Slate's got a fascinating article about the "top" reviewers on Amazon. Seems that those in the "Top ten" of Amazon's reviewers are reviewing up to 5 books a day. Grady Harp, Harriet Klausner.... have you seen these names as reviewers of your favorite books? The Gradys and Harriets of the world are either unbelievably prolific, or, as the article suggests, working with a staff of writers to produce so many reviews each day.
I should mention here that Harriet Klausner actually posted one of the first reviews of my book, but when I started to see the comments from various people doubting that Harriet really existed, I asked Amazon to take Harriet's review down (even tho, as I recall, she gave me a really good review!).
Don't get me wrong: I don't have a problem with publishers putting books into the hands of those who review the most books on Amazon (if that is, in fact, what they are doing, and I should mention here that I have absolutely no idea how Harriet Klausner got her hands on my book). What I *do* have a problem with is reviewers reviewing up to 5 books a day. There's just no way that a normal person can read that much. Can they?
And if people like Harriet Klausner actually represent a bunch of writers who are doing reviews, is that fair to then take the Number One Reviewer spot on Amazon? Shouldn't people who are *really* reading books and reviewing them honestly get a chance at this spot?