Worst reaction ever to a critical review?

[LoveHistory]

Ladies and gentlemen, the cake has been taken.

[boswellbaxter]

Some of the reviews on her Amazon page today have been quite creative, though some of the commenters don't appear to have understood the reviewers' intent.

[cw gortner]

This was posted on my Facebook page today and I couldn't figure out why. But now that I've read it here, I'm . . . well, astonished.

Some people just don't know how to behave online. Sad but true. It's as if a sense of decency and manners vanishes as soon as that little avatar pops up.

[TonyHays]

You're right, CW. This is just so bizarre as to defy description. I've gotten my share of bad reviews, but it never occurred to me to reply to them, other than to say thanks for looking at my work.

[Michy]

I don't follow this sort of thing much, but whenever I hear on here of another author behaving badly in response to bad reviews, I always come back to the same basic question -- what do they hope to accomplish? The way I see it (with my business-minded slant ) is that an author's ultimate goal is for people to buy their books. When an author goes ballistic, do they think that's going to 1) make people run out and buy their book, or 2) make those who posted negative reviews say, "oh, you're right and I was wrong. Your tantrum has changed my mind and I now realize that your book is not terrible, it's actually quite wonderful."

Of course not. I realize that in some situations negative press is better than no press, but I really don't think that works in these cases. So what is their point?

[TonyHays]

I remember several years ago that Caleb Carr took issue with a reviewer, to the extent, if memory serves, that he took out an ad in a major newspaper to counter the review. I don't remember now exactly what was at issue, and he received some criticism for doing this. But he was already a bestseller, and the hype surrounding the situation didn't really do him any harm. However, the present situation, well ...

[LoveHistory]

Tony, I think the story you shared illustrates an interesting point. You can act almost any way you like if you're already on top, but on the way there you have to behave yourself.

If most people have never heard of you before and the first association is a negative one that will hurt your sales. "Name" authors who have a loyal following don't have the same issue becuase they've already made their first impression.

[Misfit]

[quote=""Michy""]I don't follow this sort of thing much, but whenever I hear on here of another author behaving badly in response to bad reviews, I always come back to the same basic question -- what do they hope to accomplish? The way I see it (with my business-minded slant ) is that an author's ultimate goal is for people to buy their books. When an author goes ballistic, do they think that's going to 1) make people run out and buy their book, or 2) make those who posted negative reviews say, "oh, you're right and I was wrong. Your tantrum has changed my mind and I now realize that your book is not terrible, it's actually quite wonderful."

Of course not. I realize that in some situations negative press is better than no press, but I really don't think that works in these cases. So what is their point?[/quote]

I agree and you wonder why they continue this kind of behavior after all the public lessons in the last few years. Any time I see this kind of stuff they automatically go on my never read list, not even library. I did make an exception to that rule for Candace Sams though

We tried to make a list at Goodreads for authors who behaved badly, but it was taken down, but I've got my own author behaved badly shelf for these little episodes. It gets them on the feeds and usually sparks some fun discussion amongst my friends. I've also recently added another just for venting's sake - author spammed on Amazon

[Michy]

I realize that it must be really hard sometimes to take the high road -- especially when you're an author who's still struggling to get an established fan base, and especially when the critical reviewer is just plain wrong or expresses themself like a Neanderthal. But if an author wants to sell books, I really don't think they have a choice but to respond graciously or not at all. They should vent their hurt/frustration/anger to their family and close friends, their therapist, their support group, whatever. But not to the world via the Internet.

About a year ago I posted a critical review of a book I had read. I wasn't slamming the book or anything, but I pointedly commented on what I felt were many weaknesses. The author responded so graciously that I decided to give her another try and bought her next book. I didn't like it any better, and posted another critical review. She didn't bother to respond this time, and I won't be buying any more of her books. But, hey, at least she got me to buy one more! And at the end of the day, isn't that what it's all about?

[Brenna]

When I first read the blog and the responses, I thought it was some kind of joke. That perhaps the blogger and the writer had teamed up to play "good cop, bad cop" and get more publicity. But now, like Mythica, I feel sorry for her. She obviously hasn't received criticism in the past and I agree that there is something deeper going on than just one bad review. I follow a blog that I think (it might not be) addresses this issue http://lindaproud.wordpress.com/