Goodreads sucks. It’s as simple as that. The site is filled with trolls, fake reviews, extortion scams, and badly behaving authors.
Let me explain why Goodreads is bad. It’s supposed to be a place where readers find information about authors and books, with good consumer reviews. Instead, it’s filled with vitriol and malice. Yelp has the same problem.
I’ve been on the internet before it was called the Internet. Back in my day it was called ARPANET and consisted of less than a thousand systems (we called them nodes). During the intervening years, I’ve experienced just about everything. I even remember the first worm (a type of computer virus), the Morris worm, the first spam message, and the first major search engine, AltaVista.
Okay, now I feel old.
I’ve experienced most of the platforms from the old CompuServe and AOL message boards to the modern-day social media giants such as Facebook and X.
Goodreads and Manners
Goodreads trolls attack books because they are just plain negative, not because of the writing.Share on X
Never have I experienced such negativity and just plain bad manners as on Goodreads. The place appears to be filled with “Goodreads trolls” who seemingly have nothing better to do than pounce on authors.
Goodreads is owned by Amazon, but as far as I can tell, it is run by a nebulous group of volunteers called Librarians. These folks, for the most part, have been helpful, friendly and competent. It’s just odd that you don’t email or call a support group if you need help. You drop a message into a forum and a librarian will pick it up and take care of you. This seems strange to me, but so far it’s worked for me. I prefer the concept of a dedicated group of PAID support people.
The problem with Goodreads is the overwhelming abundance of negativity concerning reviews and comments. You’ll also find an overabundance of Goodreads trolls, people who attack books because they are just plain negative individuals.
First, Goodreads is strange in that you can “review” a book but not leave any explanation. A reader can click one button to give a one- or two-star review without explaining why. This really sucks. What didn’t they like? There’s no way to know. Were they in a bad mood, did they not like the plot, did they find a grammar error? Who knows?
These kinds of “hit-and-run” reviews are worthless to readers and writers. Readers aren’t given a way to judge what was wrong and writers are not given a chance to improve their work. There is no value of any kind to this method.
Second, when text reviews are left, they are quite often extremely negative. Not just negative. I’ve found Goodreads reviews tend to be vicious to the extreme. It’s almost as if there’s a conspiracy to write negative reviews and torpedo books. I’ve heard this referred to as Goodreads reviewer bullying.
In my mind, there are very few books that should ever receive a one-star review. That means, to me, that there is NOTHING good about the book. Surely there’s something good. In fact, few books even deserve two-star ratings. After all, someone spent a lot of time and effort to write it, and they deserve some kind of acknowledgement at the least for their efforts. Sure, first books can be rough around the edges, but does that mean they deserve a one-star rating?
Most books deserve three stars. That’s the middle. It means “it was okay.” It wasn’t bad and it wasn’t great. It was average compared to other books in the same genre or category.
Yet looking through reviews on Goodreads, there is a huge preponderance of 1- and 2-star ratings (usually without reviews).
I know a lot of authors, hundreds of them, and I’m meeting more every day. Not a single one of them deserves those kinds of reviews or ratings. They all work hard on their books to produce the best possible product that they can. Sure, there are some books I don’t like because it’s not my taste or whatever. I just don’t leave a review at all.
Their books may not be great, but they are not 1 star, which translates to “worthless garbage.”
For a while, I spent a large amount of time trying to figure out Goodreads and I finally gave up. The site is confusing, the ratings horribly inconsistent, and the hostility almost palpable.
I’ve given up. Goodreads sucks. I’ve found it’s just not worth the time and effort. There are far better places to engage with readers, authors and my audience.
The Design Guarantees These Problems
The core problem is philosophical. Goodreads operates on a communistic model where everyone gets an equal voice, no one earns authority, and the people willing to abuse the system gain power over those who play fair. An author who invested three years writing a book has no more standing than an anonymous account created five minutes ago to destroy it.
The “community policing itself” model only works when the community shares values. Goodreads doesn’t have a community. It has 120 million strangers, some of whom enjoy hurting people. Give malicious actors equal power to everyone else, and they’ll use it. That’s not a bug in human nature. It’s predictable. And Goodreads designed a system that rewards it.
The issues with Goodreads aren’t bugs. They’re features. The platform’s fundamental design choices create an environment where abuse thrives.
Anonymous one-click ratings. You can tank a book’s rating without writing a single word or proving you read the book. No purchase verification. No identity verification. Just click and destroy. This is the core problem. Any system that lets anonymous users damage someone’s livelihood with zero accountability will attract bad actors.
No barrier to entry. Creating a Goodreads account takes seconds. Creating dozens of fake accounts to coordinate a review-bombing campaign takes minutes. Amazon knows how to verify accounts. They do it for their marketplace sellers. They do it for Vine reviewers. They choose not to do it for Goodreads.
Ratings on unreleased books. You can rate a book before it’s published. Before ARCs go out. Before anyone on earth has read it. What possible legitimate purpose does this serve? None. It exists only to let trolls preemptively trash books they’ve decided to hate based on the author’s identity or opinions.
Volunteer moderation at industrial scale. Goodreads has over 120 million members. The site handles hundreds of millions of ratings per year. And they rely on unpaid volunteer “librarians” to manage this. That’s not a moderation strategy. That’s hoping problems solve themselves.
Authors are silenced. When an author responds to a troll review, even politely, Goodreads sides with the troll. They’ve explicitly told authors not to engage with negative reviewers. The message is clear: you’re not welcome to defend yourself here.
No downside for bad behavior. Trolls face no consequences. They can one-star every book by authors they dislike. They can leave abusive reviews. They can coordinate harassment campaigns. As long as they don’t directly threaten violence, Goodreads looks the other way.
This isn’t an accident. Every one of these choices makes Goodreads easier and cheaper to run. Verification costs money. Paid moderators cost money. Investigating abuse takes time. Amazon has decided that protecting authors isn’t worth the investment.
The Problems Have Gotten Worse
Since I first wrote this article, the problems on Goodreads have escalated dramatically. Review bombing has become a coordinated weapon.
In 2023, author Cait Corrain lost her book deal after being caught creating fake accounts to one-star competitors while boosting her own ratings. She specifically targeted authors of color in her debut cohort. That scandal made national news and exposed just how easy it is to manipulate the system. If one author with a grudge can do that much damage, imagine what a coordinated group can accomplish.
Even worse, extortion scams now target authors. Scammers threaten to review-bomb books unless authors pay up. TIME Magazine reported on this in 2021, and the problem has only grown. The scammers know Goodreads won’t stop them. They know authors are desperate to protect their ratings. It’s a perfect extortion setup.
Authors of color and LGBTQ+ authors face disproportionate targeting when they speak out on social media about anything. Express an opinion about representation in publishing? Get review-bombed. Criticize a problematic book? Get review-bombed. Exist while marginalized? Believe it or not, also review-bombed. The trolls have learned they can silence authors by threatening their livelihoods.
One author told The Bookseller about a reviewer who systematically one-starred thousands of sapphic and queer books. The account had been doing this for years. Goodreads never took action. That’s not a failure of detection. That’s a policy choice.
Amazon, which owns Goodreads, has made half-hearted attempts to address these issues. In late 2023, they announced “changes to prevent review bombing,” including more customer service staff and procedures to prevent spamming that targets individual authors. Industry veterans were skeptical, and they were right to be.
The changes only catch massive, coordinated attacks on high-profile authors. When Elizabeth Gilbert announced a book, the trolls descended, and Goodreads stepped in. But that’s because Gilbert is famous and the media was watching. Smaller authors remain unprotected. The low-level harassment, the steady drip of malicious one-star ratings, the targeted campaigns against debut authors: none of that triggers intervention.
The Real Cost to Authors
The stakes are higher than hurt feelings. Goodreads ratings have real career consequences.
Publishers watch Goodreads numbers. An editor at a major digital imprint told one author to retire a long-running series because the average rating on the most recent book slipped below 4.2 stars. That’s the threshold, apparently. Drop below it and your series is dead.
Agents use Goodreads to evaluate potential clients. A debut author with a pre-publication rating of 3.2 stars (thanks to trolls) looks like damaged goods. The agent doesn’t know the ratings are fake. They just see a book that readers apparently hate.
Readers use Goodreads to decide what to buy. That’s the point of the site. When trolls trash a book, fewer readers take a chance on it. Sales drop. Royalties drop. The author’s next contract gets smaller, or doesn’t happen at all.
And then there’s the mental health cost. Authors pour years of their lives into books. Watching anonymous strangers gleefully trash your work, knowing you can’t respond, knowing the platform won’t protect you: that takes a toll. I’ve talked to authors who stopped writing entirely after Goodreads harassment campaigns. The trolls won.
Why Goodreads hurts the authors it should help
The complaints in the comments below fall into a handful of buckets. Here they are, sized by how often authors raised each one. Tap any bar to read the full breakdown, or tap the last one to add your own story.
The design
Anonymous reviews, no gatekeeping, ratings before release
The problems
Pile-ons, review-bombing, bad-faith one-stars
The cost
Publishers watch the numbers, a slipping average can end a series
The stakes aren’t hurt feelings: an editor told one author to retire a series after its average dipped below 4 stars.
Why Amazon Doesn’t Fix It
Amazon bought Goodreads in 2013 for $150 million. At the time, people worried about what the acquisition would mean for the site. Turns out, it meant neglect.
Amazon knows how to build safe platforms when they want to. Their marketplace has sophisticated fraud detection. Their review system for products, while imperfect, at least requires a purchase. Vine reviewers go through verification. AWS has world-class security.
They could apply any of these capabilities to Goodreads. They choose not to.
Why? Because Goodreads still serves Amazon’s core purpose: selling books. The site drives traffic to Amazon’s bookstore. It doesn’t matter if authors get hurt along the way. Authors aren’t Amazon’s customers. Readers are. And readers keep using Goodreads despite the toxicity, so Amazon has no incentive to invest in fixing it.
The volunteer librarian system is the tell. A company with Amazon’s resources could hire a real moderation team. They could build automated detection for review bombing. They could require identity verification. The technology exists. The money exists. The will does not.
So Why Isn’t Goodreads Working?
I feel it’s because of the lack of intelligent moderation combined with design choices that reward abuse.
Any platform at scale needs active moderation. Not volunteers. Not algorithms alone. Real humans with real authority to remove bad actors and real accountability for their decisions.
Goodreads has none of that. When you report abuse, your report disappears into a void. Maybe a volunteer librarian sees it. Maybe they don’t. Maybe they agree with you. Maybe they think the troll has a point. There’s no consistency, no transparency, and no appeals process that works.
The platform has over 120 million members and relies heavily on volunteer librarians. That’s not a moderation strategy. That’s hoping the problem goes away.
Meanwhile, the site’s features actively enable abuse. One-click anonymous ratings. No purchase verification. Ratings on unreleased books. Every design choice favors the trolls.
This is why Goodreads isn’t working and is not worth the time and effort to even sign up.
What Authors Can Do
If you’re an author dealing with Goodreads, here’s my advice:
Stop checking your ratings. Seriously. Nothing good comes from watching the numbers fluctuate. You can’t control what trolls do, and obsessing over it will drive you crazy.
Don’t engage. I know it’s tempting. Someone says something false or cruel about your book and you want to correct the record. Don’t. Goodreads will side with the reviewer, and engaging often attracts more trolls.
Document everything. If you’re being targeted by a coordinated campaign or extortion attempt, screenshot everything. You may need it later.
Report, but don’t expect results. File your reports with Goodreads. Create a paper trail. But understand that reports rarely lead to action unless you have media attention or a large following.
Focus on platforms you control. Your website, your email list, your direct relationships with readers. These are assets no troll can take away.
Consider not participating. Some authors have deleted their Goodreads accounts entirely. The platform needs authors more than authors need it. If enough writers walk away, maybe Amazon will finally pay attention.
Alternatives Are Emerging
Many readers and authors have migrated to StoryGraph, which offers similar book tracking features without the toxic culture. It’s not perfect, but the moderation is better and the community is smaller and more civil.
Some authors focus on BookBub, more marketing-oriented, with a reader base that buys books.
Others have simply abandoned the review world entirely, focusing their energy on email lists, social media, and direct reader relationships. You don’t need Goodreads to sell books. Plenty of successful authors have minimal presence there.
The book community existed before Goodreads. It will exist after. The platform’s dominance isn’t permanent, especially if they keep treating authors as expendable.
Should authors still use Goodreads?
Goodreads had a good idea: create a community where readers could discover books and share recommendations. That idea got poisoned by bad design decisions and corporate neglect.
The platform now serves trolls better than it serves readers or authors. Until Amazon decides to invest in real moderation and redesign the features that enable abuse, nothing will change.
I’ve given up on Goodreads. I recommend you do the same.
What do you think? Leave a comment below with your experiences.
References
- How Extortion Scams and Review Bombing Trolls Turned Goodreads Into Many Authors’ Worst Nightmare (TIME)
- Goodreads has a ‘review bombing’ problem (NPR)
- Does Goodreads do enough to protect authors from trolls? (The Bookseller)
- Goodreads faces further criticism from authors over trolls and ‘homophobic reviewers’ (The Bookseller)
See also
The Guides That Get Your Book Written, Published, and Sold
Four short, practical guides on writing, publishing, and selling your book, plus the occasional note when there's something worth your time. No fluff, no daily inbox clutter. Drop your email and they're yours.
We use MailerLite to manage our list and send these emails. Your address is used only to send you what you signed up for. We will not sell it, share it, or use it for anything else, and you can unsubscribe anytime.
Frequently Asked Questions
