Jess pointed out in the comments to our entry regarding Amazon reviews for sale that Harriett Klausner has been named one of Time Magazine’s influential persons of the year. While I do like the focus of the profile of Ms. Klausner that discusses the power of online reviewers, I’m not sure I love that the spokesperson for the revolution in online reviewing wouldn’t know plot accuracy if it hit her in the deus ex machina.
Seems the Time Person of the Year is You. Or me. Or both of us. Or all of us who use the internet and make our tastes and preferences known. We who control the information age by participating in the global discussion of romance novels, celebrity gossip, technology, and how cute our cats are when they sleep, we are the People of the Year:
The influence of newspaper and magazine critics is on the wane. People don’t care to be lectured by professionals on what they should read or listen to or see. They’re increasingly likely to pay attention to amateur online reviewers, bloggers and Amazon critics like Klausner. Online critics have a kind of just-plain-folks authenticity that the professionals just can’t match. They’re not fancy. They don’t have an agenda. They just read for fun, the way you do.
Candy and I, we are certainly amateur online reviewers, and we’re definitely bloggers. We don’t write on Amazon (which begs the question: what if Klausner got paid $5 a review? Ka CHING!) but we do write online in multiple locations. Now I wonder how the line between amateur online blog reviewer and professional reviewer will be defined, and how much credibility rests on amateur status versus quality of review.
I’ve read the reviews from Klausner and though I appreciate her effort for reviewing all those books, it does seem that she only gives “rave reviews”. I’ve never read anything that was actually constructive towards the book and most times reading her reviews makes me wince. On the occassion that I did read a book she recommended, I was in no way impressed. It seems she lumps really great novels with mediocre ones and call them the same thing.
Hmmm. It says in the aricle that she does it for free…
Oh, yeah, she does it for free. But if she were hired by the $5-per-review freelance people, that would be a big chunka change.
According to the article, she reads 4-6 books A DAY. No wonder she gets the plot wrong. How could anyone plow through that many words in one day and retain anything?
Oh, I’m honored to have my name tacked up in the beginning of an article at smart bitches. Makes me feel all tingly.
I can understand people wanting to have less erudite reviews of books, because let’s face it the NYT is never going to review the latest in vampire fiction, more fool them.
But amateurs can still write intelligent, well-reasoned reviews that bring up the issues that readers want to know about. Was the plot contrived, did the character action make sense, and did Acheron fix everyone’s problems…again?
The trick is recognizing a well-reasoned review from either fangirl hysteria or brutally vicious (though often entertaining) snark.
I think the confusion about HK’s influence is that her “reviews” are like a plague, infecting droves of book-related sites all over the internet. You can’t help but stumble upon them.
But, in my opinon, not worth the bandwidth they take up.
I don’t like Klausner’s reviews for the simple fact that she does not give negative reviews. She lives in the shiny happy land of “speak no evil” and they all sound alike.
Recap the plot (from the book jacket…yes I checked)
Say a few nice things about the hero and heroine.
Say nice things about the authors previous work.
Tell you she enjoyed it (If she indeed does read 3-5 books a day then how in the world could she do that! It’s like eating at a favorite restaurant and hoovering your food.)
I can’t trust a reviewer loves simply loves everything.
She’s a Reviewer-bot
I have actually passed over books before if the only review I can find is by Klausner.
What irritates me (especially after reading this article) is that she acts as if she’s doing a good, selfless thing, and maybe she even believes it. Unfortunately, I think she does as much harm as good. She posts misleading reviews with many important points completely wrong and posts rave reviews about sucky books, then has the GALL (OK, now I’m getting mad) to speak condescendingly about people who only read one book a week?
I know many people who don’t read often. However, they can at least speak intelligently about a book they claim to have finished!
I have a very difficult time believing she receives no monetary compensation for the reviews.
What this seems to boil down to is: You can please some of the people some of the time, but….
First there’s Mrs. Giggles, who often gives savage, snarky reviews that nevertheless contain many valid points. Readers grin and cheer, and authors take umbrage.
Then there’s HK, who wouldn’t type shit if her keyboard, not to mention many of the books she reviews, were full of it. Readers take umbrage, and authors grin and cheer.
Life is all about balance, Grasshopper.
I ONCE saw a review by the HK and she only gave the book three stars. I think it was in RT. I almost bought the book, figuring it had to be the stinker of all stinkers if Harriet only gave it 3 stars. But I didn’t want to give HK that much power over me.
“I have actually passed over books before if the only review I can find is by Klausner”
I also pass over these books. I will not even read the review by HK. I’ve been burned in the past, having purchased a couple of rubbish books on her recommendation.I think of HK not as a reviewer but as an advertiser.
Klausner’s policy of only reviewing books she likes doesn’t bother me as long as readers are aware of this. The reason I don’t find her credible as a reviewer are the numerous inaccuracies, such as getting vital plot details wrong, mixing up characters names, etc.
Bully for Klausner if she can speed read 4-6 books per day. Given the number of mistakes she makes in her reviews, I’d say she’s somehow misunderstood the idea behind speed reading: to read quickly but to absorb essential information effectively.
SarahT
Wry Hag, speaking for myself—and MANY authors—we don’t grin and cheer at HK’s reviews. She very often gets key plot points wrong, or gives away others that are spoilers. It’s pretty clear, in most of her reviews, she hasn’t absorbed the book.
Positive reviews may make me grin and cheer, but they have to be CORRECT positive reviews.
When authors I know speak of HK, it’s not with grin and cheer, but with moan and groan.
OMG! Nora Roberts!
Now where was I? Oh yes, HK. I never waste my time reading her reviews.
SarahT noted,
A couple of years ago, HK revealed the key plot point in a book that fans had been waiting for a long time. Around the same time, she managed to get the names of the main characters in another two books mixed up. That was the straw that broke this camel’s back as far as her so-called reviews are concerned.Nora Roberts said,
No kidding. Most of the people I know consider HK nothing but a bad joke.