Yesterday I´ve received a copy of the book Wikipedia - The missing manual from O´Reilly for writing a review. Cool, isn´t it?!
I started to read it - but it´s really a big book with lots of information in it. Do all reviewers actually read their books from cover to cover? Are newspaper reviews really based on the books or just on summaries or press releases from their publishers? A while ago I wrote about an upcoming movie, mentioning only a review, without having seen it yet - and was critized for that.
Reviews, on the other hand, are quite some work. A journalist for a newspaper has to spend several hours to read a book or even several days for a computer or business book and then is only paid for a few paragraphs?
Actuality and speed is another problem. New, upcoming books have to be reviewed often in the short time-span before the book is released to help create demand for that book. I doubt that journalists are really readings all the books they receive.
Anyway, I will try to read that book as fast as possible and then post a review back here.
Comments