Humanity was founded on communication... passing information among one another in order to survive. And as long as there has been communication, there have probably been reviews and critics. (I'd bet the first review came when the first caveman crafted a stone knife, and the second caveman told him, "You should have made that longer.") It's no wonder, then, that reviews and critics have become so integral to human history and development, one of the most powerful and pervasive tools of mankind.

It's also no wonder that reviews have become one of the biggest tools of people who hope to popularize content... including, often, their own. These days, authors are among the creators who are asked to contribute their own reviews of content, often in order to present themselves as authorities worthy of being read themselves.  I've been given the same advice at times, and since I was already in the habit of casually critiquing movies through social media, I could easily imagine reviewing books as a fellow author.

But here's the thing: I wasn't simply being asked to review.  Advice from author support sources, for instance, was to carefully choose what to review, and to tailor my reviews according to the subject of the review, the content, and the impression created about the author (and—most significantly—about yourself) that you want to give.  In other words, try not to be too critical of successful authors, in order to leave a positive impression about yourself to others (so that maybe they will, someday, give a positive review to you).

Reviewing is not the pure form of communication that it once was.  What some may call a tool, others might see as more of a weapon.  In fact, some reviewers have taken to generating intentionally negative reviews, specifically for the attention it grabs in social media.  Reviewing has become more of a commodity, designed specifically as a promotional product in itself, of itself... which, to me, ultimately cheapens it. And knowing that definitely took some of the incentive—and impact—of reviewing from me.

I've occasionally posted Facebook comments about movies or television shows as they were presented to me, and have been encouraged through Goodreads to post reviews of books I've read. But it seems reviews aren't being taken by most people as they are intended... or maybe they are, as face value labels, nothing more than a thumbs-up or -down gestures from influencers. I'm willing to offer opinions, to impart the occasional truth or revelation, and to make educated suggestions; but I've come to realize that I never wanted to be known as an influencer, and have no desire to do anything intended to sway people's actions pro or con (if I wanted to do that, I'd run for office). 

Clint Eastwood once said: "Opinions are like assholes... everybody has one."  (I say opinions are like teeth... everybody's got 20 to 30 of 'em.) Then is there still a value in reviews, something everybody's got so many of?  There can be: If the reviewer takes the right tone, reviews can (and should) be about imparting the truth... not just offering opinion.  And if the reader is careful, they will be able to tell the difference between truth and opinion. Of course, reviewers can willfully offer opinions, with the assurance that their opinions are more valuable than mere truth. Ultimately, it's up to the reader to decide what they want from a review... or if, perhaps, their own opinion is more important.

As for me?  Well, I may find myself giving the very occasional review, for what they are worth (essentially, not much). But I'd rather create than review others' creations.