For weekly "Inspiration" by email send 
New Media Reviews
When I saw Jason Kottke's post on new rules for reviewing, I thought FTC. No. He has noticed something I thought was my personal problem: reviewing based on the quality of the media product. If the TOC in an ebook isn't linked to the chapter titles, the book falls in my estimation. If I find too many typos or outright errors in the printing--or any of a dozen other irritations--I may pan the product.
Kottke's point is that we are more often turning a blind eye and ear to the content. It's all about format. I disagree with him, though, that purchasers pay no attention to, say, the story and buy a format. If you have a Kindle, do you buy books just because they are in the Kindle Store? It's not like climbing a mountain just because it's there.
If I focus on the quality of the product, it's because I didn't find glaring errors in the content or the story didn't disappoint. I'm reading a hard cover of short stories right now. The book is nice, the cover attractive. The heft and feel of the product is pleasant. The stories suck. I thought the same of this author's last novel. She writes depressing tales of disillusionment and despair that simply peter out. You're glad to reach the end, emotionally exhausted from waiting for something good to happen.
However, rather than waste my time and readers', I probably will skip reviewing this book I didn't want to receive in the first place. Why give more free publicity to something just to tell you don't bother buying it? I'd rather tell you to not bother buying this particular edition of a useful/pleasing book. Just because my reviews appear mostly in "new media" (in digital format) doesn't mean I'm not a "traditional" reviewer, either. I'd say or do the same if my reviews appeared in print. Listen to this article
Kottke's point is that we are more often turning a blind eye and ear to the content. It's all about format. I disagree with him, though, that purchasers pay no attention to, say, the story and buy a format. If you have a Kindle, do you buy books just because they are in the Kindle Store? It's not like climbing a mountain just because it's there.
If I focus on the quality of the product, it's because I didn't find glaring errors in the content or the story didn't disappoint. I'm reading a hard cover of short stories right now. The book is nice, the cover attractive. The heft and feel of the product is pleasant. The stories suck. I thought the same of this author's last novel. She writes depressing tales of disillusionment and despair that simply peter out. You're glad to reach the end, emotionally exhausted from waiting for something good to happen.
However, rather than waste my time and readers', I probably will skip reviewing this book I didn't want to receive in the first place. Why give more free publicity to something just to tell you don't bother buying it? I'd rather tell you to not bother buying this particular edition of a useful/pleasing book. Just because my reviews appear mostly in "new media" (in digital format) doesn't mean I'm not a "traditional" reviewer, either. I'd say or do the same if my reviews appeared in print. Listen to this article
posted by Georganna Hancock M.S. | 11:28 AM
1 Comments:
I've noticed the same trend. I still think the story is paramount. Typos can ruin a story, so that, to me, is part-and-parcel of the story review itself. The media? Secondary to the point of being not worth mentioning. What if I'm reading it on a reader and the makers of the reader have lousy screens? Is that the fault of the author? What if the digital version is distributed by fools who have incoherent idiots reading the material? Only then do I think it really matters to the story because if you can't hear it, you can't enjoy it.
Post a Comment
<< Home