On SaturdayI receive a lot of review books, but I have never once told lies about the book just because I got a free copy of it. However, some authors seem to feel that if they send you a copy of their book for free, you should give it a positive review.
Do you think reviewers are obligated to put up a good review of a book, even if they don’t like it? Have we come to a point where reviewers *need* to put up disclaimers to (hopefully) save themselves from being harassed by unhappy authors who get negative reviews?
This is so hard. I've received many a review copy over the months that I've run this blog and I'm always uber grateful to the author for being willing to send me a copy of their book. But despite the fact that I got a book for free and the author is looking out for a review of it, I try to stick with the truth about what I feel about books that I read. I think I'd lose a huge amount of credibility as a reviewer if I let my opinions be swayed. If a book's bad, I'll definitely state that and give reasons to support my thoughts but I'll also point out some positive points that the book might have had. I dislike reading reviews that are all gushing or all negativity so I try my hardest to write reviews that have both in them.
I recently read a comment left on a review of a book, by the author himself. In it he seemed rather accusatory and disappointed as the review was a highly negative one. I think that while reviewers need to keep their opinions unbiased, authors need to do their part and accept the criticism that might come with that. I think sometimes authors expect reviews to be good but they need to realize that we can't always give them what they want.
It runs both ways...