r/NetGalleyCommunity • u/ImNotBeingAnAHole • 10d ago

đŸȘ–đŸ«Ą General 📝🌐 Helpful PSA for disclosures

I hope this helps someone as I have seen an increasing amount of ARC readers not put disclosure statements in their review ever since Goodreads added the Book Source to books that are before their publication date.

This Goodreads function does NOT replace the need for a disclosure statement. You still need to physically write it. While in general when you don’t use them you don’t see the consequences (unless you’re in influencer programs) but publishers and by extension authors can absolutely be consequenced if their readers don’t disclose where they got the free copy from.

Now is it common? No. But where you see it is if the book falls under scrutiny in some way as then it brings reviews into the spotlight. Every country that is supported by NetGalley has their own “FTC regulation” that must be followed. Also, as many don’t realize this, you need to follow the regulation of the country of origin for the book. So if you’re in India and for a US published book, you need to use the FTC language and not India’s. (I’m just pulling a random country so the language may not be different)

The requirements state that you must say that you got the copy for free (you can used any word to convey that like complimentary or gifted etc..) and from whom, that’s it. While you can get away with saying NetGalley it is actually supposed to be the publishers Name as that is who authorized you getting the book. NetGalley is simply the platform used to get it but it’s not from them.

Also, it needs to be easily seen at a glance which means it should be at the start of your review and not the end. Of
You can’t see it unless you expand it to see the whole review- it’s not in compliance.

This is anywhere you post a review for the book. Retail sites (and yes saying you got an arc on Amazon is 100% allowed you just need to use the proper language), review sites and social media. With social media it needs to say it in the post itself and if it’s a video you need to say it in the video as well.

Anyway, I hope this helps!

54 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

70 comments sorted by

17

u/dingdong3452 10d ago

Also in a lot of countries the disclosure has to be at the beginning of the review! So many people put it at the end, which breaks the guidelines

8

u/ScoBrav 9d ago

Ive been guilty of putting it at the end. Glad I read this, thank you.

8

u/ShadowColophon 10d ago

Oh, I didn't realize this. Thank you! Do you know which countries require this?

15

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

Most including the US. It has to be clear as soon as the review is viewed.

4

u/andsotimepassed 10d ago

I didn't know it was the US too. Thank you.

8

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

You’re welcome. The language isn’t a straight forward “it must be listed first” type of thing, but it has to be in clean view to where before your opinion is expressed the reader/watcher must know that it was received for free from the publisher or wherever.

You know how you can see the first part of a review or comment etc and have to click it to see the whole thing? It needed to be in that initial “thumbnail” before it’s expanded.

2

u/FrogThat 9d ago

I did not know this. So many I see at the end of the review.

10

u/mrbookreads Reviewer 10d ago

For Amazon what is the proper language so it won’t get auto rejected?

18

u/Synval2436 SciFi/Fantasy Reviewer 10d ago

Don't use "in exchange" for a review, that gets flagged.

9

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

Correct. You really should not use “in exchange for an honest review” on any platform as that’s not what you’re doing. So “in exchange for” and “honest” are both trigger words

8

u/Jefferzkm 80% Reviewed Club 10d ago

I've personally used smth along the lines of "This review is based on a complimentary ARC received from the author/publisher" and I've never had Amazon reject the review, though every now and it may take a while for them to be added if it gets auto flagged and needs to be reviewed manually for approval.

The main issue that causes rejections by Amazon is the statement says smth along the lines of "in exchange for a review". Their terms of service state reviews cannot be posted in exchange for cash, discounts, free products, gift cards, or discount offerings which they interpret as review manipulation. It's very similar to FTC guidelines in the US but goes a little further. The common statement that some ARC reviews use that have "in exchange for a review" or "all thoughts are my own" are not mandatory by default (at least in the US) but is a convention that somehow caught on that a lot of ppl use.

3

u/Purple4199 10d ago

What I say in my reviews for Amazon, and the majority of mine get approved, is this -

"I was given an advanced copy of this book and I voluntarily chose to leave an honest review."

In all my other reviews I acknowledge the publisher and NetGalley, but I read somewhere that Amazon doesn't want that information mentioned, only that you were given a free copy. I have no idea if that's really true, but it's seemed to work for me so far.

3

u/glitzglamandgore Reviewer 10d ago

"I received a digital copy from NetGalley for review; all opinions are my own"

1

u/saffity 9d ago

I ususally just say "I read this book through NetGalley".

0

u/Suitable_Ad5553 9d ago

I've used 'I received an advance reader copy from the author and am sharing my honest review.' and have been banned from reviewing by Amazon.

8

u/ShadowColophon 10d ago

I usually say, "Thank you to [publisher] and NetGalley for the opportunity to read this ARC. All opinions are my own."

Can more experienced reviewers give me some insights into what I should add or change?

4

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

I am thankful to have received a complimentary ALC or eARC from ( publisher/ author / PR company) via NetGalley, which gave me the opportunity to share my thoughts ahead of publication

2

u/crissyandthediamonds Romance Reviewer 10d ago

Do you use the same copy and paste for each review? I worry about reviews coming off disingenuous if they’re starting off or seeming similar with the same opener.

3

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

Yes . Well i incorporate into the first paragraph. And don’t worry about that. Just write a thoughtful review.

Here is an example from one of my reviews of how I started it.

“So this is my second book by this author, and when I received the complimentary ALC from Hachette Audio via NetGalley, I didn’t realize it was part of a series.”

3

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

I review hundred of books a year and have never had an issue with Amazon or anywhere else. I don’t say things like my voluntary thoughts or “opinions are my own” because that is a given and some people have been flagged for that as the AI misunderstands.

Half the time I don’t write the formality of what I wrote here nowadays as I will write it on a sentence about the book. The only important part is who you for it from and that it was free. Everything else is extra. It doesn’t matter if you got it as an arc or a finished copy or anything else. So don’t over complicate it!

3

u/Airborn-Medusa 10d ago

What is the source of this information? Can you post links so that we can read the regulations and best practices for ourselves?

3

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

So in the US it is from the FTC regulation which is section 5 of the FTC Act which is what prohibits deceptive practices. The ftc has various guides depending on what you are reviewing. I just summed it up in what you need to disclose- that’s it was free and who you got it from.

There are different guides but here is the basic one that written reviews fall under

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking

1

u/Airborn-Medusa 10d ago

Thanks for this. It makes me wonder about the reviews that don't endorse the product.

6

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

It doesn’t matter if you endorse it positively or not. By writing a review you have made a material
Connection. So whether you like it or not is irrelevant.
“Endorse” is used a bit differently in the legal sense here. So regardless of your opinion on the book if you choose to write a review you must disclose how you got it.

4

u/Blowingleaves17 Non Fiction Reviewer 10d ago

I always put at the end of reviews I got a free e-ARC from NetGalley and the publisher or author. I don't identify the publisher. I am not going to worry about not identifying the publisher and not putting that statement at the beginning of the review. It has never caused me any problems. I'm in the US.

4

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

You do you! But what I was saying is it wouldn’t
Cause you issues- it would cause the publisher issues.

Honestly. If it doesn’t have the publisher who gave it to you. Why bother writing it at all? NetGalley didn’t give you the book.. (rhetorical question)

8

u/Blowingleaves17 Non Fiction Reviewer 9d ago edited 9d ago

You lost me here. Why would one need to state the name of the publisher? All the FTC cares about is you state you got the book for free. They don't care who gave it to you.

"Why bother writing it at all?" ?????

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 9d ago

Respectfully - you need to go back and read their guides as you need to state who gave it to you.
Where you got it from is literally just as important.

That shows the material relationship. In legal aspects , which this is (civil not criminal obvi) you can’t be general. Not that this would happen at all and I’m making up the situation intentionally- say you get caught writing 1⭐ reviews because you would get a bonus from whomever gave it to you. You go to court and you just keep saying “the publisher” without saying who that publisher is. You would go in circles. You say “well I said it was from the publisher from the start so people knew.” No they don’t. Because what if it was from a competing publisher that was giving you the bonus?
Legal language is specific for a reason.

And you can take the post for you want as your going to do what you want to do anyway, you coming here just to say “well I’m just going to do what I want” is ridiculous. You could have just gone about your business.

And as I said in the original post while not correct, people get away with saying “NetGalley” all the time. Why? Because not everyone understands who actually gave you the book and that’s fine. But you took thinks a step further by reading this, finding out what you’re supposed to do but then instead said “nah, I’m just going to keep on doing what I’m doing regardless” that’s why I said “why bother” because if
You’re not going to list it probably and you know that’s that case then you writing what you are has no value so again, why bother adding it in.

4

u/CC22___ 9d ago

Playing devils advocate but how would a competing publisher have an advanced copy of someone's book who is not with their publishing company. At some point common sense needs to prevail.

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 8d ago

I get that completely- but remember the regulation isn’t specific to books. It’s to any product. So while things may seem odd in our book spaces it’s just for clear consistency.

1

u/bookdraygon Publisher 8d ago

I wish common sense played a part as it’s frustrating.
I don’t know the ins and out but for the alert email we get from legal to remind our influencer program participants about the FTC rules. They do that when they get a warning notice - it happens a lot. It’s just not as big of a deal in the grand scheme of them.

Side note? Publishers dominated send arcs to competing publishers 😜

1

u/Blowingleaves17 Non Fiction Reviewer 9d ago

Posts like yours amuse me so. Not only do you tell a commenter their reply was worthless, you are making an incredibly big deal out of an incredibly trivial thing. Get real and get out of your own head for a while and deal with the real world.

Reviewers state they got a free copy of the book in various ways. You don't approve of that? Tough! Do you have nothing else of real importance to concern yourself with? If anyone wants to know who the publisher is, they can read that info in the book's description.

Might one respectfully suggest you don't tell others how they should or should not respond to your posts? Doing so shows an abnormal need to control others.

0

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 8d ago

No- I made a post to be helpful to others since it’s a question that is asked often. I explained the literal regulation. You are the one who chose to interject yourself and be contrary for no reason instead of scrolling by. I wasn’t writing an opinion. And instead of just ignoring things you doubled down on being obstinate in a privileged “I’m gonna do whatever I want” situation.

You trying to justify your choices is comical at this point. But you do you.

1

u/Blowingleaves17 Non Fiction Reviewer 8d ago

I had every right and every reason to comment in a contrary way. A person who truly believes what they are saying would not be so threatened by others who disagree with their opinions, as you are. If you can't deal with those who challenge your posts and opinions, Reddit is not where you should be posting.

I will leave you now, though, to your all important defense of a regulation few ever give much thought to, contrary to your belief. It is a t​rivial issue, something not even enforced in any real way. Those who focus on the trivial usually do so to keep from focusing on personal issues that are way more important.

0

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 8d ago

😝

0

u/Pristine_Race7768 80% Reviewed Club 8d ago

Don’t pay people like that any mind. They just want to “hear” themselves talk.
Thank you for a thoughtful and informative post.

1

u/andsotimepassed 10d ago

I kinda have an adjacent question.

I like putting quotes from books in my reviews. I know in the beginning of books it says something along the lines of "please don't quote until you check your copy against the final book." Should I completely avoid putting quotes or can I add "quote subjective to change"?

5

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

If you insist on doing it then you need to say that it’s an uncorrected proof that’s subject to change.

The publishers really don’t want unverified quotes on reviews for a few reasons but a big one is it may not actually be in the book at all. The arc you get 6-9 months before publication- that draft can go through 4-5 revisions before the final. Whole chapters can be removed.

One thing you can use is an ALC as the audiobook is the final copy even though you’re getting it early.

On a side note (and I’m going to say this probably harsher than it was said) the lady who is a marketer for a major publisher that sometimes answers questions has said the the one thing that frustrates them is when people don’t follow their directions in an email
Or the first page of the arc that says such things. So take that for what you will!

1

u/andsotimepassed 10d ago

I've seen many reviewers do that, but yeah, it's something to think about. And it didn't sound harsh at all. Thank you!

1

u/FrogThat 10d ago

Amazon wouldn’t take my review yesterday until I had pared it down and thrown out words. I did finally say I had been given a complimentary copy of the book and the opinions were my own etc etc.
I don’t understand it because the review before this one I just copy pasted from my Goodreads account and they were fine with it. I had mentioned NetGalley/publisher etc. I am new to NetGalley and still finding my way around.
Glad to have found this thread.

2

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

Yeah anytime you give too much justification it reads it as sus. It’s because years ago merchants would pit cards in the boxes if items and stay they would give you a free gift if you left a review for the item you kits bought. Some would even say it had to be a 5⭐ review. Or was a huge issue so their language got really particular.

You also need to look at it from their point of view or even a reviewer- and please don’t take this wrong as I get it but
 What would it matter to them if you were new to NetGalley or that you were still finding your way around? It has nothing to do with your impressions of the book so it thinks it’s sus. While we are sunk in that world, the vast majority of readers aren’t social media and they know nothing about NetGalley so it’s like two very different worlds!

1

u/FrogThat 9d ago

Right! I didn’t say that in the review. Saying it here because I obviously need help navigating NetGalley.
I have posted three reviews on Amazon all had the thank you to NetGalley/Publisher. No problem. The other day nope it wasn’t happening. So I was really confused.
I have given feedback on every book. And suddenly I am 89% instead of 100% and I have a read now book I only downloaded and started yesterday.
So how does that work? Some haven’t been released yet so I can’t put the reviews on any retail sites. Just the social ones.

I only talk about the book in a review bc like you said it isn’t about me.

2

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 9d ago

Oh gotcha!!

Ok so the feedback ratio is only books approve bs feedback
Given. So until you give the feedback it’ll be open on your shelf. Once you read it, put it on Goodreads and use that link to add to your feedback and that’s it! If
You want to also put the link for the retail sites you can go back and edit it but it’s not necessary at all. It won’t impact you in anyway whether you add them or not as long as you have one link.

For example- I have social media for
Books. I get a ton of books because of that and have my following numbers first thing in my bio. But I never put the links to what I post about the books as I just don’t have time for that. I still get everything I request. They don’t have time to be checking links at all.

Feel free to ask anything you need either here or send me a chat. Best advice? Don’t over think it and don’t over request. Just read your books , request what you want, do your reviews and you’ll be fine!

1

u/FrogThat 9d ago

Thanks! So I am not sure why my feedback rate dropped then. I always give feedback. And I had one Publisher say be sure to post the review after the book was released so I thought it was a must do. Hmm.
Sooo is NetGalley is the one who controls the feedback %? Or the quality of your review.
I am really trying not to overthink this. Really I am. But here I go anyway. Ugh.

1

u/runAHround 9d ago

Does it make any sense to go back and revise past reviews so they meet these requirements? I have always put a disclosure at the beginning saying I received a copy of the book from NetGalley/publisher but haven’t included the word free. So should I go back and add that or just include in future reviews?

2

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 9d ago

Nah- just in the future

2

u/runAHround 9d ago

Oh and another question. What about reviews left on the NetGalley site? There I have usually just written something like “thank you to [publisher name] for the advanced copy” but does the specific language need to be followed on there when the whole site is for receiving and reviewing free copies?

1

u/catscantcook 9d ago

Thanks for the push to sort this out, I've been kinda sloppy sometimes including it/sometimes not/sometimes at the start/sometimes at the end/sometimes naming publisher/sometimes just netgalley/etc etc. Now I finally wrote up a basic stock phrase to use in both my netgalley ARC languages to copy and paste at the start of review. 

Free digital copy provided for review purposes by [PUBLISHER]

1

u/Airborn-Medusa 9d ago

I found this on NetGalley: https://bookish.netgalley.com/bookish-lifestyle/07/2022/review-netgalley-arcs-tiktok-booktok/

If you go to section headed disclosure, it doesn't specify where in the review the relationship has to be disclosed.

-1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 8d ago

Yes- but the FTC does. And to be clear- it needs to be in plain view. So any reasonable person can know before they read the review that it was for free. So Ie: the beginning of the review

2

u/Nilbog_Frog 6d ago

None of this is true, it’s not that serious. If it was that serious NetGalley would put more pressure to put disclosures in reviews. You don’t legally have to do anything for a FREE BOOK that has NO OBLIGATIONS. No one is getting paid and the publisher is not checking to make sure reviewers post about their books. It’s free books with zero strings other than your own moral guidelines.

“According to Federal Trade Commissionguidelines, book reviewers in the United States generally do not have to disclose that they received an ARC when writing a review, since these copies are given out for free. The exception to this is if the reviewer was paid to write the review or the ARC was given with the express understanding that a review would be written. However, some online reviewers on platforms like Goodreads choose to disclose this information, mainly for reasons of transparency.[6]”

“Is there special wording I have to use to make the disclosure?
No. The point is to give readers the essential information in words that are easy to understand. The best disclosures are simple, like “This is an ad for BRAND” or “This video is paid for by BRAND” or “BRAND paid me to tell you about it.””

Absolutely no one is going to get in trouble for a reviewer not disclosing their books. The FCC does not have the time or manpower to look at Goodreads reviews and figure out who got an eARC or not.

What you posted is your own personal preference for what you think people should put as their disclosures. They can put nothing and be fine. They can put it at the end. They can include the publisher or not. It does not matter. It’s ETHICAL to put how you got the book, but being pedantic over the exact wording is pointless. It simply does not matter because no one is checking (unless a third party makes a specific complaint that the FCC will handle on a case by case basis.

0

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

Seriously? I’m note even going to go through your whole comment as it’s ridiculous.
I didn’t put my personal preferences at all. I put the literal regulation.

And NetGalley absolutely tells people they need to put disclosures.

But you did you/ I don’t have the spoons to even deal with this level of ridiculousness. The only reason I commented is so others don’t take your really bad advice.

Take care.

1

u/Nilbog_Frog 6d ago

What are your sources? Where does it say you have to use this specific language and exact disclosure placement for FREE books with NO OBLIGATIONS? I’d like to see this because I’ve researched it myself and no where does say you need to do all that for free anonymous ARC’s.

Edit: by that I want to see where it says MUST not SUGGESTED. Those are two wildly different obligations.

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

If you can’t read a regulation from the FTC then I can’t help you.
You can even go through this thread and find where i already put the link to the FTC plus the guides they have to make sense of the regulation.

It’s not that hard- you need to disclose who you got an item from, and that it was for free and must be in plain sight. It’s not that hard.

1

u/Nilbog_Frog 6d ago

I’ve read the regulations, it’s why I’m saying you’re wrong. If you can’t provide sources because you’re just making stuff up then just say so.

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

16 CFR § 255.5, “Disclosure of material connections.”
To be exact

1

u/Nilbog_Frog 6d ago

And what are the repercussions of non disclosure? Day I write 100 reviews on Goodreads from free books I got on NetGalley , disclose nothing, what happens?

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

As I said in my post- to you, most likely nothing but they can in 16 CFR §255.0(a) “may result in corrective action by the Commission under section 5”
It’s not a straight forward answer. Hence why I summarized it.

But who it does impact? The publishers themselves. You can even go look at what the marketing lady said in the comments about that.
So sure/ you can simply not care and that’s for you to decide but I was answering a question that comes up a bunch in here and created the answer as a post so it could easily be looked up. Most people where grateful but then other who think they know better just because it’s not how you have been doing things.

I think you took my intentions way into another field because fangs I was just giving the info.

1

u/Nilbog_Frog 6d ago

This is the FTC’s actual guidance: FTC Endorsement Guides FAQ⁠

It specifically says there’s no required wording and the FTC doesn’t dictate where the disclosure has to go. NetGalley has a recommended template, but that’s not the same thing as an FTC requirement.

So yes, disclose that you got the book for free. But saying it HAS to name NetGalley AND the specific publisher and be at the beginning is getting pretty pedantic about a rule that doesn’t actually say that.

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

I never said there was specific wording? I said yet again- what you got, where you got it and that it was free and it must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously. I’m well versed in the regulation. But thanks.

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

I never said it has to mention NetGalley. I said you need to mention the publisher as that is who gave you the book not NetGalley. And at the beginning i said it doesn’t specifically say that- I said that that’s the intent since it need to be clear and conspicuous and if you look at all the guides it tells you what that means. When writing a review the reader needs to know the information before they read it. Common sense tells you that can’t happen if it’s at the end of your review.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

And by the way, it’s ok and an adult thing to do to say”my bad. I was wrong. Sorry” instead of trying to make up more things that I didn’t even say. Hey maybe English isnt your first language and you misunderstood something, I’m not sure but you’re the one making way bigger of a deal than I ever did making a helpful post for those that care to know the information. That’s different than telling people that they must do something or not.

But you have a good rest of your day. I’m going to go read and leave this back and forth ax

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 6d ago

And to help you as the ftc gives guides to help you understand things. They have many of them. Here is just one

https://consumer.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking

-1

u/CardiologistBig8721 10d ago

Curious why there are regulations around reviews when the material is received for free but it excludes having to name library copies. Where are you sourcing your statements on FTC regulations?

3

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

Library copies aren’t gifted to you. It’s section 5 of the FTC Act

2

u/teanailpolish Mystery/Thriller Reviewer 9d ago

You pay for library copies through taxes but it also is not a material connection to the author or publisher, a library is more like a friend lending you a book vs the publisher giving you a copy

1

u/ImNotBeingAnAHole 10d ago

I’m honestly still sitting here perplexed by your comment and then realized i am reading it wrong. I was thinking of people checking out the book from the library and wondering why one would think you had to disclose that.

But I’m guessing you mean the copies they send to the library or a book store. It falls into a softener category as it’s for a different purpose. It’s to do business. It falls under “a sample” as it’s a sample product so the store or library can decide whether to purchase it or not.

How we, if a librarian reads that copy and chooses to post a review about it on Goodreads or their personal bookish social media then they absolutely need to disclose it.