Goodreads v. FIYAH, Round 2

Posted on by

Brian J. White, founding editor of Fireside Magazine, today pursued Goodreads’ deletion of FIYAH’s Series listing in two different forums on Goodreads. (He screencapped the entire interaction.) Thread starts here.

And there was heightened concern after Anathema Magazine, a “spec fic mag of work by queer POC/Indigenous/Aboriginals,” reported Goodreads has deleted its entry, too.

The discussion surfaced the Goodreads Librarian who deleted Anathema and some issues of FIYAH. A couple of excerpts (note, unfortunately I can’t make WordPress display only the selected tweet, so these come in pairs) —

https://twitter.com/talkwordy/status/1042522816455815171?s=19

https://twitter.com/talkwordy/status/1042533677459296258

Responses by Goodreads participants have focused on (1) Goodreads has a policy against listing publications which lack ASIN/ISBN numbers, and (2) denying that the enforcement could be anything besides business as usual, let alone an individual or institutional expression of racism.

Here are links to the discussions –

An important element of the controversy has been that Goodreads deleted these particular spec fic magazines while leaving intact the listings for many others. Neil Clarke of Clarkesworld, in a twitter thread that can be reached via Carrie Cuinn, describes his own encounters with Goodreads librarians, what rules were invoked then, and how decisions were made. Some of his tweets say —

Due to the attention now being paid, a reader contacted Brian J. White to say that an issue of his Fireside Magazine was (at some point) deleted by Goodreads –

https://twitter.com/JXilon/status/1042228425321263104

Responses to Goodreads’ actions also include —

Bridget of SF Bluestocking wrote a thread which says in part:

Escape Artists says they will be taking down Mothership Zeta’s Goodreads listing in protest:

[Thanks to JJ and Mark Hepworth for the story.]

Discover more from File 770

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

60 thoughts on “Goodreads v. FIYAH, Round 2”

  3. Ok, now I’m really curious. How does one consider Goodreads as Bridget says ‘mainstream structures commonly used to market their work’? Hell how does one build community of readers in it? Goodreads certainly only very broadly create special interest groups. Again Amazon uses it largely as a selling tool — go look at the front page — unlike LibraryThing and shows little interest in books that don’t sell large numbers.

  4. Well, that escalated quickly.

    “The Secret Lives of the Nine Negro Teeth of George Washington” was the first entry on my short-story longlist for 2019 nominations. It’s outstanding.

  5. If I understand correctly, the problem for FIYAH by itself would be solved if they got ISBN numbers for their individual magazines. A crowdsourcing project for paying for that?

    It wouldn’t solve the problem for everyone, but at least it would be a help for writers published in FIYAH.

  7. Hampus, not sure if this would be feasible, but perhaps crowd-sourcing a fund to buy the (very) less-expensive 100-packs of ISBNs, with the fund then redistributing, at cost, the cheap ISBN’s to not just FIYAH but to other financially marginal publications that could use the break?

    Basically, one central site to provide a service to small/indie magazines that run on enthusiasm and a shoestring.

  9. ISBNs are not really cheap if using them occasionally costing about five dollars a time which given that the FIYAH issue in question is two dollars is a lot of money. They’re a lot cheaper if you purchase a thousand at a time dropping down to a buck a piece but really Goodreads needs to either drop the requirement that they’re needed or admit that Goodreads exists solely to sell product, not to build community.

  12. I don’t have the spoons to go back through the different threads, but apparently the particular ISBNs which apply to magazines are more expensive than the ones for individual books, and I saw someone say that they are only available through one seller. If you buy in bulk you can get 100 for $575, but individual numbers are prohibitively expensive (I don’t remember the price offhand) for a small literary magazine.

    ETA: A quick Google says it’s $125 for one, $295 for 10, and $575 for 100.

  13. @ JJ:

    As far as I can tell, FIYAH would only need one single ISSN.

    From the issn.org ISSN manual:

    Serials are continuing resources issued in a succession of discrete issues or parts, usually bearing numbering, that have no predetermined conclusion.
    ISSN are assigned to the entire population of serials. However, National Centres can decide to exclude ephemeral serials or serials of purely local interest from systematic ISSN assignment (see Section 0.7).

  15. Googling
    goodreads issn

    reveals a number of discussion threads which all seem to indicate that literary magazines with an ISSN instead of an ISBN will all be treated with the same contempt as literary magazines with no ISBN, so the ISSN does not appear to be a viable solution.

  16. According to what Neil Clarke says above, FIYAH and others like it should be an exception to the ISBN/ASIN requirement:

    periodicals without ISBNs but substantially similar to books

    I don’t know where he found that info. But it is obviously something that Goodreads librarians aren’t aware of or ignore when they want to.

    I could see Goodreads not wanting to include ISSNs since those are used for all types of periodicals. Although I’m not sure why they are so precious with their virtual shelf space.

  17. Laura: Although I’m not sure why they are so precious with their virtual shelf space.

    GoodReads has the same problem as Wikipedia, fandom, security and military services, and a whole lot of other entities: people who are insecure and have little power in their real lives will use the organization as a way to attempt to achieve some sort of power and dominance over others.

    This is why I’m not an editor at Wikipedia. When I found out what sort of egos and power-plays were involved on a daily basis, and how petty and childish a lot of them could be, I left them to it. I currently volunteer for a couple of entities where I don’t have to put up with that crap (well, there is one guy who expects way too much validation from others and has a tendency to whine about things, but that’s the extent of what I have to put up with).

  18. Cat Eldridge on September 19, 2018 at 5:41 pm said:
    Ok, now I’m really curious. How does one consider Goodreads as Bridget says ‘mainstream structures commonly used to market their work’?

    As Bridget explains right above that: it’s about having your stuff visible where a lot of people go to connect with others about what they are reading.

    Hell how does one build community of readers in it? Goodreads certainly only very broadly create special interest groups.

    That’s really the problem here. It’s difficult when all the discussion built up over the past couple years has been erased. I’m not sure where you’re looking, but I see a lot of very niche community created groups there.

  19. Laura: I see a lot of very niche community created groups there.

    Lois McMaster Bujold maintains her blog at GoodReads, and has built up a large community with her fans there, with whom she frequently interacts.

  20. Yes, Amazon using Goodreads to help sell books doesn’t stop it from being a great place to connect with other readers and authors regardless of where you get your reading material…other websites, brick & mortar stores, the library, friends….

  21. Goodreads won’t consider an ISSN, only ISBN and ASIN. They have a long history of deleting magazines or editions of magazines that don’t meet this requirement. (A lot more than the handful of magazines mentioned in this thread.) ISSN isn’t a per-issue unique identifier. It’s a series identifier. They also won’t consider the ASIN attached to a subscription at Amazon. They selectively enforce unique identifier requirements based on format. Oh and series, they do have something for that, but it explicitly denies magazines are valid series and pushes them into Listopias.

    Their rules make allowances for “periodicals without ISBNs but substantially similar to books (e.g., perfectbound literary magazines).” A novel without ISBN is always fine, but for some reason, a literary magazine can only get an exception if it is printed. This is a very antiquated way of looking at things.

    The only thing that keeps this from being a much bigger problem is that many digital magazines sell individual issues on Amazon, which earns them ASINs. Most of us don’t tend to notice when they do purges of the “invalid” editions because a few “valid” ones of the same issue stick around. This recently happened to Clarkesworld. There was a massive purge of our various editions from Kobo and other sources, but the ISBN and ASIN-tagged editions remained. (In this case, they merge data, so the reviews and bookshelf links remain.)

    The fix isn’t to require ISSN, buy ISBNs, or convince publications to sell issues on Amazon. It’s to convince Goodreads that it’s time to change this policy and consider all literary magazines acceptable regardless of format. By the way, this would also extend protection to podcasts, which are also currently disallowed, but allowed if released as standalone audiobooks.

  22. Neil Clarke on September 20, 2018 at 4:37 am said:

    The fix isn’t to require ISSN, buy ISBNs, or convince publications to sell issues on Amazon. It’s to convince Goodreads that it’s time to change this policy and consider all literary magazines acceptable regardless of format.

    Hear! Hear! During 2016-2017 my sole use of Goodreads was to keep track of and discuss my short fiction reading. Then someone decided that their 2018 New Year project would be purging Strange Horizons from the database. That’s when I discovered the weird animosity toward the short fiction magazines from Goodreads librarians.

  24. JJ notes that Lois McMaster Bujold maintains her blog at GoodReads, and has built up a large community with her fans there, with whom she frequently interacts

    Author cantered communities I can see successfully being built and created pretty much anywhere given enough effort by the writer involved. What I’m curious about is how groups whose interest is a subject, say Afro-Caribbean futurism, come together on Goodreads and flourish. Goodreads itself is certain not set to do this as their categories are broad to say the least.

    So how do you do it?

  25. @Bruce Arthurs: Wikipedia’s discussion of how numbers are assigned confirms my recollection that blocks are supposed to go to specific publishers; I think they’d have issues with a consortium, although I don’t know whether it has been tried. I also don’t know their attitude toward post-publication assignment of ISBNs, but a consortium going forward (if allowed) would at least undercut Goodreads’s (Goodreads’?) arguments.
    I don’t care directly; I looked at Goodreads and decided it was too much noise and hassle for trivial benefits (from my PoV), and this hoo-hah doesn’t recommend them to me.

  26. Chip Hitchcock: this hoo-hah doesn’t recommend [GoodReads] to me

    It doesn’t, does it? It makes their “librarians” look like a bunch of petty, squabbling schoolchildren knocking each other over to see which of the “uncool kids” they can exclude from their clubhouse. 🙄

  27. @Cat Eldridge

    Groups and Listopia are a couple places where people can connect on more specific topics.

  28. Cat Eldridge: Since people have asserted that they feel it does theses things, why is it so important that you demand how? Building communities, including in locales where it seems like the people in charge never set up space or room to do so, is something humans do.

    Besides, the original assertion is ‘mainstream structures commonly used to market their work’ which I can definitely see happening. Getting on lists so people who like half the books on the list check out your work, getting reviews and star ratings… all this has a definite effect on marketing. Interested fans asking questions on books and getting answers from other readers. Extant fans trying to promote favourite but obscure works. Author centred communities.

    It doesn’t matter what Amazon means it to do, or who Amazon cares about.

    (The Shoggoth appears to have restored the time machine. At least, I seem very suddenly to be in 4076, and I swear when I started this post, I was taking a break from work…)

  29. GoodReads’ functionality allows members to “follow” authors. An author’s page shows the other members which also follow that author. It also allows members to read other members’ reviews, and to click “Like” on reviews. People can see who has “liked” their reviews, and they can “friend” other members who seem to have similar tastes, and the system will show them what their “friends” are reading and reviewing. It also provides the ability for readers to ask each other questions about works. Much like File 770, people use it as a way to get recommendations for works to read from people who share similar tastes.

    I can see how this would enable the people who are reading and enjoying FIYAH to find each other, to discuss Afrofuturism, and to make other recommendations to each other: in other words, they become a community of people with shared interests. It’s possibly less functional in some ways than File 770 or a Facebook group on Afrofuturism would be — but in certain other ways, it’s a lot more functional. And I can understand why the loss of this interaction would disadvantage both the magazine and its readers.

    GoodReads librarians need to get their heads out of their asses and sort their shit out. Their goal should be to foster reading of literature in all its modern forms — not to play gatekeeper at the door of their Imaginary Elite Literature Mean Kidz Clubhouse. I’m just so disgusted with these so-called “adults” that I just can’t even. 😠

  31. @Cat:

    There’s a Goodreads group for the SF book club I’m a member of, via which we organize our list of upcoming books to read, etc.

    I checked and there are a couple of groups that are explicitly tagged as “Afro-Futurism”

  33. Laura says Groups and Listopia are a couple places where people can connect on more specific topics.

    Yep that was what I was asking about. Thanks much!

  35. Ooookay, this is likely to get long. Apologies in advance, but the subject requires a deep dive.

    To begin with, I suggest reading the initial comment I made on GR, which Hampus linked to, in which I spelled out a few of the issues to explain why another commenter’s proposal of “just require that every GR record must have an ASIN or ISBN.” The short answer to that proposal is that it won’t work, as there are at least two types of valid record which may (or must!) by the rules have neither. One is a pre-ISBN book, and the other is an alternate cover edition of an existing book. (For instance, Star Wars: Last Shot has a Han cover and a Lando cover, but both have the same ISBN.) I would also like to point out what Neil cited upthread:

    [Goodreads’] rules make allowances for “periodicals without ISBNs but substantially similar to books (e.g., perfectbound literary magazines).” A novel without ISBN is always fine, but for some reason, a literary magazine can only get an exception if it is printed. This is a very antiquated way of looking at things.

    It is also an incorrect way of looking at things, and now it’s time for me to take this can opener to a tin of worms by saying something that someone else pointed out in a later GR comment (and which Reuben and Cecily note above): e.g. is not i.e. The former means “for example” and the latter means “in other words.”

    A literary magazine need not be perfectbound to qualify for that allowance. A PBLM is one example of the exception class, not the whole of it… but that’s a hellishly easy mistake to make. Grammar sites show that people mix up “e.g.” and “i.e.” all the time; it’s a common error.

    Thus, when Neil suggests that GR should change this policy, I must disagree. I can point at the text he cited and defend Fiyah issues as valid entries all day long. It is without question a literary magazine, and I defy anyone to tell me that it is not “substantially similar” to a class which includes ten-page Kindle short stories.

    The problem is enforcement, and tackling that really deserves a new comment. Stay tuned.

  36. On to the problem of enforcement, as I don my “Goodreads librarian” chapeau…

    tl;dr – IMO, the GR rule governing magazines should be rewritten for better clarity, but that’s a minor problem. When read correctly, the existing rule is sufficient to justify relisting Fiyah and all other magazines of similar form. The trouble is with all the librarians who have learned the rule incorrectly and are thus delisting valid content in error.

    This whole discussion – the previous F770 thread, this one, the tweets, and even large chunks of the GR thread – remind me in a critical way of the Sad Puppies and the Hugo Awards. From the outside, they imagined a small, unified cabal of People In Control who decided what works and which authors were worthy of attention, whose “turn” it was to be recognized, and when such things didn’t match the Puppies’ expectations, they saw nefarious intent and collusion at work. We knew better, though, because we were on the inside (or at least had more info). We know that a lot of what they assumed to be absolute truth was laughably false, and we know that getting Hugo voters to nominate according to some Seekrit Agenda is about as feasible as convincing cats to meow “Jingle Bells.”

    Goodreads librarians are a big herd of cats.

    We’re told to read the manual before applying, but it’s a big document which can be (and probably is) updated regularly. Expecting a Goodreads librarian (henceforth: GRL) to know it in detail is like expecting the average iPhone user to pass a quiz on the fine print of the iTunes EULA. Speaking for myself, I read the Manual when I got approved as a GRL and have seldom looked at it since. I have a basic understanding of the rules in it, one generally sufficient to govern the edits I usually make, and that’s about it. I’ll look if I have questions, but I seldom cross into territory where that comes up.

    If I were a more active GRL with more spoons and free time, I might track the forum where normal users request that GRLs address errors in listings. I might study the Manual in wider scope and deeper detail. But I’m not. I’m just a guy who tends his own neck of the woods, fixes errors if he sees them, but generally has neither the time nor energy to get involved in looking for things to fix. If someone who specializes in an area where I do not – such as periodicals – is certain that the Manual says X, I am likely to trust them on the subject unless it sounds really bizarre.

    And this is where Fiyah and the discussion its removal has sparked comes in.

    I’ve been dimly aware for some time that some magazines are listed on GR – for example, I see a lot of single issues of Marvel comics if I have to manually add a newly-acquired graphic novel to my shelves. I was able to cite the Star Wars: Last Call example because I bought the ebook on sale, added it to my collection, and spotted the “alternate cover edition” note when I looked at the available editions. I know those things because I encountered them in my usual travels… by happenstance.

    So, when another GRL tells me that the Manual forbids the listing of magazine issues which have neither an ISBN nor an ASIN, that’s a specific enough statement that I figure they know what they’re talking about. I suspect most GRLs are the same way – it looks like a citation, so we take it as one.

    Even when it’s wrong, because it’s specific and certain in its wrongness.

    Having had my attention called to the relevant portion of the Manual itself, I am more than willing to admit my error, incorporate the correct info into my understanding of the GR rules, and “go and sin no more.” (Note: I never delisted any magazines.)

    But I am one of many GRLs – thousands? – and the vast majority of them will not see that discussion. We don’t have supervisors or trainers; instead, we have programmed limits on our abilities that prevent us from doing too much damage if we go astray. We act independently, with all of the good and bad aspects that implies. The superlibrarians hold more substantial power, but although many people assume that they are staff and/or get more training, we don’t really know that. For all I know, a librarian with a really good add/edit record might wake up one day with super status bestowed from on high.

    On the flip side, remember that one need not be a librarian to add a record. Anyone can do it. A user named Linda in the GR thread complained that she keeps having to fight “Goodreads” because she writes fanfic and does not want it on the site. I have news for her: she’s actually fighting with her fans, who keep adding her work to the site. She doesn’t blame them, though, no more than Larry Correia blamed the voting Worldcon members when he failed to win the Campbell. She blames Goodreads, and he blamed the Hugo Admins, because those are the obvious targets… even though they are the wrong ones.

  37. Cecily Kane:

    “Welp, someone finally posted a link to the rules in that goodreads thread, and as stated they don’t require literary magazines to have ISBN’s or ASIN’s. Which means that the librarians were either being dishonest or ignorant of the rules they’re enforcing.”

    Or possibly, as me, uneducated in the difference between i.e and e.g. I had to look up the difference to understand how to interpret the rule.

  38. But, Hampus, unless I’m very confused (totally plausible, especially right now, so don’t hesitate to say so), even though your English is extremely good, it’s not your native language. E.g. vs. i.e. falls into the category of things I’d expect a decently educated native speaker to know, but maybe a bit fiddly to necessarily expect students learning English as a second language (or third or fourth) to consistently and reliably acquire and retain.

    It appears to me that most of the people participating in that feedback discussion are native speakers of English. Again, I could be totally wrong. That’s merely the impression I have.

  39. Lis Carey:

    “But, Hampus, unless I’m very confused (totally plausible, especially right now, so don’t hesitate to say so), even though your English is extremely good, it’s not your native language. “

    At least one of the more active librarians in the thread – and a defender of the deletions – was from the Netherlands. So I would not assume that most of the participants in the thread has english as their first language.

  40. @Lis:

    Why would you expect native English speakers to be especially well versed in abbreviations for Latin terms?

    As I noted, ie/eg are frequently confused by English speakers, native or otherwise. A quick search will turn up several explanations of which to use when, and even The Oatmeal has made one. In addition, the GR librarian application doesn’t ask anything about one’s native language, level of schooling, or GPA. There’s not even a graded essay question.

  41. Considering some of the common phrases I see miswritten every week, many native English speakers seem to not read much, and have no clue how to use a dictionary.
    You’d think by 8652, this would be fixed.

  43. Rev. Bob: Why would you expect native English speakers to be especially well versed in abbreviations for Latin terms?

    It’s a lovely nitpick, however, those abbreviations have been imported into the English language, like many tens of thousands of other non-English words.

    And you’d be hard-pressed to find native Latin speakers anymore.

  44. @OGH:

    Are you saying, then, that English is the only modern language which has incorporated those Latin abbreviations, such that only a native English speaker should be expected to be familiar with them?

  45. @Rev. Bob–Not speaking for OGH, of course, but I, at least, tend to regard them as not especially different from all the rest of English’s stolen vocabulary: a) tgwyre English now, at least in English; b)it’s very likely they do also exist in other languages–where they may or may not retain substantially similar meanings. It’s not something I’d presume to pontificate on.

    I expect native speakers of English with a decent education to understand the normal meanings of these terms in English. People whose native language is something else may or may not have these particular Latin phrases imported into those languages, they may or may not be as completely absorbed for as long, and they may or may not have emerged from the process with the same meanings and usages as in English.

    That at least one of the GR librarians in that thread is in fact based in the Netherlands is a far more relevant point. Though it may be a point that cuts the other way. I’m not sure at this point, and I’m too tired to go back and check.

  46. @Lis:

    I think the best takeaway here is that this section of the Manual would benefit from an edit which clarifies the intent, and I have suggested that in the GR thread:

    1. Rephrase the parenthetical so that it does not use “e.g.,” which is commonly misunderstood as “in other words” when it actually means “for example.” The meaning must be clear to be useful, and currently it is not clear.

    You may consider the rule adequately clear as written, but given that both sides are citing the same text to support their positions in that thread, I disagree.

    I also pointed out that “substantially similar to a book” is a near-useless phrase which should be revised into something which makes sense in the modern market, and that whether something is available at Amazon (“has an ASIN”) should not be part of the qualification criteria, whatever those end up being.

  47. @Rev. Bob–Oh, I’m all for revising it to make it as clear as it needs to be, even the parts I think they shouldn’t find unclear. In 7465, we’ve become very pragmatic about that, perhaps from exhaustion.

  48. Rev. Bob: Are you saying, then, that English is the only modern language which has incorporated those Latin abbreviations, such that only a native English speaker should be expected to be familiar with them?

    Aren’t you supposed to ask me first if I’ve stopped beating my wife?

  49. “Are you saying, then, that English is the only modern language which has incorporated those Latin abbreviations, such that only a native English speaker should be expected to be familiar with them?”

    English at least uses the abbreviation “e.g”. In Sweden, we have our own abbreviation (“t.ex” – till exempel) that we use. We do use abbreviations for latin, but not always the same as english speakers use. So I do think there at least is a point to be made that english speakers will be more likely to know of some abbreviations.

    In this case at least more likely to know what e.g means than swedes are. 😛

Comments are closed.