Today’s discussion is somewhat controversial.  It has to do with Goodreads and the many books that have one-star ratings when the book is still in the editing phase, no ARCs are out and the book hasn’t even been published yet.  While I understand why some people do this, especially with books that may be problematic/harmful I think there are better ways of going about things.  There are ways to comment on Goodreads without rating a book, there are also other ways like emailing the publisher directly.  Yes, if a book is possibly problematic/harmful I want to know about it, I want to know what makes the book problematic/harmful.  I also want to know how and why it is in an honest way, meaning from people who have read the book.

I never rate or review books that I haven’t read, I feel like it is a dishonest practice.  I have a responsibility as a reviewer, to be honest.  I know that this topic is iffy, and I do see both sides, I just wanted to voice my opinion.

Here are some other blog posts that I have found about this topic:





13 thoughts on “#FakeRatings

  1. Pingback: A CUPPA WITH A BOOK BLOGGER | INSIDE MY MINDS - Read and Seek

  2. If you think for one second, that I am trying to take the voices of marginalized people away you are mistaken. I would never take away the voices of marginalized people, and I take offense to you saying that I was doing that with this post. I am not the first person to bring up the issue of “fake ratings” on Goodreads.

    • This post has nothing to do with marginalized people at all. It’s something that I have seen even from people who aren’t marginalized. It’s an issue that has been an issue for a while, even before marginalized people started speaking out. So for you to still insinuate that I’m want to take away the voices of the marginalized is off base.

  3. I agree! I get where people are coming from, but as reviewers, we should be taking our self-made jobs seriously (and those of us who get ARCs are mainly reviewers). I don’t like to cast aspersions unless I know exactly what I’m talking about.

  4. I kind of see both sides here. I don’t like when ratings are available for books that haven’t been published yet (although I tend to see ones with 4 and 5 star ratings months before publication). However, if someone gets an early copy and it is harmful to their identity then, in their opinion, it probably does deserve the low rating that they gave it. I’ve also seen a lot of people say that they can’t give a full review until the book has been released so that may also have something to do with it.

    • Exactly, it’s okay to rate and review ARCs and early copies as the raters/reviewers see fit. That’s what ARCs and early copies are there for to give people an early heads up about content that may be harmful to certain groups of people. It’s books that aren’t even published yet, are still going through editing, that doesn’t have ARCs or early copies that this is a problem with. I too have seen 4 or 5-star ratings, but those are to counter the one-star ratings.

  5. This pisses me off to no end. I think you shouldn’t even review a book if you haven’t read it. It’s a pet peeve of mine. If you DNF a book, give it 0 stars, because YOU DIDN’T READ IT.
    It just bugs me…we are just supposed to listen to what others say and just rate accordingly? I’m sure people will disagree with me, but you can always comment without rating.

    • I give 0 stars to books I DNF, but I still review what I read and give my reasons for not finishing. And I definitely agree with you about commenting without rating.

Comments are closed.