I had a really nice little post all scheduled to go up this morning. But something happened over the weekend that I stumbled upon and I just HAD to say something about it. I haven’t usually weighed in on goings-on in the book blogging community, mostly because I always felt like a relative newbie and (thankfully) haven’t been involved in any blogging scandals. But for a couple of reasons, I just couldn’t let this one go.
I’m sure many of you are familiar with what I want to talk about today, but in case you aren’t I’ll give a brief breakdown of the situation. Blythe Harris, a book blogger at Finding Bliss in Books, gave a 1 Star review on Goodreads to Kathleen Hale’s No One Else Can Have You. I’ve read the review, and as it’s 1 Star, it obviously isn’t very positive (as I’m sure the other 242 1 Star reviews aren’t either).
Now, as book bloggers, some of us try to be as positive as possible when discussing books we’ve read. The things I would say to a close friend when discussing a book, are probably not the same things I’d write about on this blog, or on public forums. That’s not to say that I am dishonest in reviews in any way, but rather that I try not to be too blunt or sarky, which trust me, is sometimes a struggle. I try to be sensitive to an author and their creation. Some bloggers are not so censored, and fair play to them, they usually make for highly passionate, opinionated and entertaining reviews – each to their own, and Harris’ review was a little more on the blunt side.
On Saturday 18th October 2014, The Guardian published an article by Hale, where she seems to have taken this particular review very personally, believing Harris to be out to destroy her career. Not only does Hale openly admit her actions “felt like the biggest breach of decency I’d ever pulled”, but she basically stalks Harris online, manages to get hold of her address and phone number, conducts a $19 online background check, rents a car and drives to her door after looking it up on Google Maps, calls her at work and clearly harasses the poor woman senseless.
Hale’s conclusion? That Blythe Harris is a pseudonym for another person entirely. While this may be true, people are well within their rights to write under pseudonyms, both reviewers and authors do it, and after reading about Hale’s adventures, I’m beginning to consider doing it myself for my own personal safety! Hale takes this concept further, she seems to believe that not only is Blythe Harris a pseudonym, it’s a pseudonym set-up for the purposes of destroying careers and trolling online. That story may stick, if it weren’t for the fact that Harris’ blog, Finding Bliss in Books, has been going since 2012, and has dished out PLENTY of 4 and 5 Star reviews. Sorry, Hale, but this sounds like a case of sour grapes to me.
Unfortunately, as often happens, the article on The Guardian was one-sided, accusatory and factually inaccurate (the term “catfishing” was used completely out of context). As a member of the book blogging community I felt like some issues needed to be addressed – Harris had been blogging since 2012, these profiles weren’t created with the intention of harassing Hale, and in case anyone was under a different impression – Hale’s behaviour was completely unacceptable. My comment was removed from The Guardian by moderators.
I honestly feel outraged by this whole situation. I’m disappointed in The Guardian for approving such a story to be posted on their site, and I’m shocked at Hale – not only for her actions, but for publishing them with the belief that they are justified! Books are reviewed all the time, both by “professional” critics and non-professional reviewers, and plenty of the “professional” critics can be pretty scathing. Books are published in a public domain, where opinions are rife, and as the saying goes, “You can’t please all of the people, all of the time”.
Many bloggers have written posts on the topic of author/blogger interaction, particularly on what to do if you don’t like an author’s book. Let’s be honest, it can be an uncomfortable scenario to find yourself in, but most authors can appreciate that they are not demi-Gods who get everything right, and can hold a perfectly reasonable and safe interaction/discussion with a blogger via social media or email. Hale’s actions in this case are not “normal”, and certainly not the actions of someone with a sound mind, and anyone supporting her actions are only contributing to her problem.
My final note – regardless of what Harris may or may not have written in her review, and no matter how scathing, or brutal, her review may or may not have been, it does not justify the gross invasion of privacy, breaking of the law and threatening behaviour that Hale dished out as a consequence. Ironically, Hale was under the impression that Harris was out to ruin her career. One review does not a career ruin. However, Hale’s response and subsequent article have most definitely affected her career in the most negative manner possible, with many in the book community now boycotting her books, and boycotting other authors who support her.
Hale’s Twitter account professes that she in interested in “myself, animals, and crime”. Well, Ms. Hale, I couldn’t have put it better myself.
What does this mean for Book Bloggers?
Personally, I’m going to tidy up my social media sites and blog to try and ensure there is minimal information for anyone to find me. I’d hate to think that Hale is starting a precedent. In fact, I’m pretty sure what she did is considered to be a criminal offence, and I can only hope that it is taken seriously by local authorities and used to set an example (as well as condemned by her Publisher? Watch this space). Crazed stalker-fans get sentenced for stalking, so why not semi-psychotic authors?
I also hope that this doesn’t have a negative impact on freedom of speech and opinion within the community, and most importantly that we don’t lose excellent bloggers because of this incident. Now, more than ever, we need to support each other.
Finally, I’ve been impressed by the number of authors, as well as book bloggers, who have come forward on Twitter to express their shock, concern and at times disgust for what Hale has done.
Disclaimers:
In the interests of full disclosure, I do not know Blythe Harris personally, and I do not know if her name is a pseudonym (I do follow her blog on Bloglovin’). I do not know Kathleen Hale personally, nor have I read her book(s). Kathleen Hale is the girlfriend of Simon Rich, writer for SNL, and son of journalist Frank Rich and Harper Collins executive editor Gail Winston. Her book, No One Else Can Have You, came from James Frey’s Full Fathom Five Book Packaging company.
Update:
On the evening of the 20th of October, book bloggers took to Twitter to vent their frustrations at the actions of Hale, and the lack of response or comment from Harper Teen, her publisher, nor from The Guardian, who posted the article in the first place. Due to this lack of response, and Hale’s apparent reveling in the attention she has been receiving, book bloggers decided to boycott Hale’s work and began using the hashtag #HaleNo. Within a few short minutes, #HaleNo was trending. Buzzfeed has done a great overview of the initial incident, and the online discussions that followed it.
Sources For More Information:
Privileged – An article written by Hale describing an attack she carried out at 14.
Catch Me If You Can ASPCA – A disturbing article by Hale describing animal abuse she carried out as a child.
Smart Bitches, Trashy Book: A Response
An Open Letter to Kathleen Hale and Guardian Books
The Importance of Pseudonymous Activity
How Not To Respond To Negative Reviews
Confessions of a Book Geek 
Had never even heard of this situation. Thanks for making me aware of it.
LikeLike
Thanks for commenting, Alex. Not only did I feel an urge to share my personal opinion on what happened, but I felt it was necessary to share to take our online presence more seriously, people have ways and means of getting information, and then doing silly things with it.
LikeLike
[…] you say online. Dana @ The Nerdy Journalist’s Post | Amanda @ Book Badger’s Post | Rachel @ Confessions of a Book Geek’s Post Erika @ The Red Bookmark talks about expanding the subject areas of her blog to her other […]
LikeLike
I’ve been reading up on this for the past two days, and frankly, it’s disgusting. Especially the way Kathleen thinks she’s done the right thing by “outing” a blogger. Blythe has been a Goodreads friend for many years, and I don’t give two shits about whether it’s a pseudonym or not. The fact is Kathleen was way, WAY out of line, and it astonishes me that there are people out there who condone this kind of creepy behaviour.
LikeLiked by 1 person
She’s “outing” her, yet she doesn’t really know if Harris is “Jane” or not, and even if she does, what exactly is she “outing” her for? Not liking her book? Writing a bad review? By doing this Hale was meant to “out” a blogger, but all she’s accomplished is “outing” herself as a narcissistic author I doubt many bloggers will want to work with. Credibility has gone out the window, and won’t be forgotten quickly. The fact there are others who are condoning this shocks me more than what Hale did in the first place. Anne Rice condoned this behaviour (while saying she wouldn’t have done it herself) and she is known for working with ridiculous websites to “out” bloggers who dare leave negative reviews on books. R x
LikeLike
I completely agree with you. However, I did mention this to an author friend after I read it. Mainly because I’ve been in a similar situation with an author and I wanted to see if she had heard about the incident or anything. She said that apparently Harris had been bashing Hale on her feed and anyone else who stood up for her, before Hale went crazy. Is that an excuse for Hale’s own bad behavior? NO! Absolutely not. In fact if offered the chance to review her work I would definitely politely decline. Simply because if I don’t love her work I’m not in the mood to deal with that kind of drama. But what surprises me is that The Guardian didn’t do some fact checking and look into what started the whole problem in the first place. I’m not sure where my friend got the information about Harris bashing Hale’s work and positive reviews, so for all I know that could be something Hale has created in her own “make herself the victim” story. But it would have been nice to have the person who agreed to let her make more of an ass of herself check some of the background.
Also I’ve been reading a lot of the conversations on this and A LOT of reviewers have been saying that incidents like this is why they only publish reviews that are 3-5 stars. Which is really messed up. Already reviewer bashing has bullied reviewers into not being completely honest. I don’t mean being mean, but honest. If they don’t like a book enough to give it 3 stars then they need to put that in a review and put why. I understand from an authors stand point that 1 star reviews completely mess up the algorethym (that’s so spelled wrong, sorry) that Amazon uses to promote books. But if the 1 star review is an honest and fair review that it has every right to be there. (I also discussed this with my author friend, and apparently you need 50 reviews before Amazon will start promoting your book, like recommending it and stuff, and a 1 star review is worth something like around 5 -5 star reviews. Which in itself is a problem, but that’s a different topic) I have mini-panic attacks before putting up any review, good or bad, I can get absolutely terrified that even if I like a book that some troll is going to come along and bash what I’ve written. Or worse, someone else who has read the book and hated it and actually has a valid point, which would make me feel really dumb if it was something obvious that I missed. I’ve already been threatened by an author, and harassed by her ‘followers’ so that alone, while it scares me, doesn’t scare me as much as it used to. However I still get nervous that I’m being overly critical and some author is going to cry because I didn’t like their book. I know I probably should stop reviewing. lol. Not thick enough skin to be mean.
But I’m really glad that you decided to post about this. Not because I believe Hale or Harris needs any more support or exposure. But because the whole problem of reviewers being bullied into not reviewing, as well as reviewers who are purposely mean just for shock value or because they are trolls, is something that bloggers and writers should band together to put a stop to.
LikeLike
Hi! Thanks for commenting.
I wasn’t able to find the alleged tweets where Harris apparently “attacked” anyone who spoke positively about Hale’s book. But as you mentioned, and as I said in this post, even if those things happened, Hale’s response is not normal or justifiable. I’m sure authors have to deal with negative, troll-like and far meaner reviews regularly, to be an author you must have to have quite tough skin! And there are ways and means of dealing with it that don’t resort to stalker-ish and obsessive behaviour. I’m not sure what Hale’s objective was with this piece, but I’d be surprised if she didn’t realise she’d receive a backlash.
And I’m hugely surprised and disappointed in The Guardian. Aside from Hale’s instinct, there’s no evidence that Harris is “Jane”, so really that is a defamatory article. All four comments I made, which were pro-blogger, have been removed from the site. None of which were in breach of the comment policy as far as I’m aware, and were no different than the 700+ comments still available to see, except mine were pro-blogger and not pro-Hale. Disgusted by it.
It’s a really interesting point you make about being reluctant to post negative reviews. I think the lowest on my blog is 2.5/5, but I’m guessing that’s because if a book was any lower, I’d not continue reading it. I’m always conscious of what I write, in the sense that I try not to “attack” an author personally, but base my review on the content of the novel, but I never thought any of them would see it or pay attention to it. I’ve had a couple of authors comment on my reviews (positively, even when there was some critique!) and while I found it exciting that they had seen it and read it, part of me then was concerned if I ever did post a particularly negative one in the future that I’d offend. Luckily, I’ve yet to have a bad experience with an author (self-pub or not). But I can also see how this incident may cause a blogger to stop and think in the future before posting a negative review, even if it is well-thought out and not an “attack” on the author as an individual.
I have had the experience where another blogger has disagreed with my standpoint completely, and they have had a valid argument that made me stop and question my initial gushing (Reviews of a Bookworm and I had very different opinions on Beautiful Disaster!), but it was a constructive conversation, and we actually bonded over it, and we do share a lot of love for a lot of the same books too. I think it’s all about how you approach someone with a differing opinion, and how you choose to respond to it. But yes, if I miss something totally obvious when someone else points it out, I do feel a little…bashful, is that the right word? But hey, we’re all only human, and we al interpret things completely differently based on our own experiences. I haven’t read Hale’s book, but from what I’ve heard about it, I don’t think I’d like it. Dark comedy isn’t usually my thing, and in her article she couldn’t identify where the rape was in the book, but apparently it was actually statutory rape because of the age difference between the characters. It just sounds like a trigger book to me, that was written in a particular way to cause polarised opinions and get attention – which Hale seems to do quite well with her writing.
I guess this is a whole new arena for the publishing industry. Authors aren’t likely to receive media training in the same way celebs, musicians and actors do, but maybe they should start to. With social media and the internet, authors and readers/bloggers/reviewers have person-to-person contact in a way they’ve never had before, and some of them clearly don’t know how to do it. R x
LikeLiked by 1 person
After I replied to your post I went in search of anything that could like or confirm Hale’s accusations. ( I know I’m just feeding the machine, but I have WAY to much time on my hands. lol) I couldn’t find anything, but I did find a lot of things out about Hale and facts brought forth that countered a lot of what she said. I couldn’t find the girl who Harris and her followers supposedly harassed about her positive review of Hale’s work. I also saw some of the tweets that HALE had made and found out that her significant other and in-laws are involved at the Guardian and are writers, which might explain the Guardian letting her write what she did and deleting comments against her. I do know that I looked for the original review by Harris, that you had a link to, and she has taken the review down and just replaced it with F***this. Which is really a shame. (She has also put up new review rules on her blog saying she isn’t accepting certain types of books/authors for review anymore, which is a shame to) I understand why she did these two things. She was sick of the drama. I get it. But it’s really a shame that she was pushed to take down her opinion and silence her own voice because of someone else not agreeing with it. What I also found amazing was this review was originally put up back in 2013….and Hale has dragged this out until now?? (I know it took a while for her to stalk Harris and for all of the actions to accumulate, but still.) I don’t agree with all reviews. I don’t agree with how all reviewers decide to word their reviews. But that doesn’t mean they don’t have a right to their opinion. The fact that she was so stressed by it she silenced her voice is just wrong. That right there is the main reason I will not read any of Hales work. Hale has the right to write whatever she wants, be it good, bad, inflammatory, whatever. But so does Harris. If Harris really was doing the things that she is accused of there are other actions that Hale could have taken. She could have reported her comments, she could have blogged about Harris’ supposed harassment or published it in The Guardian. No instead she went mental, which I did find out isn’t the first time she’s taken matters into her own hands. The only thing that might convince me to ever give Hale a second chance is if she publicly apologized to Harris and Harris in turn accepted it, and put her review back up.
I think that authors, and bloggers, should really look into social/media training. At least maybe a Ms. Manners course or something. I work with authors all the time. Some, not all, aren’t exactly socially blessed. So I give them tips/advice on just “talking” at blog events and facebook events. (Biggest hint: Just say hi! Fans love to just know that you ARE reading their comments and it makes them feel good. You don’t have to be eloquent or a social butterfly, just let them know you know they are there. Cause there are tons of other places they could be) The ones that I am more friends with than co-workers, I lend an open ‘ear’ to for them to vent about low reviews or trolls. Cause yes I understand even the most well written review if it is negative is stressful. But despite thinking everyone should take a Ms. Manners course, I don’t think any amount of PR training would have helped, or would help Hale, I think she needs psychiatric help.
LikeLike
There really is no evidence to support the claims that Hale made, which is why it was so shocking that The Guardian posted the article, especially as Hale also publicly “outed” the blogger. The original review was changed quite a while ago I think, but the review that is still live is the one Hale references, Harris made status updates as she was reading the book (which are still there) and which started out very positively, it was only when the book started using things like rape, PTSD and domestic abuse as punchlines that Harris had a problem, and if you scroll down on that link you will see her replies to others’ responses. Harris announced on Twitter that she would not be blogging again after this, but I hope she changes her mind. Hale really went out of her way to make Harris look like some sort of troll, when she’d been blogging for over two years and had plenty of 4/5* reviews listed on her site too, she was just a blogger with an opinion – not someone capable of doing the “career destruction mode” type stuff Hale claims.
Great point to pick up on – the review was done in 2013 when Harris read an ARC of the book sent to her by the publisher, again not a troll but someone who publishers trust with their precious (and I don’t mean that sarcastically) ARCs. Why Hale decided to post an article about it now, so long after the event, is beyond me. Why she chose to post it at all is the bigger question. Surely, she or her advisers (assuming she has any) would have jumped at the chance to stop her. Then again, her future father-in-law tweeted in support of the article. As a well-known journalist, I thought he would have known better than to support such a story, so maybe those around her weren’t giving her the best advice.
I also agree that some reviewers can and have made me “uncomfortable” with how they choose to publicly review books – and I did mention in this post that Harris’ review was a little more blunt than one I would write. But again, everyone has a different review style, and this was hers. Though she didn’t attack Hale as a person, she picked out the parts of the book that were a problem for her. I also agree that there were many other actions that could have been taken (though most authors who have spoken out have said there seems to be a secret code among writers where you just don’t read the bad reviews, and if you do you don’t engage). I have to say, having read Harris’ review, I really don’t see where Hale was coming from. This was not a troll review, it wasn’t out-of-proportion attacking, scathing, or even that bad to be honest, it just seemed to trigger her for some reason. And yes, Hale seems to have a bit of a history of this, and for airing dirty laundry in public when it doesn’t need to be by writing about it.
While I don’t agree with Hale’s actions, and think as a community we have a right to defend ourselves, and I took part in the #HaleNo campaign on Twitter (boycotting Hale’s work, which I still support and will continue to do), I do see that she is a human, and that humans can and do make mistakes. A close friend commented that she may have some form of mental health problem, and even if she doesn’t, it’s clear she could use some guidance and sound advice. I guess I’m conscious of the book community being labelled as something we’re not, as this close friend now seems to think the tweets Hale is receiving, both from the book blogging community and from Twitter users in general, could amount to cyber-bullying. I’m not sure where I stand on this as none of our tweets are malicious, threatening, use profanity etc. but I can see where my friend is coming from, and I’m conscious of the fact that Hale is a human behind her computer screen. Yes, I think an apology would go a LONG way for Hale right now, if only she were smart enough to release one. Since the article was published she defended her actions proudly and revelled in it, even baiting those who were commenting on how wrong her actions were. I wonder with hindsight will she change her stance?
I also completely agree that authors should receive media or PR training. I think I’ve said this before in one of the comments, but celebs, actors, singers etc. receive media training, and in the digital age when readers, reviewers and authors can have so much free interaction, it really would be beneficial for authors to receive some guidance on appropriate public behaviour. It’s such a tricky one to comment on, as I don’t know Hale at all, but from previous articles she has written, as well as this one, it does sound like she could use some sound input in her life, which I guess at the minute she just doesn’t have.
Thanks for commenting. R x
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was reading about this yesterday. Scary as hell. I think Hale needs some serious mental health help. What she did was not and could never be acceptable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very scary. If this were any other scenario, where someone stalked someone online in this manner and then went to their home, it would not be considered to be “OK”. I’m also hugely surprised her publisher haven’t commented on it, as she’s put them into disrepute. As for The Guardian, they’ve lost their reliability and status in my eyes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m one of those reviewers, sometimes, who is too blunt, mainly because that is how I am IRL. My first experience reviewing a book for an author was a bad one, ending in the author (nearly naming) and certainly shaming me all over the goodreads message boards because she couldn’t believe I had the gall to write a 1 star review and low and behold, not even finish the book. I’m still angry about her response, because I felt it was highly immature and unprofessional- but at least she didn’t stalk me, I guess! (review was Tent City by Kelly Van Hull and is up on my blog if you are interested!)
This really is about 100 shades of disturbing! : /
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ohhh, I must go check that out!
To be fair, I’m much more sarcastic and blunt about books IRL, but publicly, although we’re not “professional” reviewers, I try to maintain professionalism about my reviews, as much as I can. I’ve read some reviews that made ME uncomfortable, sometimes they can be harsh, and I appreciate that authors are humans with feelings, and that their books are like children. I get it. But no matter what anyone writes, I just can’t see how doing what Hale did can be considered a normal, healthy reaction. She’ll have some journey to find me, but I’ll put the kettle on, just in case. I’m @ Guardian Books and Harper Teen in a lot of tweets – I’m expecting a response in terms of a public announcement, for them NOT to do one is poor form. I won’t be supporting Hale as an author, and I’ve noticed she is showing zero remorse, or understanding of the consequences of her actions. In fact, she seems to be revelling in it. R x
LikeLike
also you are right btw, those with badges should look at what she did because yeah….not exactly legal.
I hope they definitely do get back to you! I hate that they deleted your comment and I find it weird that they decided to make what Hale did seem so…normal. whut.
haha definitely have a mooch- I have my review up and a slight subsequent discussion of what occured after…
LikeLike
Hale’s soon to be father-in-law works for The Guardian I think, could be part of why it’s being allowed.
Loads of people have said, this could have been a kid blogging, or what if it was a male author? Or if it were under any other online circumstances, it would be investigated.
LikeLike
wonder if anyone has actually contacted the police about it…
LikeLike
Just said the same thing myself. She’s in NYC district. Do they even have Twitter?
LikeLike
hopefully the controversy will have flagged it up one way or another to them. Most big police departments do actually have twitters though, in an attempt to engage effectively with their communities via social media- I’d be shocked if NYPD didn’t have one!
LikeLike
They would know what is happening, but the silence sounds like condoning it – something should be said.
LikeLike
I think she thinks it is some form of free advertising. After all I had never heard of her until an author I follow brought up her bad behavior. And honestly if she wasn’t just the current face of a growing problem I wouldn’t give her a second thought.
LikeLike
Someone did question if it was a PR stunt on Hale’s part. We’ll never know. I had heard of her through her connection with Full Fathom Five, but that was also a bit of a negative.
LikeLike
Read your review – perhaps a little blunt but certainly not scathing, rude or inappropriate. To be honest, I would have mentioned that awful cover too. R x
LikeLike
Yeah, I mean this was one of my first online reviews, so it was very short and blunt, but it was also honest, which is what she asked for.
hahaha IKR, it really is such a bad cover! I should have! Some of the comments she made about me to those other authors though were absolutely horrific!
LikeLike
It was brave for a first, it took me a while to find my feet!
LikeLike
haha I’ve gotten kinder as time has gone on ;3
LikeLike
This was mental! I have given bad reviews before, and even though I try to be kind and mellow, sometimes I just can’t. Still, never has this happened before. I did actually get an email from a author thanking me for a 2 star review, inviting me to reread the story as they fixed it after my suggestions! If that’s not one of the points of book blogging, I have no idea what is.
Hale is a mess and I hope this doesn’t become a norm. I get some authors agree with her, but some bloggers have also expressed support, which is insane. Try putting yourself in Blythe’s shoes! :X
I think you are right to clean up the social media as such, I may do just that myself. You never know! :X
I was planning on reading this book, but after this, definitely not. I had no idea it was a FFF novel either, or that Hale actually has ties in her publishing house, which just ruins everything further. -.- So done with such crap.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It really is excellent when feedback can be given and received well! I’ve given 3 and 4 star reviews where I’ve mentioned the things that were “off” to me that knocked the rating down, and authors have either not mentioned it, or thanked me for my feedback. I’ve never really had to give “bad” reviews luckily, but the day will come when I do, and that should be OK! I get that some people can see why she made contact, or thought her piece was “riveting” (in the words of her almost-father-in-law), but she went far to far, and continues to do so with her stinking attitude. I question the moral fibre of the people who agree with her actions. You’d think after this backlash she’d at least hold her hands up and say she made a mistake. But it’s gone too far for that even now. I honestly hope her careers peeters off into oblivion after this. Harris’ review didn’t end her career, she did.
As for HarperCollins not commenting, and Guardian Books not commenting, that’s just a PR nightmare for them now too. It’s honestly shook me up a little to think someone could do this and get away with it. I doubt the authorities would do anything, but it should be reported. R x
LikeLike
I’m going to be completely honest and say that this scared me into changing my ⭐ reviews on Goodreads to either ⭐ ⭐ (books I actually finished) or no stars (books I DNF’d). I’ve got a family to protect!
LikeLike
It’s terrible that it’s come to that! I tend to be a little pedantic, so I’ll not be changing anything, but it was food for thought for the future!
LikeLike
I completely understand. And that’s why something should really be done about Hale. Use her as an example or something with whatever punishment she receives. Whether it is legal or just being dropped like a hot potato by her publisher, etc.. No one should ever be afraid to express their opinion.
LikeLike
I do think something should be said by Harper Teen, and The Guardian, and especially by Hale. An incident of this nature requires a response. Silence only makes it worse.
LikeLike
Wow. As an author, I’m shocked by the lengths that the author went to get revenge. Nobody wants a bad review but it happens. It’s part of the game. If you can’t handle them then maybe you should only publish your books to family and friends. Book bloggers provide a service and the ones I’ve met seem to strive to be fair and honest, while maintaining their integrity. They certainly don’t deserve to be stalked and harassed. Hopefully Hale will knock off the crap and the boycott will make her re-evaluate her behavior and apologize. I’m sure I’ll never read one of her books.
LikeLike
Thanks for commenting! I don’t think stalking someone is ever justifiable, but if Harris’ review were at least remotely an attack on Hale, it would be possibly more understandable. But it really was just a negative review. Authors and publishers have already spoken out about how much this could hurt the blogger/author relationship. We don’t pretend that we help to sell thousands of books, but there is a contribution and a valued relationship there that publishers and authors seem to appreciate, and I do think this may have tarnished it slightly, at least for a while. It was nice to see Twitter coming down with positive tweets afterwards though championing positive authors.
LikeLike
I got to say this is terrifying. I don’t presume to know the whole truth after reading Hale’s article, but from what I can gather this was a case of a lot of pride and not a lot of self-control. I don’t know the story from the blogger’s perspective, so I won’t try and comment on hear-say from the author. However, from what she did say, I cannot for the life of me see how Hale’s actions can be justified. Even if Blythe wasn’t who she said she was, for Hale to physically go to her house seems insane. This wasn’t a person who killed your cat or something equally horrible (I’m trying to think of a scenario where it would be appropriate to show up at a stranger’s house but anything short of violence doesn’t seem enough), she wrote a bad review which she is completely entitled do to. It seems like the author needed to prove Blythe didn’t exist and therefore negate her negative review and its influence on other readers. And because Hale thinks she proved Blythe wasn’t real, she seems to think the end justifies the means when it very clearly does not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yea, there’s a lot of confusion over this among people who aren’t in the community – Hales seems to think she proved Blythe wasn’t “real” which means she was a fake reviewer, writing false reviews having never read the book. In reality, even if “Blythe” was a pseudonym, this was a book blogger who was writing reviews and running a blog for over two years, so the opinions in the review were never fake – whether they belonged to someone named Blythe, or someone with that pseudonym. I stated all of this in the comments section of Guardian Books too, but guess what? It was deleted. “They” just want a warped version of the truth because it makes Hale’s story more plausible and makes their publication look more reliable. The review was never falsified, and readers have began to question Hale’s own understanding of her book, because Blythe noted statutory rape among other triggers in her review, and in the article Hale claims there is no rape in her book, when there clearly is. But besides and above all of that, you have to question if an online discussion/dispute such as this should ever be taken offline without invitation and notice to the individuals involved, to stalk Blythe how she did was never an appropriate response, whether she was a troll or not. Condoning this will set a bad precedent. Hale seems to still be proud of her actions, maybe she thought we’d agree with her? I don’t know why else she would tell the world she stalked someone. Her reputation is now tarnished though.
LikeLike
There is definitely something off about Hale’s logic in this situation. It is ironic and probably poetic justice that she’s not going to be well-received in the book blogging community because of her behavior. What I find disturbing as well are those that are defending Hale and attacking Blythe. But when I read the article, there isn’t anything there that shows me that Blythe was some internet troll. What we have in the article is hearsay without any evidence to back it up. I then went over to read the status updates by Blythe on the book and there is nothing there that make me believe she was in anyway targeting Hale.
And you know what’s also made me angry? The fact that Hale goes out of her way to change the real name of this blogger, but doesn’t bother to change the pseudonym Blythe used because you know her intention was to ‘out’ this blogger publicly. There is just a whole lot of hypocrisy coming from Hale and I for one will never read anything she writes. I really don’t know how any blogger will after something like this.
LikeLike
Someone did comment at the irony that Hale may need to adopt a pseudonym in order to keep publishing, because although she was under the impression she “outed” a troll, all she did was “out” someone who used a pseudonym online to protect their privacy, and look how that turned out. It was concerning that The Guardian, and so many of those who made comments, took the word of a self-confessed stalker, over that of actually doing any research. A stark reminder of how we shouldn’t believe everything we read, even when it comes from a “respected” publication.
Hypocrisy is the perfect word for this incident.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Having read the original article, I had a far different response than you. I am reserving my full judgement until further research, but if what you say is correct, it does change my initial thoughts. One thing Hale pointed out, and you also show a demonstration of this, is the blacklisting idea. Had Hale made a simple online response, she would have been blacklisted. She made a far more drastic response and is definitely blacklisted. I don’t approve of her actions, but I also don’t think she needs to be boycotted by the book blogging community. Harris’ review bordered on a personal attack and according to Hale contained false assertions. Also, I don’t recall thinking any of her actions were illegal. Inappropriate, yes, but not illegal. I’d have to do more investigation to be sure. Anyway, while I don’t feel Hale was in anyway right, the evidence she presents does make me question Harris’ current portrayal as an innocent book blogger. I don’t think this story is black and white. It’s grey all over, but one thing is clear: Don’t do what Hake did. No one, not even other authors, will support you.
LikeLike
Hi Jennifer, thanks for commenting!
Can you clarify which parts of what I’m saying have made you reconsider your initial thoughts? I think that’s interesting.
I’ve mentioned in this post that Harris’ review wasn’t positive, and that she is one of the more blunt reviewers out of us, but I would argue it wasn’t a personal attack on Hale. Harris disliked many of the themes and triggers employed within the book, including statutory rape (I know in the article Hale claims there isn’t rape in her book, but there is, there’s statutory rape). And Hale very much portrays Harris as a “troll”, someone who persistently writes 1* reviews of books to torture authors, and who seeks them out online to get a reaction. This too wasn’t the case. Hale invited bloggers and followers on Twitter to give her ideas for her next book, Harris replied, and that is how the whole thing started. Hale then clicked through Harris’ profiles (according to her own article) and discovered Harris had reviewed her book negatively. It was from there she began lightly stalking (as she describes it) Harris’ online accounts. Because Hale was “googling” her own name and had set-up Google Alerts for herself, it meant that when Harris was talking to other book bloggers on twitter about Hale or her book, Hale could view these tweets. Harris wasn’t engaging in troll-like activity with Hale directly, Hale was seeking out the negative comments on her book, and then became obsessed with it.
I would think a lot of authors receive negative reviews, and probably ones from trolls too, and most of the authors who have spoken out on the issue say that they are told not to engage with negative reviewers, so based on that I do think Hale’s actions were inappropriate. Regardless as to whether Harris was an online troll or not, and not depending on how many profanities or horrible statements were or weren’t used in her review, I still think physically stalking someone because of their online activity is inappropriate, and I think if this were any other scenario it would be far more condemned. There are other ways and means to handle this type of behaviour.
I don’t know if Hale would have been blacklisted for responding online – I doubt it though – as there have been confrontations in the past, among many other reasons for bloggers and readers to have an issue with a particular author, and they aren’t blacklisted on this scale. I think it’s a mixture of the severity of what Hale did, the fact The Guardian published it unchecked, and the fact that a publisher who a lot of bloggers would have a good relationship with and would help to promote, would all turn a blind eye to it, while Hale reveled in the attention on-line and seemed proud of her behaviour. We felt like we weren’t being heard. So #HaleNo was born both to raise awareness and to show solidarity in refusing to promote Hale and her work through our blogs. Other readers and shoppers will of course still buy her books I assume, but book bloggers won’t be supporting her.
I don’t agree with any “hate” Hale may or may not have received. I think she is someone who made a terrible mistake, and unfortunately hasn’t had the common sense to hold her hands up to it. As far as we know her actions are illegal, both in the UK and US due to new legislative updates regarding harassment, stalking and online behaviours. Then of course is the question of Data Protection considering it was a publisher who confirmed Harris’ address. As well as the very serious question of mental health here, that many people aren’t mentioning in a considered way. To stalk someone online to the extent that Hale did, rent a car months in advance to pay them a visit, get there and be unable to speak to the person, and then continue to harass them after the event requires considerable time and energy and is very obsessive behaviour, over one 1* review left on Goodreads.
I agree that the story is far from black and white. But I do have a slight issue with the term “innocent” book blogger, as it insinuates that Harris deserved to be stalked and publicly “outed” for writing a negative review, which I don’t think she did. I’ve been surprised at the response from authors, as well as bloggers, showing support and concern at this, I’m patiently waiting for Harper Teen and The Guardian to released statements.
Thanks again from commenting, great to see opinions shared from other viewpoints. R x
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] When An Author Stalks You… […]
LikeLike
[…] another take, check out this post on the Confessions of a Book Geek blog. The author has clearly done far more investigation […]
LikeLike
Normally I kind of roll my eyes at the latest book blogosphere drama. I don’t generally care about authors behaving badly because sometimes this can turn into a bit of a double standard. But I find myself incredibly fascinated by this one!!! My reaction to this I find is far different than most others. I can’t say I’m on board with either party here because there are just so many questions that I don’t think have been answered, and maybe they cannot be answered. I’m not throwing support behind Hale, but I’m not prepared to boycott her books either. I just think there is a lot of grey area in this situation. Hale’s behavior was inappropriate yes, but I don’t see her actions as illegal. If she’s seeking out Blythe Harris, but Blythe Harris doesn’t really exist, has a crime been committed? Then again, I’m not familiar with federal law regarding cyber-bulling or harassment. And if Blythe Harris is in fact catfishing, why so we accept this behavior? My reaction to Hale’s article wasn’t negative. I’m not angry at her or her publishing company.If anything, I think this experience was probably more humbling for Hale– she sat behind her computer accusing another person of being a “troll”, yet her own behavior was troll-like, and she does acknowledge this at least. She acknowledges that her behavior was obsessive and border-line insane. And if anything, it’s eye-opener for the rest of us– how secure is our information really? I grew up with the internet. I feel comfortable with it, and I don’t usually think twice about the information I display. Perhaps I ought to…!
LikeLike
Edit: I think I may have misunderstood the pseudonym v. the catfishing insinuation. Now this scenario is far less fascinating and more wtf?! than I initially thought.
LikeLike
Ahhh. Yes, Hale tried to make it look as though Harris was out to get her in her original article, whereas anyone involved with Harris in the community knew this wasn’t the case. It was a pseudonym (if it was one at all, we still don’t actually know if Hale publicly outed a blogger or a pseudonym). I did comment to this effect on The Guardian article as there was so much hate for bloggers going on, but TG removed the comment. According to their own Comment Policy it was not in breach of any guidelines, but all 4 comments I made (some in discussion with others) were also removed, which I thought was very interesting…
LikeLike
It’s a tough one. In terms of it being illegal, whether it’s reported or not is a different matter, but according to recent updates to legislation what she did is illegal and considered to be harassment. Most definitely it raises security questions, but as many authors commented, it also calls into question how authors deal with negative reviews, and public review sites like Goodreads, where reviewers are often sarky, and aren’t “professional” critics.
LikeLike
[…] Rachel writes her own post about the stalking author. […]
LikeLike
I have been reading the articles over the last few days and I’m beyond disturbed by it. Like so many others I write reviews just for the love of books and I want to freedom to express my opinions without fear of an author backlash. I’m not a snarky reviewer but I do write negative reviews. Thankfully I have had no repercussions so far but I am wary. I’m even considering not publishing negative reviews on my blog but I really don’t want to be censored in that way. I want to be honest and to express my views in their fullest form whether they are good, bad or indifferent. And more importantly just because I dislike a book doesn’t mean it’s a bad book just that it didn’t work for me. My reviews are recording my thoughts for myself personally as much as for anyone reading.
Anyway, this has me thinking a lot about online safety and some steps I need to take to protect my privacy. I know the chances of being stalked are slim but this proves you can’t be careful enough.
LikeLike
Hi, Trish!
I feel the same. I do try to write professionally when reviewing, but I don’t think any of us considered the possibility of an author tracking a reviewer down to enact revenge! It’s important to not be censored, but I know many are now thinking that way out of fear, which is horrible. I also massively agree with you in that books aren’t exactly “bad”, they just don’t work for everyone. I’ve tried a few cult classics lately and I’ve been baffled by them. I would say they’re terrible, but they’re well loved by many. It’s just my personal preference and opinion. Have you heard about the girl in Scotland? An author tracked her from London to Scotland and HIT HER OVER THE HEAD WITH A WINE BOTTLE for a negative review of his prologue?! Need to find a link… R x
LikeLike
I read that yesterday. It’s all gone crazy. And the more comments I read, the more I realise how many authors despise bloggers. Not the majority of them of course but a significant few. I have seen more than one comment ‘those that can write and those that can’t review’ which just makes me grind my teeth. I have never aspired to be an author and review because books are everything to me.
LikeLike
I know, where did that come from? Thankfully, many, many authors showed support. Realistically, when anything goes into the public domain it is up for criticism and opinion, be it professional or otherwise. Art, music, media etc. The difference is today there are so many digital platforms that authors can see negative reviews, whereas in the past there weren’t as many platforms for it. Times are a-changing! R x
LikeLike
[…] Rachel addresses when an author stalks you […]
LikeLike
[…] but well delivered and overall I found it to be a pretty enjoyable read. Reading this following the events of last year, I have to say, it made me consider my on-line safety and the measures I can take to try and be […]
LikeLike
I can’t believe I missed this when it actually happened! At first I read the Guardian article, and it convinced me that the author was being harassed by the reviewer. But then I actually did the research, and saw all the blogs and articles that painted a very different picture. Regardless of whether the blogger was who she says she was (I could care less if she lied about her age and profession – it’s not like she was on a dating site or something), the author was totally out of bounds. I think she just allowed herself to obsess so much over that one review, and rather than seek counseling, she let it grow to an extreme. It seems like her friends are also enablers as well. I’m not going to throw around words like the author is “crazy” or anything like that, but I do think she has some serious anxiety issues that require professional help. It’s one thing to be nervous about bad reviews and upset when someone gives you a bad review, but it’s entirely another to engage with reviewers and go and stalk them. I actually looked up what I could find on this reviewer, and it seems that she lives in California! The author lives in NY! If that is true, it means the author went ACROSS THE COUNTRY to go to this reviewer’s house?!?! The way the author wrote the article made it seem like the reviewer must be in the next town over or something. Stalking is never OK. Though my blog itself is relatively new, I’ve been active on Goodreads for about four years, and never in my wildest dreams would I have thought an author would stalk a reviewer like this. If an author did that to me – I don’t care how famous the author is, it could be J.K. Rowling herself – I would be calling the police and filing for a restraining order!
LikeLike
To add, it just goes to show how only hearing one side of the story can change EVERYTHING. That research, and getting info from multiple sources, is SO important!
LikeLike
The Guardian article was SO biased it wasn’t even funny, and I tried commenting a couple of times (not in violation of any of their codes, I wasn’t rude or inappropriate etc.) but my comments were all deleted by moderators. It was such a controlled environment, and when a semi-response was finally allowed it was hidden somewhere in the middle of the Money section and not in the Books section. It’s really tainted my opinion of The Guardian, and most definitely the author. I was also disappointed the publisher didn’t release a statement, because when you do research what went on and see the other side of the story, it becomes very different to how Hale portrayed it. The author planned the visit quite a while in advance and rented a car to travel cross-country, it’s insanity. Sadly, this isn’t the only instance of something like this happening either! R x
LikeLike
[…] Please don’t. However, you may be interested in what to do When An Author Stalks You. […]
LikeLike
[…] We use the internet daily. We download apps on to our phone. We have social media profiles. We have profiles on a range of software for collaboration for work. The internet is everywhere. We rarely read Terms and Conditions, and many of us are under the illusion that the internet is a safe space. And most of the time, it probably is (book bloggers don’t tend to attract a lot of trolls). […]
LikeLike
[…] When An Author Stalks You… […]
LikeLike