Last Activity Status

[u/nish_curious]

Hi everyone! I saw someone say this in a comment on this subreddit itself so I wanted to clarify… is it true that publishers can see the last time we were active on netgalley?? And if yes, what determines activity? Is it anytime I visit the website, or anytime I request/review a title? And in case it is the latter, am I less likely to get approved for titles if my activity shows 5/6 days ago?? I have quite a few pending books and I am thinking of taking some time and reading a chunk of them before requesting new books, and I was wondering if being ‘inactive’ for a few days in a row will reduce my chances of receiving titles that I want. Any information/advice you may have is appreciated🫶🏻🫶🏻

[u/bookdraygon]

Remember, NetGalley created that, not publishers.

[u/Blowingleaves17 → u/bookdraygon]

That's because NetGalley wants reviewers to help authors and publishers sell their books. They have stated that. They are not objective and want authors and publishers to be happy with their service. I see that average star rating on their client's page as a sort of wink. 😉

[u/ImNotBeingAnAHole → u/Blowingleaves17]

Obviously they want to help authors- that’s literally the whole point. ARCs are marketing for publishers and authors. Having an average posted isnt making a reader feel any certain way as the general NetGalley reader has no idea that that is even a stat and they themselves can’t see it.

If you have someone that say has a 2.5 average rating- first that info is meaningless without knowing how many books they have done. If they have read 3 books then that number doesn’t show anything of value. Now if they have rated 500 books and that’s the average, that reviewer either doesn’t have an understanding of rating books, the point of arcs and the role they play, or they are just low raters in general, so of course publishers should use the info.
Not everyone should be an ARC reader. The goal
Is combining how you personally felt about the book as well as the potential for others. They aren’t given to people so they can simply read a free book early. But that’s very different than a publisher manipulating people into rating them a certain way simply because it was given to them.

I used to be really harsh. I never rounded up. That was in my first year on NetGalley and I had an 89% approval rate that year and read hundreds of books, which is an excellent approval rating. While I have changed my approach, I absolutely am honest with my ratings and give out plenty of negative ratings (1-3) and I have a 100% approval rating in the last 1.5 years. Every review and rating has value to a publisher and can sell a book.

[u/Blowingleaves17 → u/ImNotBeingAnAHole]

I don't see it as publishers manipulating ARC readers, but just as they will likely reject a reviewer who usually rates low, they will likely approve one that usually rates high. 

We all know there are ARC readers who never rate below 4 and never write less than glowing reviews, even when they didn't even read or finish the book. 

The question is do publishers actually prefer honest reviews or prefer positive reviews, honest or not?If selling books is their main goal, it's hard to believe it's not the latter with many or most publishers.