Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2020/09/18/why-goodreads-is-bad-for-books.html
…
2 Likes
Yeah, the only problem is getting the books in the database first. Or making a tool that can provide a facade…
1 Like
I read this article last week and I’ve got to say, I’m still not clear what the author’s premise is other than “it could be better”. Ok, sure. It definitely could be better. But so could Netflix, which has the most confoundingly obtuse interface across multiple platforms and whose recommendation “algorithm” still doesn’t understand a thing about my taste after 12+ years of use. Her take that it’s “bad for books” seems to be predicated on the idea that it should be Goodreads role to direct readers to more obscure offerings. Which yeah, would be nice, but the exactly same logic could apply to libraries since they buy based on NYT bestsellers lists and bulk publisher discounts as opposed to recommendations and “community”. You’d be hard pressed to argue that libraries are bad for books.
But hey, I’ve clicked on the article probably 5-6 times by now, so…
7 Likes
I was going to say what exactly is wrong with the least weaponized most harmless bit of social media I use? oh… well yeah I agree with everything in the article but maybe just maybe that’s why it’s not a weaponized threat to my mental health?
4 Likes
I mentioned it on the other post about GR: https://www.librarything.com/
They do it so much better that GR, and are only partially owned by Amazon.
2 Likes
I’ve been using The Story Graph (not allowed to post the link) and the recommendations have been good. Plus I was able to just import all of my info from GoodReads and their book reading challenges are about more than just quantity of books read in a year.
4 Likes
@beschizza wrote a post about the same article last week.
As @lizlyons8 already said, one alternative is The Story Graph, which was also mentioned in last week’s post.
4 Likes
Come on, Boing! This isn’t slashdot! We aren’t supposed to see multiple posts on the same exact article! 
2 Likes
Happens regularly. The game is to be the first one to post a comment with a link to the previous post of the same thing, and say “Reboing!”.
6 Likes
the archive of dupes (we tag them “b-side”) is the best page on the site
(tag pages are temporarily down for maintenance)
4 Likes
slash dot is still a thing?
2 Likes
Why can’t you post the link to The Story Graph?
That’s what I came here to do.
There’s also Gnooks, which shows you closely related authors & is how I discovered that Karl Popper is basically the epicenter of authors that The Guy Sitting Next to You on the Bus will absolutely tell you all about.
1 Like
Oh, it is. And the readership didn’t age up in the time period since you last looked at it.
I am not the usual Goodreads user so I’m not worried about the issues raised. I joined it for one reason, which hasn’t worked out - I’m trying to find a book my wife remembers from high school (so pre-1968) which discussed Christianity as basically Madison Avenue-type marketing men. No luck so far
I’m loath to recommend Reddit for anything but have you tried asking /r/tipofmytongue? And maybe /r/books for good measure
Agree. I read that other article too, NYT I think. I don’t get the harping on goodreads. It’s a sucky website and could be better. Big deal. Does that make it “bad for books” and worth going on and on about it? Give me a break. It’s 2020, there are a million more important things going on. Write about one of those things.
2 Likes
Their argument really seems to boil down to “Amazon something something”. Which, fine. I’d be happy to see Amazon’s impact diluted. However, they didn’t make a compelling argument that Amazon’s hegemony in publishing has any impact on Goodreads’ algorithm. In fact, the complaint seems to be that it is outdated and hasn’t really adapted to the times and Amazon is an absentee landlord. Which is preferable to the alternative.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
