I've been thinking about this for quite a long time, but I haven't been brave enough or focused enough to write about it. Today I'm going to try. If you're reading this, I decided to go ahead and post.
So the internet is changing everything, and quickly. Other watershed moments in technological history have also brought about big changes, sure. But the full impact of the printing press took a couple decades to really be felt, while the internet tossed everything into the air straight away -- and keeps tossing.
For an author the internet is mostly a blessing. Research, communication with agent and editors, marketing, all those things are much easier. Keeping in touch with readers is now possible in ways never even imagined twenty years ago. This is good.
The democratic nature of the internet means that anybody with the time, interest and access can become active in the community of readers and writers. Also good. The vibrancy and creativity of the fanfiction communities is a direct result of the internet. The many people with stories to tell and no other way to get them out there have created in ezines and ebooks. And people are writing about the books they read, and making their thoughts public for response and discussion.
It really is all good.
But with all this access and communication come complications. The ability to state an opinion quickly to a large audience has got more than one person into a tricky spot. Various romance authors could tell you more about this from personal experience. A person takes a stand, ruffles feathers, and the debate goes into hyperdrive. With the help of the internet, authors are having to be as careful as actors about the statements they make publically -- if they worry about offending and driving off readers. Tom Cruise is learning the hard way that trumpeting his opinions on how new mothers should deal with post partum depression in a condescending and mean spirited way hurts his reputation and ticket sales. Some authors have offended readers by making public their frustrations about ARCs being sold on ebay.
An author sets up a website, maybe a discussion forum, a FAQ page. He or she stays in contact with the readers by posting about work in progress, or matters of craft, the business in general, and to a greater or lesser degree, his or her personal life. The purpose of all this, though it is not often stated directly, is to keep the readers aware and interested in the long stretch between books, to win new readers, and to stay afloat in a difficult business. The internet and the author website are marketing tools like no other.
Readers set up websites too, to talk about the genre they are most interested in, the business, particular books, and authors. They review books, and review other reviewers. Some of these sites are very unstructured; anybody can (and does) submit a review; there's no editorial process at all. Some of them are very structured, the product or one or a few people who set themselves the task of making thoughtful reviews available for other people. There are also people active in other aspects of the business who keep weblogs that record what their professional lives are like. Booksellers, agents, editors, librarians -- there are dozens of weblogs written by people in all aspects of the business.
Some reviewers have come to see themselves as watchdogs with a singular purpose: to keep track of authors not as writers, but as individuals. Readers can visit weblogs that report about writers who misbehave (and note, please, the choice of word, which implies a certain childishness and need for supervision). There are reader weblogs where it seems the primary motivation is to vent against authors who are not responsive enough, or too responsive. I have read posts and comments where readers declare that authors need to be taken down a peg, that authors are self absorbed prima donnas. Jane at Dear Author responded to a post on the ARC question at Smart Bitches in no uncertain terms:
...The reviewer owes the author nothing. NOTHING. Is the author paying for the review? Is the reviewer somehow indebted to the author? How does the reviewer owe anything to the author? WHy the sense of outraged entitlement? [...] Readers do not owe authors anything either. We do not have to read the books. We do not have to buy the books. We can choose to engage in swaps, buy from UBS, or lend them from the library. We are not responsible for feeding anyone’s children, sending them to college or in anyway supporting an author unless we so desire. Jaysus, as Kel, said, get over yourselves. ...
And of course, she's right. No one is obliged to buy or support any particular author. An individual can chose to read what he or she likes, in any format available. To buy everything new in hardcover, or everything used for the lowest possible price, without concern for the author's financial welfare or career. These statements are true.
But now compare two other weblog posts. First from Todd Goldberg on his personal observations at a conference where another author behaved very badly indeed. the second post about Authors Behaving Badly is by Diane at Nobody Knows Anything. This is a look at a few big name authors who have embarrassed themselves publically by responding inappropriately to criticism.
All these stories are fascinating in a car-crash kind of way, and both Diane and Todd are clear about how distasteful they find such behaviors, but there's no bile or mockery in the way the information is shared. There is no pandering, but there's also a distinct lack of hostility.
Do authors behave badly? Sure. Is that a fair topic for discussion? Absolutely. What I'm bothered by is this tendency toward commentary seeped in disrespect for an author's work, career and person. An author who shows public disrespect for readers is foolish and self destructive (because readers will vote with their feet). On the other hand, it seems to be increasingly acceptable for readers to go after authors in ways that go beyond honest and constructive criticism. A reader has nothing to lose, after all, and doesn't have to worry about repercussions beyond the loss of weblog readers, which is almost irrelevant. If you don't look at your webtraffic stats, you won't know if you're driving people away. And you are free not to care, in any case.
Of course, the difficult and often thorny relationship between reviewers and authors is not new. What I find unsettling and unfortunate is the way the worst aspects of that relationship are intensifying with the help of the internet.
For clarity's sake, I want to state that constructive reviews (postive and negative) are important, and while no author likes to get a negative review, that goes along with the territory and must be borne, no matter how biased or unfair the review might seem. The majority of websites that focus on reviewing books take great efforts to be fair, even handed, and professional.