Again? Srsly?

Every month or so the debate over the ethics of bloggers accepting books from the publisher raises its head. Because not all bloggers choose to participate in book tours there is a perceived disdain for those who do. Some bloggers who do choose to review ARCs feel a bit defensive for no good reason as most of them are only reading books they would have been interested in reading anyway. I tend to operate under the assumption that my fellow bloggers are honest and fair and aren't trading the promise of a free book for a glowing review. I believe it when bloggers promise to give their honest opinion.

Trish at Hey Lady! Whatcha Readin'? posted a lengthy post about where she gets her books, and what percentage of them are from ARCs that addresses some of these issues. Before I made my way over to give my opinion, Amy @ My Friend Amy asked "what about a million reviews of Twilight? or the graveyard book?", which is where I had to open my mouth. If you read my comment there, you already know my opinion, but I felt that it was worthy of a post of it's own, so I am opening the discussion here. Here's what I said at Trish's (with some minor changes to spelling and grammer):

The difference is, Twilight has a million reviews because of word of mouth-
someone liked it so someone else picked it up and reviewed it. With the blog
tours you don’t know that all those people would have picked it up if it weren’t
free from the publisher. I’m not saying they asked for books they didn’t want to
read, but I am saying their reading choice is guided by what was offered to them
from someone with a monetary interest in seeing the book do well. It is not the
same thing as having a good friend offer a book they think you will enjoy, no
matter how honest and unbiased the blogger is. The publisher is paying, in
shipping costs and the cost of the book itself, for that book to appear on X
number of blogs.

I do believe that most* bloggers are sincere in their
review of whatever book it is, but if TRISH gives the book to Amy and AMY loves
it, I usually enjoy that review more, because I know that Trish didn’t have any
other motive for passing it along other than that it was a great book. (Not that
Trish has motives. Just using the two of them as examples since that’s
where I was in the comments.) I believe that bloggers are honest in their
reviews, and there is nothing unethical going on. I just prefer to see a million
reviews of a book that spread by word of mouth, not because the publisher handed
it out like candy. (Yummy candy, but still candy.)

I don't read a lot of ARCs. This is in part because I can't promise to read something on anyone else's schedule (exactly how many challenges have I failed?) and in part because I missed the publisher sign up sheets when they went around (sour grapes? Not really. I'm not upset.) I do read a lot of books that other bloggers loved, including some that were part of blog tours. I feel a bit like a follower and I'm never part of the front line of reviews. I'm ok with this. I like to choose books that have been tested and found to have merit. It's comfortable and relaxing for me. I understand that some people get comfort from being scheduled on their reading, that they are happiest when they know what they are reading next. I don't like to be surprised by a book, I prefer it when someone else previews it for me. Yeah, there are exceptions- favorite authors, series, some plot lines I'll run to the front of the line for, but in general, I like to know it's good before I invest my time.

So why am I posting? Because I wanted to give the view point of someone who doesn't review ARCs. I wanted to try to explain why some reviews are received differently from others. I know I kinda rambled around a bit in that last paragraph, so perhaps my point got lost, but I think you get the idea.


* I say "most" because I DO believe some bloggers just want free books. I don't subscribe to the bloggers I feel this way about, so don't ask who they are.