It used to be that publishers courted reviewers and review sites like ours. Back in the day, my mailbox (and those at AAR who came before me) overflowed with paperbacks and the occasional hardback. Those advance review copies (ARCs)—unsolicited, unconditional, and generous—arrived because publishers believed reviews mattered.
No more. Every week, it gets harder. NetGalley rarely lists major releases and usually says no to most requests; Edelweiss often ignores them altogether. Silence has become the norm. For romance novels, it’s even worse. Asking for an ARC from Avon or Grand Central often feels like clicking into space. Ironically, other genres are more welcoming: mystery publishers nearly always say yes. Getting upcoming romances now requires detective work—tracking down which publicist handles which author (a role that often changes yearly)—and a willingness to keep asking, and though I’m often told yes, it’s a lot.
Why? There are plenty of reasons, but here are a few: publishers now chase metrics and pour resources into a handful of big names. A TikTok clip or Instagram squee feels safer than a thoughtful review. Publicity has become centralized and risk-averse. And Amazon and KU have built their own closed ecosystems, with little room for independent, long-form reviews.
What’s vanished isn’t just access—it’s relevance. Review sites like AAR once connected writers, readers, and critics in a conversation built on curiosity, trust, and joy. It feels as if that kind of exchange no longer interests publishers. The romance, it feels to me, is fading fast.
“A TikTok clip or Instagram squee feels safer than a thoughtful review.”
Safer, yes, because God forbid a review contain any criticism!
I’ve frequently had trouble getting review copies from NG and Edelweiss simply because I’m not in the US. Never mind that the internet is global, those pesky geographical questions are alive and kicking, and I can’t even SEE releases from Avon, Berkley, Grand Central etc. let alone request them. The only big publisher whose books I can still get is Sourcebooks.
But publicists are gatekeepers now, and seem to want to restrict access to books by their authors – or rather, restrict access to people they know are likely to gush about them for fear of getting kicked off the ARC list otherwise.
Probably 95% of m/m romance is self-published, so I get the vast majority of the books I review directly from authors and the occasional publicist with whom I’ve built up a working relationship over the years. The rare trad.pubbed one can be a problem though – I’ve had a request in at Edelweiss for Cat Sebastian’s Star Shipped since August; reviews are out there so I know ARCs are being sent out, but it’s published by Avon, so no big surprise – even back when I was reviewing a lot of HR, they always ignored my requests.
Avon–and almost all the big five back in the day–rarey ignored AAR’s requests and now they do. I can, as I said, track down the publicist who has the book, introduce myself, connect them with the reviewer–we can’t be trusted with shareable epubs apparently–and ask. They do then often say yes–although I’ve gotten nowhere with the Sebastian. It’s a lot of work and it’s clear that they feel they are doing us a favor.
I was at a romance bookstore pop-up this weekend–I went to introduce myself and to offer any help or support (I bought a book I didn’t need.) to the woman who’d started it. She had no interest in talking to me, she’d never heard of AAR, and she actually seemed irritated I’d initiated conversation in the first place. It did make me think, rather ruefully, my how the mighty have fallen! (Part of it, I’m sure, was the OK, Boomer issue which is its own kind of understandable agism.)
I hope she wasn’t as rude to her other customers.
She actually seemed lovely but utterly nonplussed/not interested in talking to me about romance.
I feel sad, no, I’m angry about that. How could that woman do that? She just doesn’t care about the genre, she only wants to sell something.
Let me talk a little about myself.
whenever I go to a bookstore, I have this feeling, seeing their romance section, to introduce myself and give them some pointers about long-sellers, or what are the best among the huge number of recent releases, or just talk about the genre.
And I also had this idea, in the past, of reaching to the publishing houses in my own country and give them good romance novels they could translate into Spanish. Can you believe that they have not translated books by writers as Julie James, Meljean Brook, Ilona Andrews, Rachel Grant or Toni Anderson, and only one or two —a long time ago—, of authors like Joanne Bourne, Sherry Thomas, Eloisa James or Tessa Dare? Even authors like Rachel Gibson, Sandra Brown or Suzanne Brockmann have only been partly translated.
When I go to a public library, I look for names in the genre and I say to myself that I should ask for good romances, not only good historical novels or noirs.
I had these feelings and ideas but in the end I shut up and do neither.
I see that they really don’t know much about the genre, and they don’t care. It’s their business, they just want to sell and what they think is going to sell more books. And that’s it. It’s not against romance novels themselves, they do the same about other genres. Only in literary fiction is more difficult to ignore certain names than in popular fiction.
And in the libraries, they just know what their readers want and how best to use the public money they are given.
You have something that woman ignores, your Top 100 for instance is a unique thing that I have seen commented by Spanish readers for years, and many have discovered authors with that. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the longest sellers in the romantic genre are included there.
On translations – I see a lot of m/m authors talking about translations of their books – into other European languages. Most of them are self-published but I think have, in most cases, been picked up by a French/German/Italian publisher. Another thing the big publishers are falling down on.
I do think AI will change all of that. My sister is a legal translator and she is sure pretty much all that work will be replaced by AI.
Ugh. More enshittification. I’ve seen people talking about that and there’s a lot of feeling that it’s yet another race to the bottom.
Actually, I don’t think translations will be that problematic.
As an MFL teacher, I have to disagree. Google translate is already pretty crap unless you only want to look up single words or short phrases and are essentially using it as an online dictionary. It’s unreliable and inaccurate for long passages because it can’t do colloquialisms or nuance. There’s an excellent French tutor I follow on Substack who, just last weekend, posted that a phrase I’d learned and had always thought correct isn’t one that French people use at all. AI is no substitute for that. Maybe it will work for translating technical manuals, but not for anything that requires more than a technical knowledge of a language.
I don’t mean Google translate. I mean AI programs specifically written for language translation that one pays money for. I’ve seen some of that work and it is very good now and will just get better.
No, I know, I was just using it as an example because it’s pretty much all AI now. Language learning apps (Duolingo is a popular one here) are using AI and it’s not good.
I’m sure you’re right – and it’s yet another way people are going to be put out of work.
It will absolutely put most translators out of work. I envision a world in which 80% is done by AI and then there is a smaller pool of editors who check it over. Although, within a few years, I suspect the systems’ iterative learning will obviate most editors as well.
It’s not just in the world of editing, translation and books in general – it’s everything. AI is already having a devastating effect on the job market for young people – what is it going to take for businesses to realise that nobody will be able to afford what they’re selling if people can’t get work?
I have the sense that most businesses have opted to pursue the big spenders. The percentage of the US consumer economy spent by the top 10% is already 50%.
It’s not sustainable in the long run but it’s where the US economy is going.
This is very dispiriting. I wonder if this is related to critics losing their jobs at major newspapers and magazines. It’s weird because part of it is hooked into the fact people read less now. But now people interested in books don’t want to read a review of a book??
I use Net Galley, mostly just getting books from the Read Now section. I have noticed there is far less romance on there as even a year ago. Now they seem to mostly put debut romance authors on there.
Regarding KU, it’s an overwhelming subscription and IMO reviews are needed now more than ever.
Book reviewers, as a breed, are vanishing. The AP–the source for many a newspaper–quit doing book reviews in August. Many other newspapers that once had book reviewers have gotten rid of such coverage.
I think most people are content with BookTok, Amazon stars, and Goodreads which makes Amazon’s influence almost absolute. Why would publishers care about traditional reviews if most readers don’t?
I use Goodreads because of the dearth of other places to find decent reviews!
Amazon Stars are practically useless most of the time – one of the reasons I don’t review there often is that my (I hope!) well-crafted review sits next to 5-star “Great book!” or 5 star “OMG so hawt!” so-called reviews, and often gets relegated to the 2nd or 3rd page of reviews because mine has a lower star rating. They’re useless for anyone who wants to know if a book is worth their money – but they’re also all most publishers and publicists are interested in.
Several years ago, The Washington Post eliminated the Book World section that came with the Sunday newspaper. A couple years later, they brought it back after readers vigorously complained. There is hope if newspaper readers raise their voice. That being said, the rest of the Washington Post is shrinking fast and features that used to appear regularly are disappearing so I don’t know how long the current Book World section will last.
It’s sad that marketing and bad metrics are driving the publishing industry today. As well as not caring about reviews from thoughtful reviewers, publishers are dropping established authors when they do not fit with whatever is hot today. It’s a disservice to readers.
I do recommend subscribing to Ron Charles’ email newsletter. He’s the chief book critic at WaPo. It’s not romance related but it’s pretty newsy about the book business and highlights new book reviews. But yes, WaPo is currently being gutted for no reason besides the owner decided to destroy the newspaper. 2025 has been a rough year.
Gutted is a good word to describe what Bezos has done to the Post.
I do enjoy the book reviews by Ron Charles and Michael Dirda, as well as some of the newer reviewers. The book and movie reviews, and the comics, are the only reason I still have a subscription.
Ha–if Dirda likes a book, I won’t go near it!
I like to read professional reviews. I am not against perusing Good Reads but I find my taste differs from the crowd there. I do like Kirkus Reviews and Publishers Reviews (when I am not paywalled.)
This and sometimes Dear Author are the only laces I know that do decent reviews. On Amazon and Goodreads, I check the one and two star reviews because they are the ones most likely to give me useful information.
I check the one and two-star reviews on those sites, too. They often provide more information than the 4- or 5-star reviews.
It’s so frustrating that we seem to breaking off into closed communities. I love this site and have followed it for years. I hope it can keep going.
For me, the problem will always be the inability of some to take critical reviews in stride or even learn from them. Instead, it’s the easy pursuit of the rave.
Yes – the number of authors I’ve seen getting pissy with reviewers is ridiculous. I get that it’s not nice when something you’ve poured your heart and soul into gets criticised – but reviews are for READERS, which is a lesson some authors clearly need to learn.
Honestly, I have found the lack of author support for AAR in the past five years heartbreaking.
It’s a bit against the tide that The NY Times added a romance review column a few years ago. Mostly the reviews are done by Olivia Waite, so there’s a fair emphasis on M/M and F/F stories. My taste and hers often don’t align, but that’s not a mark against her, it’s just a sign that romance is a big enough tent to have books that appeal to many different readers. I would guess that since she’s reviewing for the Times she has no problems getting ARCs.
I’m sure she does not.
This post adds to my personal feeling of being outside the mainstream romance community. You are the place I go to read about romance novels, to discover good future readings. And now you say you are not relevant? You are for me and many other readers. Think the long term.
Some times I see a book, usually a rom-com, labelled in Amazon as ‘the novel everybody talks about in TikTok’ or ‘the TikTok novel of the year’. Whenever I read one of those books (because I have known about it in other places, I do not use that media), I’m always disappointed. So nowadays, mentioning TikTok in publicity acts like a reversal recommendation for me. I won’t touch it with a ten-foot pole.
I will keep on reading more than a hundred romance novels per year. I will keep on getting recommendations from you and not other social media, certainly, not TikTok or Instagram. Life is too short to spend hours in infinite reeling that adds nothing but stupor. And I will keep on writing and publishing long reviews in my own blog just for the fun of talking about the genre with a little bit of depth. Because that’s the way I roll.
You say that mystery publishers usually say yes and I’m quite happy about that. If you review more romantic suspense this way, it will be great, as it is the only genre in which I think contemporary authors are as good as those from the past. I have already told you about the stagnation I see in contemporary and historical romances.
What still amazes me is this. How can anyone spend their money in something that is being sold to them in TikTok by some influencer that you can have the suspicion that hasn’t even tried the thing itself. Books they have not read. Products they have not really tried on themselves. Not only that, they talk about everything with the same shallowness and lack of knowledge, from political issues to nutrition or science. Let’s say that I’m suspicious of the political tendencies of the algorithms. How can anybody take them seriously?
With you on the “reverse recommendation” thing. If I see a blurb describing a “TikTok” sensation than I know it’s not for me.
It is a very odd thing–almost every other romance I see on Edelweiss (where we get most of our advanced copies) blares exactly that.
They do. But they’re almost never books that interest me anyway. And on the rare occasion I DO want to read one, it’s usually because I like the author’s work already and know that the blurb probably bears no relation to the content.
(I haven’t forgotten the utterly ridiculous description of Car Sebastian’s We Could Be So Good as – “Colleen Hoover meets The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo” – tell me you haven’t read the book without telling me you haven’t read the book!)