Interesting article here on why you shouldn't respond to online reviews

[ImperialBlether]

An author, Kathleen Hale, was having her first book published and it was offered to online bloggers to review first. Big mistake.

It was in The Guardian today.

I read this article a couple of days ago and I was mostly sorry for the poor blogger who was stalked by this mad, obsessed author. This goes way beyond those public author meltdowns you see now and then. Surely it's verging on criminal?

Really? The blogger seemed to feel very powerful - a typical keyboard warrior. I can see why the author felt like she was driven mad by it. She should have taken note of the initial advice, not to respond at all.

Although of course, it's also out of order that the blogger stole someone else's photos to create a fake online i.d.

I've had a few really bad reviews and it's a horrible feeling - I nearly had to have my hands tied behind my back to stop me responding. That article helped, actually, to show that a response is what they're often wanting. I'm glad I managed to control myself!

I think it just makes the author sound like a loon. Imagine if it was a male author going to the blogger's house! I am amazed the Guardian published it.

Imperial, I know what you mean - it's a definite Awful Warning to hold our tongues and deal with it in private.

(Anyone want to compare their worstest reviews ever? Mine just said, Worst book I've read so far." I especially liked that he left open the possibility that one day he might find another book he hated even more than mine.)

Oh mine said that, too! Here it is:

"The worst book I can remember reading. No idea how it has so many good reviews. Kept hoping it would get better but it didn't . Unvelievable plot and desperately boring characters. Dont waste your time and money on this."

The errors in the review are the reviewer's.

Schmalex, I think she did that because of the tv programme Catfish. She certainly put herself in a difficult situation, never mind the blogger.

Actualy, she wasn't Catfished, was she? Catfishers entice people into a fictitious relationship using a fake online persona. The blogger was using a fake i.d., but she wasn't seeking a fake relationship. She just reviewed a book, unfavourably.

She did more than that though, didn't she? She had quite a bit of influence. Everything about her was fake, everything she said.

She does seem to have made up an extensive online persona, I agree. But I don't know, Hale's response just seems so terrifyingly out of proportion. It's not as if she's some unknown self published author who was savaged by a well known critic - she had a big publisher behind her.

Jezebel has a great article with a rather scary additional incident in it. Link should be here

jezebel.com/author-stalks-anonymous-blogger-who-gave-her-a-1-star-r-1648545005

It has scary implications for book bloggers though. What if the book actually wasn't very good and deserved a 1 star review? Should bloggers be fearful of reviewing in case a lunatic turns up on their doorstep?

Just read that Jezebel link. Terrifying!

I don't think normal ethical book bloggers should worry based on that story. The blogger seems to have done more than just hate a book and review it badly - she seems to have objected to other people liking it, and also accused it of things that aren't in the book.

Goodness knows how I'll cope when I start getting reviews but I can be fairly sure I won't go to anyone's house.