Publishers Marketplace's Top Reviewers

Publishers Marketplace has launched a new feature listing the "Top Reviewers" -- those reviewers with 25 or more reviews in their database. They note that they began tracking reviews in October 2002, and they include primarily full-length reviews in major newspapers that post their reviews to the Web.

You have to be a subscriber to see the listings, so I'll share some stats with you here:

David J. Montgomery
28 reviews : 23 positive (82%), 4 neutral (14%), 1 negative (4%)
Philadelphia Inquirer (17); Chicago Sun-Times (5); Boston Globe (4); South Florida Sun-Sentinel (1); Washington Post (1)

(Since they only include full-length reviews, much of my work, which comes in column round-ups, is not included. They also seem to be missing a few that I thought of.)

Here are the stats from some other prominent crime fiction reviewers:

Janet Maslin
382 reviews : 189 positive (49%), 159 neutral (42%), 34 negative (9%)
New York Times (378); Boston Globe (3); Los Angeles Times (1)

Oline H. Cogdill
246 reviews : 189 positive (77%), 28 neutral (11%), 29 negative (12%)
South Florida Sun-Sentinel (246)

Patrick Anderson
191 reviews : 107 positive (56%), 58 neutral (30%), 26 negative (14%)
Washington Post (190); New York Times (1)

Carol Memmott
62 reviews : 50 positive (81%), 8 neutral (13%), 4 negative (6%)
USA Today (62)

Adam Woog
48 reviews : 40 positive (83%), 8 neutral (17%), 0 negative (0%)
Seattle Times (48)

Tom Nolan
44 reviews : 35 positive (80%), 9 neutral (20%), 0 negative (0%)
San Francisco Chronicle (16); Los Angeles Times (16); Wall Street Journal (10); Boston Herald (2)

Betsy Willeford
33 reviews : 11 positive (33%), 22 neutral (67%), 0 negative (0%)
Miami Herald (31); South Florida Sun-Sentinel (1); Houston Chronicle (1)

Paula L. Woods
29 reviews : 23 positive (79%), 3 neutral (10%), 3 negative (10%)
Los Angeles Times (28); Washington Post (1)

I'm pretty high up there on the positive/negative ratio, which is not surprising, since I tend to select books for full-length reviews that I have something good to say about. If the data were included from my round-up pieces, I imagine that percentage would drop.

Even so, I wonder if I write too many positive reviews and not enough negative ones.

Comments

[patti abbott]

I don't think so. I'd rather read about something you liked than something you didn't. Kakutani (sp?) just spills venon and it makes for uncomfortable reading. Omitting ones you are negative on seems kind.

[Sarah]

Definitely interesting stats. In my case, none of the Baltsun roundups were included so that skews the data, but I think most of mine tend to be positive. And I, too, wonder the same thing, but it's better to be thoughtful all around than worry about statistics in the end.

[David J. Montgomery]

I agree with Sarah -- the statistics are interesting, but I'd hate to see people change the way they review because of it.

I had a similar thought to the recent batch of Sisters in Crime stats, which track how many books by men versus books by women various newspapers review.

Ultimately, I think reviewers just have to try to do their best to write about interesting books in a fair and interesting way. That alone is hard enough without worrying about the other stuff.

[David J. Montgomery]

For the record, here are Michiko's stats:

280 reviews : 100 positive (36%), 83 neutral (30%), 97 negative (35%)

[spyscribbler]

While it's true that sometimes a lot of criticism about a book will pique my curiosity, the only reasons I read reviews are so I know what's currently good in the marketplace, and make sure I don't miss reading something good.

A negative review doesn't much help me. Obviously, others may feel differently!