Why getting your book reviewed is so hard

Let's break it down...

I’ve been a book reviewer for a very long time. I started reviewing books for publications back home and then started doing the same after I moved to this country in 2008. From local newspapers and online magazines to any blog that would have me, I have reviewed for way too many publications to remember. I started calling myself a professional book reviewer when I started getting paid. Now I’m the horror columnist for the New York Times and my reviews appear regularly in places like NPR, Locus Magazine, the Boston Globe, and other venues. I’ve taught workshops on book reviewing for years. If I listed all the publications I’ve reviewed for in the last decade and a half, this would be my longest newsletter ever. Why am I telling you all this? I don’t expect you to give a fuck about my CV, but there’s a lot of misinformation out there, and when someone wants to set the record straight, it helps if they actually have the experience to know what they’re talking about. So, here we are.

Let me kick things off with two devastating truths:

1. Getting your book reviewed is incredibly hard.

2. The quality of your work often has nothing to do with getting or not getting reviewed.

Still here? Good. Let me give you some more truths:

1. Getting your book reviewed by readers on Goodreads and Amazon is hard, and we all know both of those places are problematic for a bunch of reasons. Review bombing, people dropping 1-star reviews because they don’t like you, reviewers with bizarre “no one gets five stars!” mentalities, and folks who love getting galleys but hate reading and reviewing are all elements that make those platforms complicated. Yes, they matter. Yes, people will buy your book because of some 1-star reviews (trust me, I used some of my 1-star reviews to sell books). No, the problems with these platforms aren’t going away any time soon.

2. Getting your book reviewed in big venues like NPR, the Boston Globe, and the New York Times is a thousand times harder than getting reviews from readers in Amazon or Goodreads.

3. If you’re a self-published author, getting reviewed in most of those big venues is impossible.

4. If you publish with a small press that doesn’t get galleys very early, it’s almost impossible. You need months to build a buzz and get on reviewers’ radars.

5. Reviews still matter, so every publisher out there is reaching out to reviewers, which leaves those without a marketing team in the dust. Trust me. I was that guy with my first four books. Sigh.

One of the reasons I started this newsletter was to do my part in fighting misinformation. I have no clue why it took me this long to write about reviews, but now that I’m doing it, I want this piece to be as honest, informative, and transparent as possible. To do that, I’m going to give you a glimpse into my process for NPR and the NYT, two venues that can move the needle for a book.

For the NYT, it all starts with a very long list of books. That list, sadly, doesn’t include self-published titles. I’ve talked about my love and support for self-published authors many times. I have also mentioned that I reviewed for BlueInk reviews for a couple of years because I was tired of not getting pitches for self-published books picked up by big venues. When you self-publish, you’re accepting that you will have to do a lot of work all by yourself. Well, understanding that the stigma is still there comes with the territory, so if you’re a self-published author, your books are very often out of the race before the damn thing even starts.

Take the long list for the month of June, which is the column I turned in yesterday. The initial list for June had 54 books on it. That’s a lot (and it didn’t include all the book published that month). I might get around to some of those at other venues, but for the Times, I can only pick 4. That means that 51 books that made the list still didn’t get reviewed. Horror is thriving, so every list contains novels, short story collections, debuts, and anthologies. Each one of those deserves attention, so I always keep that in mind. That’s why the columns are never four big names. I’ll review Stephen King’s latest because he’s perhaps the most recognizable name in horror, but in the same review I’ll include a novella by Spanish author Layla Martínez because her work deserves the attention. See? It’s all about balance. Sadly, this means a lot of deserving books get left out. Think about it this way: only 7% percent of the books on the list got reviewed, and the list didn't include every book. I’m only doing this because people like numbers, so here you go: there’s roughly a 1% chance of your book getting reviewed. Or something. Sounds right, but I suck at math. Where is Paul Tremblay when you need him? Anyway, the point should be clear by now: getting your book reviewed is incredibly hard.

Now let me talk a little bit about NPR, which has a different system. My last round of pitches included a LOT of books—crime, literary fiction, nonfiction, etc. I got those books mostly from the dozens of catalogs I receive from publishers. Not working with a publisher who lets people like me know that a book is coming months in advance? Hard just became way harder for you. In any case, my pitches covered August through December. The one thing that all these venues share? If your book is already out, they won’t review it. They want that fresh stuff. I don’t agree because a book is always new to those who haven’t read it and I’m out here plugging my book that came out in August of 2022, but I don’t make the rules. From that long list of pitches I sent NPR—a list that usually takes me three or four days to put together—my wonderful editor will select a handful. Sometimes less. Never more than three or four books per month. Sometimes one or two. Sometimes none. Yes, I’m interested in every book I pitch and I think they all deserve attention, but most of the won’t get reviewed. It has to do with space and budget, not with the quality of the books.

Hard. Harder. Hardest. Almost impossible. I know. I want you to have the information, but I also don’t want you to quit. Keep talking about your book. Keep reaching out to people. Reviewers like me are out here doing all we can to talk about as many books as possible.

Anyway, I really hope these examples help folks understand why it’s so hard. Also, sadly, a lot of venues have stopped publishing reviews. Others simply went away. From my days at ManArchy Magazine more than a decade ago to the fun reviews I did for LitReactor, I remember many places that allowed me to review books that are no longer around, and that’s sad. The more venues we have, the more books we can review. Yes, that’s why I’m always looking for new venues to add to my list, for new places to pitch, for more important pubisdcations that will pay me to write about books.

I know that this was a little harsh, especially for those who didn’t know (and there are plenty of those folks because the information isn’t readily available and folks ask to review their books that came out months ago). That said, there is nothing easy about publishing, and that shouldn’t stop you, so keep at it. Good luck and, as always, thanks for reading. Stay cool.