Retraction: Crossroad Reviews

6133267677_ba4a6477ca_bEarlier this week I reported on a social media frenzy against Crossroad Reviews for the way they supposedly were selling multiple copies of ARCs they had picked up at conventions and received from publishers and authors.

Today I am retracting that story.

It has been brought to my attention that the image I used to back up the story was not an original screenshot of a Facebook update. Instead, it was a composite image of a FB update and an unrelated image from the same FB account's gallery.

Here's a screensnap of the original update side by side with the composite image. As you can see, it tells a very different story when considered in its original context.

Before I published that post I took care to make sure that the image at right was legit, but in spite of my best efforts I still missed the fact that it was a composite.

The original image, as posted, does not meet my standards for proof of illicit activity.

I still don't like this book blogger; their "reviews" are all 50 to 200 word summaries of books rather than actual reviews. And that update about grab bag sale still stinks.

But it also doesn't prove anything, by my book, and so I have to retract the story and express my apologies for the mistake.

image by Sh4rp_i

About Nate Hoffelder (11598 Articles)
Nate Hoffelder is the founder and editor of The Digital Reader:"I've been into reading ebooks since forever, but I only got my first ereader in July 2007. Everything quickly spiraled out of control from there. Before I started this blog in January 2010 I covered ebooks, ebook readers, and digital publishing for about 2 years as a part of MobileRead Forums. It's a great community, and being a member is a joy. But I thought I could make something out of how I covered the news for MobileRead, so I started this blog."

7 Comments on Retraction: Crossroad Reviews

  1. Victim card wins again…

  2. You should do your own research instead of piggybacking for followers. Shame. But the victim wins again, and you’re not credible.

  3. Maybe you should have done your research!!! Here are the ALA youtube video, she has enough incriminating evidence all on her own!!! https://youtu.be/CE9loLwyUs4

  4. Or this one where her own daughter calls her out for stealing all the books while at BEA (27 minutes in)
    https://youtu.be/WFXDPgjXNDw

  5. Um, I am the person who took the photo on the left and its complete. The one on the right is a photo someone else (I Do not know who) out together to show people her stack of multiple ARCS, and what she is doing with them exactly. So you’re original post was correct.

    I commented and told her that it does not cost that much to ship books and that she was basically robbing readers. Before I commented I took a screen shot of her post because I knew she would delete it.

    Shortly after sharing the photo on twitter, more and more things came to light. Her scams go back to 2011 from what I found.

  6. Good on you for the correction, Nate. No wonder your blog is always at the top of my morning to-read list! 🙂

  7. LOL retraction? Like you’re The NY Times or something? Pretty obvious you only posted about this to gain blog traffic. How many ARCS did this thief bribe you with to get you to make this “retraction” post? The evidence is everywhere! She’s also got years of gofundme scams behind her. If you want to stick your head in the sand like an ostrich and hide from the truth, so be it. The rest of us won’t stand idly by while she tarnishes book bloggers with her ARC “mystery box” sales that cost 10x the value of the shipping cost.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*