and posts the real names of the people reviewing, reputations explode along with the heads of people who got six horrible reviews all from their very best friend who was harboring a grievance along with the six glowing reviews they posted for themselves . . .

So into this community of inaccurate, backbiting, sychophantic reviewers comes Harriet, who’s been a joke for as long as I’ve been in romance (when you were all wee children) and suddenly people are outraged.  Because all the other Amazon reviews are so pure?  Nah.  They just all want to be the number one reviewer and can’t as long as Harriet is posting forty a week.  It’s a power struggle and Harriet brought it on herself when she cheated to keep the crown (nobody reads forty books a week and then writes reviews of all of them).  She wanted to be queen and the peasants revolted.  And if you figure you’re talking about people who actually care passionately about being the number one reviewer on Amazon, you have to consider that the average member of that subset is not going to be wound too tight, so it’s not surprising that when the peasants revolted, they were revolting.

You make a power grab, somebody’s going to go for your fingers. 

I think this is a great example of why internet communities, like real communities, need to be policed.  Somebody needs to be standing over these idiots saying, “You know, your language is out of line; criticize the act/work, not the person.”  But the same somebody should also have said, “Harriet?  Who are you kidding?  Start doing real reviews or we’re going to bar you.”  Amazon doesn’t have the time or interest to do it, so their reviews are always suspect and there’s a fair amount of nastiness on there way beyond Harriet’s Day of Reckoning.

Also, Rich?  The next time you imply that women in their fifties can’t kick butt and take names, I’m coming for you.  I don’t care if you are twenty years younger that I am, I can take you.  Be afraid.

Don’t think I’m going to go look at the reviews of reviews—they sound nasty and spiteful, from what I’ve heard.

But I’d take issue with the idea that HK’s reviews are harmless. I’ve seen a friend beg for people to go and write reviews to push Klausner’s 5 star review of his book down the page, because her review was so inaccurate it was likely to attract people who wouldn’t like the book when they read it, and repel people who would. Sub-genre can be a funny thing in science fiction, and Klausner had given a completely false impression of who the book was likely to appeal to.  I doubt he’s the only one that’s happened to.

(shaking head) I knew Crusie was going to come after me for that one.

Look - in one of my comments on this very post I said, and I quote:

Exactly. The more I thought about what I’ve said about it, the more I realized that none of my reasons were really the reason it bothered me. She’s in her fifties - who cares? I know women in their sixties and seventies who could take on the Harriet mob and leave them huddled and weeping in their wake.

It was the stroke and the fact that HK is obviously enfeebled, not her age, that made me come out in her defense. When I read what I’d written to Sarah - which I’d told her to post - I realized that it didn’t represent what I really believe, which is that women in their fifties are just getting started. One of the women I admire most in the world is my husband’s grandmother, who’s 86 as of this writing, and who I would not want to meet in a dark alley. So, mea culpa, I didn’t mean it, and Crusie - you could kick my ass any day and twice on Sundays. :)

And to Candy, who didn’t see the difference between what the SBs do and what the evil posse is doing, there are a few very important differences:

1. Your comments are not personal. If any of those authors wrote a kick-ass book, you’d be the first to say so.

2. You don’t hunt the author down and stalk her where she works.

3. You’re smart. And pretty. And I’m not just saying that because I just sent Sarah my latest book.

Smooches to all, and to all… a good night.

Well, I just may as well put “ditto” after Jenny’s comment.  (Hey, Jenny!)

Especially the part about the internet policing since, coincidentally I (or the video creator, I’m not sure which) just received an implied death threat on COS’s posting of my most recent book video on You Tube.  Apparently the comment has to stay up until the authorities COS turned it over to do whatever they’re going to do, but it definitely wasn’t fun to discover out there.

Well I finally worked out how to read the comments at Amazon, LOL - yep I am a technophobe.

And they left me feeling yucky, no matter if HK is an incompetent reviewer the comments are just not nice.

I would love to know how Amazon’s ranking system works and whether or not the unhelpful votes count as minuses.

I was disappointed to see that HK had reviewed Warlord by Elizabeth Vaughn, the Warprize trilogy is one that I personally love and her review does it no justice. And neither do the sarky comments from the people reviewing the review. (As is the case on a lot of the other comments. Hugs to Lucinda as there is something of a flamewar going on in the comments to the review of her book.)

There was some discussion here, about how a reviewer should review a book. And I think if you look at Janes (DearAuthor.com) Amazon review of Warlord and compare it to HK’s it highlights how bad HK’s review is.

I’m just curious about why in the effing hell Amazon, or any other site that relies on readers’ and writers’ trust, would want to post all this reputedly inaccurate, semiliterate, and misleading bullshit.  Makes no sense to me.  None at all.

I disagree that we can’t be mean to HK.  I totally think we can, and I understand why people are.  I wish someone would ban her/it from Amazon- her reviews are not harmless, and its not ok to write piss-poor reviews from the safety of your computer without even reading the book!  Why should I feel sorry for her?  Implying we can’t hate her because she is 50 is dumb.  Do we think that women over 50 can do whatever they want because we think they are too dumb/harmless/oh, look at the lady, ladies are adorible.  I mean, 50+ women should be held to the same standards as everyone else.

Ha- my verification word- trouble33.

I missed this earlier.  I doubt if you are seeing the reviewers who are in the top ten.  Amazon used to have a reviewer board but I can’t find it now, and the people who were directly behind HK were clever, dedicated people who tried to post thoughtful and at times witty reviews. Of course even the top 10 know they will never catch up with Harriet.  Harriet has 13502 reviews, #2 has 6666 and #3 has 3013. 

I sincerely doubt if it is any of the people near her in rank who are birddogging her. 

Amazon has a habit of putting up features that sound like they might be cool but end up being misused.  There was one where readers could recommend books they enjoyed similar to the listed books.  Some christian author’s fans went through and either used a script or hand listed one book as a recommendation on thousands of pages.

Of course before the comment section came into being, reviewers were not allowed to refer to other reviews except in the most eliptical way so it could be this is the release of a lot of frustration.

Then there are the web legends such as the review that has 8437 positive votes.  What is not to love about John E. Frasisco’s geek review of The Story of Ping (children’s book about a duck). “Using deft allegory, the authors have provided an insightful and intuitive explanation of one of Unix’s most venerable networking utilities. Even more stunning is that they were clearly working with a very early beta of the program, as their book first appeared in 1933, years (decades!) before the operating system and network infrastructure were finalized.

“The book describes networking in terms even a child could understand, choosing to anthropomorphize the underlying packet structure. The ping packet is described as a duck, who, with other packets (more ducks), spends a certain period of time on the host machine (the wise-eyed boat). At the same time each day (I suspect this is scheduled under cron), the little packets (ducks) exit the host (boat) by way of a bridge (a bridge). From the bridge, the packets travel onto the internet (here embodied by the Yangtze River).”

Jen wrote:
I disagree that we can’t be mean to HK.  I totally think we can, and I understand why people are.

I’m not saying you can’t be mean to her. This is America. You can do anything. I’m saying that being this mean is just… mean. I’m saying you shouldn’t, because it’s just… mean. You don’t pick on someone weaker than you, and if you’ve got half a brain, then Harriet’s weaker than you.

Oh, crap. Was that mean? :)

I wish someone would ban her/it from Amazon- her reviews are not harmless, and its not ok to write piss-poor reviews from the safety of your computer without even reading the book!

Her reviews - the ones without spoilers - are harmless. No one gives a crap. Internet sales account for something like 4% of all book sales. Of the readers who buy regularly online, I’d wager most of them look at all the reviews as a whole, rather than just Harriet’s. And people who refuse to buy books because Harriet has reviewed them will have to stick with periodicals, methinks.

Now, the reviews with spoilers - those are a problem. But the author can have them removed with a quick e-mail to Amazon or Barnes and Noble. And if the online purveyors find that a lot of their time is taken up removing those reviews, they might take a look at that.

Why should I feel sorry for her?  Implying we can’t hate her because she is 50 is dumb.

Jeez. How many times do I have to clarify this? I said in the comments that I took the age thing back. The reasone we shouldn’t pick on her because she’s a librarian. Yikes, people. Get with the program. :)

Seriously, mostly I was kidding about that stuff. It’s the fact that she’s obviously enfeebled, has very little power and influence, and basically the only thing she has in her life is this one thing. She’s the #1 Amazon Reviewer. So… let her have it. Vote that she’s not helpful, sure. But the nasty vitriol out there is just uncalled for, and I stand by that.

Being vicious to someone who is weaker than you speaks only to your character, not theirs. This is icky because these people are publicly outing themselves as vicious, nasty people, and if I wanted to see that, I’d watch Jerry Springer.

I review on Amazon. Harriet Klausner is one of the many whimsical topics that have come up on the reviewer discussion board. Real? Machine? A team of 20 readers?

Her books aren’t my style, but I believe she’s real, and reading as she says. Those chasing after her in bitterness, strangely, validate her, as I see it. There actually are people going out of their way to, point blank, give her negative votes, without reading her review. Silly, I know, but the trite way some people live is amusing.

You might enjoy a parody I did of her reviewing, paired with #2 reviewer, Lawrance Barnabo.

Stairway to Amazon (Or, the Battle of Lawrance and Harriet)

Brockeimia - The Absurd World of Brockeim
http://brockeim.blogspot.com/2007/02/stairway-to-amazon-or-battle-of.html

I don’t necessarily approve of the anti-Harriet campaign, but I disagree that she’s harmless. I’m a book reviewer and what she does debases my profession.