Hacker News Reader

Comment by Someone1234 | Hacker News Reader

> my wife is an author on Amazon and personally knows most of the people who review her books.

So your wife has people she knows leave positive reviews in order to bump her book's review score and you're upset that Fakespot gave it an F due to them being non-organic reviews?

As a consumer it sounds like Fakespot is doing a great job, and exactly what it states on the tin. What your wife is doing is at best dishonest and I'm glad they're exposed as sham reviews. Hopefully these people are putting a disclaimer in the reviews stating the conflict but I highly doubt it.

> Yet FakeSpot, who OP holds up as doing the great job that Amazon is not, is completely wrong.

Except according to your own anecdote they were completely right?

View on HN

My wife though not an author is online friends with more than I even want to think about. In some communities there is a LOT of interaction and loyalty between the authors and fans and the authors are quite active on social media. In addition, for a lot of more niche books (e.g. What 50 Shades of Gray would have remained had it not gone viral) the total number of books sold may be surprisingly small. A lot of those small publisher or self published authors are also the people that 5-10 years ago were posting their writings on community discussion sites (e.g. Bruce Bretthauer's Families military SF series).

So, when an author who's been writing a serial on a discussion board finishes and publishes it, there's a preexisting community of folks who have been reading it all along and are likely to purchase it.

Since some folks are still looking at this, I'll note that a successful SF book from a major publisher may only sell 30-40k copies over its lifespan. I believe it's Prime Palaver #6 where Eric Flint discusses some of this in relation to Baen's Free Library.

With numbers like that, it's not hard to believe that a little-known author may only sell a few thousand copies, many of them to dedicated followers.

See my second edit. I didn't explain it well.

She comes to get to know her best fans after they become fans. They leave honest reviews on their own accord.

This is NOT her asking for random friends and family to leave a positive review. I wasn't clear before.

I'll compare this to Sharon Lee and Steve Miller, authors of the Liaden universe. It's classic space opera and for years was put out by a small publisher. They had a very dedicated and vocal set of fans but didn't get much traction in the broader SF community for quite some time.

D for deception - https://www.fakespot.com/product/fledgling-liaden-universe-b...

What's funny about that particular link is related to my comment about online serials. After their publisher went under they did the original version of Fledgling as a donation based serial on their web site, and I bet a bunch of the oldest reviews for it are from people who donated for it then bought the hardcover when they signed with Baen and it was re-edited and published.

Those would be the loyal readers who go to authors' websites looking for news and new releases.

I would also call this dishonesty, but I wouldn't be too hard on someone for this. Asking someone to not do this is like asking someone to do honest advertisements. It's asking someone to uphold an ethical standard that the majority neglects.

A little bit of moderated moral pushback has its place, but I think the main solution at societal-scale must be structural.

I actually agree, I'd be lying if I wouldn't leave a positive review if my spouse or friend wrote a book. Problem is the person above said "Yet FakeSpot [...] is completely wrong." and criticized Fakespot for pointing out the problematic reviews.

They say that everyone is a hero in their own story, and I think that applies here, you have good personal motivations (help a friend/spouse/family, etc) but ultimately what you're doing is no different from the consumer's perspective than the people that do this stuff professionally. It is just as immoral/misleading/dishonest.

They get upset with a service (Fakespot) which points out the bad behavior because it contrasts with their moral motivations for doing so. I think they need to re-examine right and wrong in this situation, Fakespot may not be the bad guy here.

I mean, I'm just suspicious. Fakespot seems to say the reviews are dishonest, fake, overly positive for.. well, a lot of things, including my favorite pair of headphones.

They're positive because the headphones are utterly fantastic. They beat the crap out of the better-reviewed (on Amazon) Bose version. Which Fakespot gives a better grade to.

Got curious. Could you share the brand and model? Thanks.

Friends & family reviews do break the Amazon TOS, but Amazon has limited means available to detect it. Authors get more leeway for giving out free review copies than other categories do now.

So your wife has people she knows

Not necessarily. See my comment sibling to GP.

> Not necessarily.

They said "she knows these people personally" and I mirrored it as "so your wife has people she knows," so what does "not necessarily" refer to here exactly?

The has part is what I mean. As I said elsewhere, friends want to do this, no solicitation required. I'm sure the author is saddened that this got her in trouble.

So your key take-away and complaint with my post is that they volunteer to bump her book's reviews instead of being expressly asked? I really don't see what difference that makes.

Fakespot was being criticized above because the person claims they misjudged his wife's book reviews while also revealing that his wife was conducting the very behavior Fakespot is designed to detect. Whether the biased reviewers volunteer or were asked is completely besides the point.

Look at it from a consumer's point of view, volunteer, paid, or asked the result is the same. The reviews are at best biased and may even be fake (depending on if they actually read the book, and would have given it less than five stars under any circumstances).

His wife was conducting what behaviour? They said nothing about that at all. I think you're reading bad motives/deeds into the original description of events.

One sense implies that the author is scheming- soliciting reviews to boost her sales- and has a connotation of her agency in dishonest behavior.

The other sense is one of a natural human (but honest) response of friends excited by the celebrity status of one of their own.

I agree fully with your comment on the consumer's point of view, though. As a consumer that point's not lost on me.

See my second edit. I didn't explain it well.

She comes to get to know her best fans. They leave honest reviews on their own accord.

This is NOT her asking for random friends and family to leave a positive review. I wasn't clear before.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com