Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Yeah, yeah, I know
A couple housekeeping bits.
Yes. I know. I've been like that guy or girl who says s/he's going to call and then never calls. I understand this. I'm in school full time and it's a monster full of duties. Blah.
But I do have a review kicking up soon. So there will be something relatively soon.
That said, the Federal Trade Commission is a box full of stupid assholes. Read this and get back to me. What I say below will make tons more sense if you do.
Apparently, if I get any advance reader copies of books, I have to disclose it by law, and since I don't have the dough Kos has for defense attorneys (or any kind of readership sufficient to warrant any attention), I am going to do so, as bitchily as possible obviously.
It's a stupid as fuck rule because the operating assumption in any review industry is that the manufacturer/publisher/whoever is GOING TO PROVIDE FREE COPIES TO REVIEWERS. That is no guarantee of a good review and it's certainly not the way to make a living, reselling advance reader copies.
That's the fucking industry, you idiotic shitfucks. If you don't even know what the fuck you're talking about when you make rules, either learn about it, or don't bother making the fucking rules.
Morons.
That there is the inherent suspicion that bloggers are doing something in some fashion different than any other publishing venture and must abide by special rules is clearly a law that is in violation of equal protection clauses.
So, for now I'm going to add a blanket disclaimer here and to the template until idiotic rules created by mouthbreathing fucktards are dispensed with. I suspect the first time this ethics rule is prosecuted will be the last time, so I'm prepared to be patient even if I'm seething.
And for the record, I'm not even sure how many books I've reviewed I didn't get for free. As in from the library. And I'm sure if you looked, you'd find plenty of negative reviews.
Lastly, when I was a professional reviewer at the Plain Dealer, there was an editorial policy that essentially stood as "if you can't say something nice, say something helpful" and negative book reviews often got shunted to off-days and tucked away in some section where they wouldn't attract much attention. They weren't usually put on the Books page in the Sunday section, so as not to upset advertisers. So the expectation of a positive review is actually far more prevalent in the professional industry than in the amateur one.
I'll take my own personal ethics over that brand any day of the week.
Yes. I know. I've been like that guy or girl who says s/he's going to call and then never calls. I understand this. I'm in school full time and it's a monster full of duties. Blah.
But I do have a review kicking up soon. So there will be something relatively soon.
That said, the Federal Trade Commission is a box full of stupid assholes. Read this and get back to me. What I say below will make tons more sense if you do.
Apparently, if I get any advance reader copies of books, I have to disclose it by law, and since I don't have the dough Kos has for defense attorneys (or any kind of readership sufficient to warrant any attention), I am going to do so, as bitchily as possible obviously.
It's a stupid as fuck rule because the operating assumption in any review industry is that the manufacturer/publisher/whoever is GOING TO PROVIDE FREE COPIES TO REVIEWERS. That is no guarantee of a good review and it's certainly not the way to make a living, reselling advance reader copies.
That's the fucking industry, you idiotic shitfucks. If you don't even know what the fuck you're talking about when you make rules, either learn about it, or don't bother making the fucking rules.
Morons.
That there is the inherent suspicion that bloggers are doing something in some fashion different than any other publishing venture and must abide by special rules is clearly a law that is in violation of equal protection clauses.
So, for now I'm going to add a blanket disclaimer here and to the template until idiotic rules created by mouthbreathing fucktards are dispensed with. I suspect the first time this ethics rule is prosecuted will be the last time, so I'm prepared to be patient even if I'm seething.
And for the record, I'm not even sure how many books I've reviewed I didn't get for free. As in from the library. And I'm sure if you looked, you'd find plenty of negative reviews.
Lastly, when I was a professional reviewer at the Plain Dealer, there was an editorial policy that essentially stood as "if you can't say something nice, say something helpful" and negative book reviews often got shunted to off-days and tucked away in some section where they wouldn't attract much attention. They weren't usually put on the Books page in the Sunday section, so as not to upset advertisers. So the expectation of a positive review is actually far more prevalent in the professional industry than in the amateur one.
I'll take my own personal ethics over that brand any day of the week.
# posted by The Critic @ 10/14/2009 08:28:00 AM
2 Gripe(s)
