Amen, Dave Black! Publishers Do Deserve Better!

In his Saturday, January 15, 9:40 AM post Dave Black said:

I’ve noticed a trend in the blogosphere. Bloggers have begun posting “reviews” of books they have received gratis from the publishers. Many of these “reviews” look more like short “book notes” than full-fledged reviews. Some are no longer than a brief paragraph or two, and many do not interact with the contents of the book to any degree.

My question is this: Is this being fair to the publishers? They have given you a book, for free, that would possibly have cost you up to 30 or 40 dollars had you purchased it yourself.

Surely these generous publishers deserve better than a book note.

To answer Dave’s question: NO!  This is NOT being fair to the publishers or the readers!  Anyone can go to Amazon or a publisher’s website and read book blurbs and summaries.  For bloggers to offer these is redundant.  I think that the publishers who provide the books (free of charge) and the authors who write these books deserve some kind of interaction from those reviewing them.  This doesn’t mean that every review has to launch into heavy criticism, but if it does then tell us why you’re critical of the author or his/her point(s), and then offer a solution to the perceived problems if you see one in sight.  And if there is no criticism and all we get is praise then tell us why you liked the book so much.  What was it about the author’s writing style, argument, or whatever that made you love the book?  It’s not rocket surgery folks.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I suspect that a large part of why we only see short book notes so often is that the “reviewers” haven’t actually read the books they’re writing about.  Getting free books is a privilege that comes with a certain amount of responsibility; let’s not shirk our duties people.

B”H

Advertisements

46 thoughts on “Amen, Dave Black! Publishers Do Deserve Better!

  1. John Frame has published an account of how he reviews a book. I don’t have it on hand but it is a rigorous model. If you followed it strictly your earnings for your free book would work out to about fifty cents an hour.

    I wrote a review about ten years ago for the TC Journal when I was active in the textual criticism forum. It was ton of work. Never had any desire to write another one.

  2. Yeah, I have scruples about publishing reviews on my blog. Some books need only a short review to explain the book’s awesomeness and the whyness thereof. On my blog see “Discipleship: God With Us.” But other books require more serious interaction, like my review of BWIII’s book “New Testament Rhetoric.”

    I currently have four review books which I have read one time each, but probably will not post a review of for another two months or more, they need to sit in my head, then be reread.

  3. Thank you, Dave Black, for speaking the Gospel Truth! I think this is the third public admonition (me, you, Dr. Black); the next step, of course, is to adopt the methods of the Old Testament prophets. ;-)

  4. I remember when I first started reviewing that one of the publishers offered a page a sample reviews. Wishing I could remember which one now, but with time and age I have forgotten. I was amazed at their shortness. They were much more like the blurbs that get put on the back of a book instead of what I had been reading by you and T.C. and Esteban and many others. I decided to follow the more complex model and not the one offered by that publisher ;)

  5. You mean to tell me people get paid to read and write book reviews? I guess what I am saying is what ever happened to just reading a book and letting people know what you think. I just started blooging at the end of 2010 and when I had to come up with a topic I decided on books. I love to read and tell people what I think. Mine may be on a more personal note than a scientific model, but it is what I enjoy to do. Most of my friends and amily dont read like I do so I use blogging as my outlet.

  6. Fr. Robert: I check them often, which is why I’m convinced that many reviewers don’t read the books they’re reviewing.

    C. Stirling: I’d love to read an account of what goes into how Frame does it. My personal model that I’ve developed over the past couple of years is to offer a brief introduction, summary of the contents, praise/criticism, and recommendation. I’m not a slave to that format but it’s generally what you’ll find in my reviews.

    Geoff: Exactly. Your practice is a commendable one.

    Mike: Indeed we won’t. You’re one of the more thorough reviewers out there.

    Esteban: I’ll join you in your thanks to Dave! And yes, this is the third public admonition, your prophetic pronouncement on blurbish type reviews being the first of course. We must certainly adopt the OT prophets’ methods. Just as long as we don’t have to lay down for years and cook on excrement. ;-)

    Bitsy: I know what you mean. I once wrote a post about truncated reviews in which I said I wouldn’t review for Thomas Nelson anymore because they wanted 200 word reviews. What on earth can you say with 200 words?!!

    Tifferne: I suppose that somewhere out there someone pays literary critics to review books (it’s my dream job actually). As far as bloggers go, the payment is a free book, and that’s payment enough! And reviews can be personal, or academic, or hostile, or whatever, just so long as they tell us something about the book past how many pages are in it, what it’s title is, and who wrote it.

  7. let’s not overgeneralize. some books DO deserve just a short notice. others deserve detailed analysis. it depends completely ON the book.

    and don’t weep too much for publishers. they are concerned with publicity for their books primarily. if a long review or a short booknote does the trick, they’re happy.

    the trick is, as a writer/blogger, knowing when to write a lot and when to write a little.

    more problematic, for me, than the length of reviews (and my own tend to be about 3 pages- or the length required by such entities as RBL) is the fawning after authors whose works don’t deserve praise.

    the temptation for some bloggers is to praise books even when they hate them. that’s intellectually dishonest. the fear is, i suppose, that if you don’t say something nice, you won’t be asked to review anything again. so be it then. but what i’ve found is that good publishers aren’t bothered by negative reviews. i’ve said some pretty harsh things about books and the publishers have continued to allow me the privilege of serving as a reviewer.

    if i like a book, i’ll say so. if i don’t, i wont. i’m not really all that troubled by the quantity of a review. it’s quality that matters. and some people, believe it or not, can say what needs to be said without circling the landing field for an hour.

  8. Bitsy,

    Sadly, its all about money first for the book publishers, save a few like Eerdmans, though the Brits or English have a few, like T&T Clark, and Ashgate. I remember however, when James Packer seemed to write on the back of almost every Evangelical theological book. I like Sir Packer, but that’s just the truth!

  9. It was very obvious I had not read much beyond the intro of the T.F. Torrance book I recently reviewed – but I agree, we should interact with it as much as possible and give a decent review.

  10. Another problem is bloggers like myself reading and reviewing books with content we are not knowledgeable enough about to really offer any critique – for instance I am not super well versed in Trinitarian arguments so I would not be able to critique a book on the Trinity at a level even close so, say, yourself who is much more well versed in that topic. Does that make sense.

  11. Nick,

    I do have it on hand, could not find it on the web.

    John Frame The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, (P & R, 1987) Appendix E. Evaluating Theological Writings.

    DKG is one of those books I hang on to because I don’t totally understand it. This is the same reason I still have a copy of Dooyweerd’s “In the twilight of western thought” which I have been packing around for 40 years. Is one of the handful of survivors from my theological library which I gave away two decades ago.

  12. I would largely echo the sentiments of Jim West – the review depends on the type of book. I always read my review books (minus notable exceptions, e.g., lexicons), but if it is a topic I am not terribly familiar with, I will try and refrain from offering critique.

    I will be honest, though, the primary reason I started up my blog about 18 months ago was to receive free books to review. I have since come to love blogging for bloggings sake and am planning on not requesting anywhere near as many books to review this coming year. Because frankly, it takes a lot of time to read the book and then write out a review, so much time that I would rather just spend the money on the book myself.

  13. I think I’ve kept my reviews short because that has been the requirement (or the request) of the publisher. I’m not against longer interactions. Perhaps I should do two posts. However, I’m with Jim West (bitter words to type) in that I’m not feeling overly concerned for publishers because it really is about getting publicity for the book itself.

  14. diglot – I have quit reviewing books – at least for the time being. I cannot work full time, take classes and read books to review.

    I have also written some *short*reviews, but they were still longer than the blurb on the back of a book :P

  15. There seems to be a basic format for book reviews:

    1) Introduction to the author and brief synopsis of the basic thesis of the book.

    2) Summary of the chapters

    3) Strengths

    4) Weaknesses

    5) Conclusion (critique, constructive thinking, synthesis)

    But I agree with what Jim West said; publishers don’t care as much about the review itself, but instead that their book has online exposure and presence. If they really were concerned about scholarly reviews on the web they wouldn’t send the books they do to 3/4 of the people they actually send them to. It’s all PR and advertisement (that seems pretty clear to me).

    But I also agree with Nick, that if you receive a review copy from a publisher; then let your Yes be Yes! The reviewer has at least the responsibility to pay their “fee” for their “free” book; which is to read it and then offer the best review (book report) he/she can muster. Again, I honestly don’t think most of these publishers are concerned with receiving scholarly reviews; if the exposure they receive on the web causes two people to buy the book under review by someone, then the publisher has just made a profit . . . and in the end, that’s all they care about! I don’t think any of this is as noble as we would like to think (that’s not to say we don’t still stand before the Lord on this).

  16. I have mix feelings about this complaint. Some qualifications are needed here. I think Jim West has captured the matter well. Sometimes, it really depends on the book under review. Also, we need to keep in mind the ability of each reviewer.

    Now it’s up to these publishers to read these reviews and to decide in the future whether they should send out free review copies if they’re not satisfied. My take.

  17. Jim: A few things: First, there’s a difference between a book notice and a book review. I have no problem with book notices; I do them often. But to offer a notice in place of a review is a problem in my opinion (if you’ve been given a book for review); also, I’m not saying that a review needs to be unnecessarily long — some folks can write in 500 words what it takes another person 1500 words to communicate — as long as a review is substantive that’s okay. Second, I agree, the tenor of the review depends on the book and I’d add the audience as well. I expect more from something reviewed in an academic journal than I do from something reviewed on a blog (although sadly I don’t always get what I expect). I expect more interaction with a 200 page academic book than I do with a 40 page children’s book. Third, I couldn’t agree more with your disdain for fawning just to get free books. It happens all the time and it’s deplorable. If folks would try being honest about a book that they didn’t like they’d soon see that the well won’t run dry just for saying so (well, in most cases at least, I have actually been cut off from one publisher after a negative review).

    Fr. Robert: No, it’s about money for all of them, including Eerdmans and the rest. But this shouldn’t be a problem; they’re running businesses. Businesses are supposed to make money and that’s okay.

    Diglot: One needn’t offer critique in order to write a good review. If it’s an unfamiliar subject then the reviewer can comment on how effective a communicator the author was and whether or not they learned from the book. I think any good review should offer honest opinions about the book being reviewed, whatever those opinions are.

    I’m of a different opinion concerning review copies. I plan to maintain my current practice which is requesting books that look worthwhile as I learn about them. I was investing time and effort into reviewing books before I ever got them for free so now that I can get them for free I see no reason not to.

    Dan: The only time I can recall a publisher specifying that they’d like a short review is Thomas Nelson’s book review program. I had commented about it and someone from Thomas Nelson told me that their guidelines weren’t written in stone and that the short review was the least that they expected. For them I’ve always just excerpted from my regular reviews on my blog for the ones I have to cross-post on retailer websites. You could do the same if you desire to write something longer.

    Bobby: That’s the basic format I follow but I’m not a slave to it. I once did a “live thought” review of a Rob Bell book. I literally jotted down my thoughts as I was thinking them. It was a ton of fun but not something I’d do with everything.

    And advertising is, of course, part of the game. That’s fine. But I’ve spoken with more than a few publicists and editors/publishers who expect more than a blurb or announcement. In fact, Dan Reid from IVP wrote a post a few years ago about slothful reviewers. This paragraph largely shaped how I think (and go) about reviewing books:

    The reviewer provides an outline or sort of précis of the book, with a concluding comment that, “except for the typos we have noted, and the publisher’s disregard for the Oxford comma (which, as should be evident [snif], is superior to the Downers Grove comma), this is a fairly good book.” Okay, so it’s generally positive. But no interaction! Did the reviewer just want a free book?

    And just so folks don’t think I’m calling for nothing but scholarly reviews, I’m not. I am calling for honest and thoughtful reviews. Those look different for everyone.

    T. C.: If a reviewer is not able to engage a book then is it fair for them to request it? It’s one thing if a publicist approaches the reviewer but another thing if the reviewer approaches the publicist.

  18. nick on your last point to tc- if i ask for a review copy i review it. if the publisher just sends something i havent requested i may well just do a short notice. or i may not mention it at all.

    someone sent me a loathesomely idiotic book on lazarus as the beloved disciple as the author of the fourth gospel. it was trash and it wasnt worth my time, so i never mentioned it. such things arent worthy of even negative publicity.

  19. Nick: Your right, but some company’s really offer a real service, Ashgate for example does all kinds of books, in real subjects and for learning & knowledge. Paul Molnar’s very good book: Thomas F. Torrance, Theologian Of The Trinity is by Ashgate. Perhaps Eerdman’s is also one of the best American publishers in scholastic type theology. Nelson used to be that way, in both Bibles and quality but that is far gone now.

  20. Jim: I’m the same way, in fact on my “books received” page I say that I feel no obligation to review unsolicited books. And way to go on not mentioning that book — it sounds dreadful! Plus I think I know who wrote it. ;-)

    Fr. Robert: I think they all offer a real service, Thomas Nelson excepted (these days anyway).

  21. C. Stirling: Sorry, I missed your comment in the shuffle. I have Frame’s book but I haven’t read up to the appendices yet. I’ll pull it off the shelf right now and read that one. Thanks for the reference!

  22. Bitsy, I know what you mean. I am working full time, doing a theology course full time, trying to regularly post things on my blog, all on top of married life. Reviewing books on top of all that can be a wee bit hard!

  23. Nick,

    Fair enough question. But what level of engagement are we talking here? What do the publishers expect?

    But of course the reviewers reputation is at stake as a reviewer if he or she doesn’t engage the book at a decent level, whatever that may be.

    I’ve received unsolicited books. But since I have a good relationship with these publishers that send me them, I just go ahead and review them. ;-)

  24. Brian: Sorry, I missed your earlier comment. Yes, you make sense, but like I said to to Diglot, critique isn’t a necessary part of a book review. It’s helpful to be sure, but there are times when we’re not in a position to do it. So in those cases we assess the book as we’re able. Was it a chore to read? Did it answer lingering questions? How does it stack up against other books of similar focus? There’s plenty we can say about books that are on topics we don’t know much about.

    Esteban: Yeah, that’s a keeper!

    T. C.: The level of engagement depends on the book, the audience, and the reviewer. It’s all circumstantial.

  25. Nick,
    I gave you a bum steer.
    Never trust info you find on the web :-)
    That apendix e in Frame’s DKG is NOT the article I read by Frame on reviewing books. I have not been able to find it. I thought it was in an appendix to some book of his I had but apparently not. My web search has turned up nothing.

  26. @Nick,

    My little outline was just what we were instructed to do while in Cemetery, I mean Seminary. I had to do quite a few “reviews” — which look different than a precis in some ways — while in school; this seemed to be the standard format; that’s all.

    I have a connection with OUP, and all my contact requests is that I provide a link to my review. I also have a hook up at T & T Clark and they don’t seem to care. My point, though, is that if these publishers actually cared about anything other than online presence and advertisement; hardly anyone on this blog would get them, or for that matter, hardly anyone in the sphere (and I’m only referring to “Academic” books). If all they [publishers] wanted to do was have a good critical review, then they would leave that to the “scholars” and just be happy for a review to show up in a scholarly/academic journal. So I’m only making an inference about their motives, but I can’t come up with anything else; other than they want advertisement. And I don’t think anything I said disagreed with your point on what these folks want — i.e. more than a blurb — in fact I said I agreed with you on that point (e.g. that if someone gets a free book, then they should do an actual review as their “payment” for their “free” book).

  27. Here’s my take on the issue:
    I think we have to address the problem of qualification. For example, I don’t feel comfortable to review a book on “textual criticism” or ” Old Testament Hebrew” when I know that I’m not well versed in those fields. Reviewing a book demands some kind of familiarity with the subject and an on-going engangement with the most recent scholarship on the subject at hand. Finally, I’m going to say something mean:
    Having a degree in theology does not qualifyanyone to review academic books. That’s not enough. You have to follow the trend of the scholarship in the respective discipline or area such as Nick often does when he reviews academic books on the trinity, christology, and so forth. I can trust Nick’s review on these areas because he knows the scholarship.

  28. Man I hate even trying to review books. However I’m glad there are others out there that are good at it and actually give their honest assessment of the book. I like knowing that a book was awesome or it sucked or it was a chore to read or whatever. I do get annoyed when it seems like ever academic book reviewed is somehow required reading or worthy of interaction or being on someone’s bookshelf no matter how esoteric the subject. I also like knowing which books are better on a topic when the book reviewed isn’t that great. Nick’s recent review of Erickson was a good example of this. If nothing else, make these book reviews useful to others. I can read the publisher’s description and contents of a book. Tell me something I don’t know and whether the book is worth my time and money.

    Btw, bring back the rating system, Nick!

  29. C. Stirling: It may not have been the article you have in mind but it was helpful nonetheless.

    Bobby: It seems as if you took my comment in a negative light and have responded defensively. Rest assured that I had no problems with your initial comment. And I agree that advertisement is part and parcel of reviewing. It would be impossible to review a book without advertising it.

    Celucien: I don’t think what you said is mean (especially because it paints me in a favorable light ;-) but I think reviews can be offered by people even if they’re unfamiliar with the subject of the book they’re reviewing. I’ve mentioned some ways that this can be done above. Now these won’t be critical reviews but they’ll be reviews nonetheless.

    Bryan: If I could stomach the way that those stars looked then I might bring it back; but they really bother my aesthetic sensibilities! And I agree completely. When I read reviews I want to know about the book under review. I want to know if it’s worth my time or if it’s something I should just ignore.

  30. I just want to say I agree with David Black’s premise. I take reviewing extremely seriously and often times feel inferior. I’m also am careful about what I review like others said. I won’t review a book on textual criticism (nor would I read one at this point!).

    Requesting a book for review and not reviewing it is theft. It should be an even exchange. I won’t request any books that are less than about $15 because it’s not worth my time and I don’t do blurb reviews.

    Right now because of what I’m reading, I don’t have time for reviews, so I don’t request anything or I’d just be tempted to give it less than it deserves. I run the risk of publishers not wanting to send me more books but so be it.

    One problem is when I love a book and feel like people may feel I’m a shill. I always at least try to find something that could be improved.

    I purposely wrote a negative unsolicited review of Foster’s book on prayer. Right after I wrote it someone bought it through my Amazon Associates account. I guess any publicity is good publicity.
    Jeff

  31. Jeff: I agree, it is theft to ask for books and then not review them. I generally don’t realize how much a book costs until after I receive it and see the price on the invoice or publicity material.

    Most books can be improved upon (there’s a few that I wouldn’t want to see touched) but if you love a book then say so. There’s nothing wrong with that. The real problem, as Jim noted, is faking love for a book one hates. That’s dishonest and shows a serious lack of integrity.

    And you’re right, any publicity is good publicity. I’ve noticed that people have purchased books through my Amazon links after I’ve given them negative reviews. I guess some folks just want to see if they’re really that bad.

  32. I generally don’t want to review an $8 book (although I might on my own soon) and work for minimum wage, not that there’s anything wrong with that. Randy Alcorn does.

    When I just love a book, I guess I should just say so and why, and not worry if people think I’m fawning. I guess I could be disingenuous the other way too.

    I absolutely hate doing negative reviews of books I requested but there is no choice.

    I guess some folks just want to see if they’re really that bad.

    That’s fine with me especially if they use my Amazon link.
    Jeff

  33. I’ve never requested a book for review. I’ve received numerous offers of books for review, but I generally turn them down. There are some very few that I’ve agreed to receive and review, and I make certain to mention that it is a review copy. Generally, the books I review are those that have interested me, and that I’ve purchased. That makes for a different situation than the review process as generally conceived, and I like it that way. My reviews tend to be notes on reading, for those interested in the same topics.

    I’ve actually got some software to compare and review (several desktop and mobile Bible software products), and that’s much trickier than a book review. I’m still trying to figure out the best way to manage that….

  34. Kevin: Your reviewlets are a perfect example of how one can provide a substantive assessment of a book in very limited space. I’ve never failed to learn whether or not a book you’ve read would be worth my time from one of your reviewlets, and your in-depth reviews are even better!

    I still review books that I purchase along with those I receive for free. The reviews end up looking the same but sometimes I slack a little bit when it’s a book I purchased because I don’t feel the the same sense of obligation.

    As for the software, if you’ve got some to compare, then compare the major features and tell us which does what better. That seems the obvious route to go. I’m a technological invalid so when I’ve reviewed software it hasn’t been very good. I’ve been using BW8 for well over a year and I still have no idea how most of it works or of the extent of what it can do.

  35. Thanks so much, Nick! I appreciate your appreciation! I always enjoy your reviews. I’ve bought and enjoyed several books because of them.

    Software comparisons are tricky. In this case, the major two are Accordance and Bibleworks, but I’ll likely include Logos too, and then the mobile Accordance and Logos as well as the OliveTree BibleReader. All are Bible study programs, but with wildly divergent capabilities and a variance in available modules in addition to the OS issues. My original interest was in Septuagint-related capability, but it’s morphed into more, particularly in the ability to generate one’s own modules and tools in addition to those available for purchase. With some, you can’t. Some allow it. So, none of these programs would get a 100% score. So, it comes down to creating a fair method of evaluation that will at least be marginally objective. I’ve been thinking of it lately in terms of titles available and their prices, functions available, ease of use, and then some summary discussions. I’m aiming to be pretty comprehensive at this point. Anyhow, those should start showing up soon.

  36. I presented Logos and Bibleworks with a spiel telling them that I used to review freeware for a newsletter I wrote in the old days and that I’m always using, trying and maintaining software and that I review books. Logos asked some questions and then never responded but BW was gracious enough to send me a copy. Since that costs a whole lot more than a book I did a healthy three part review. I read through the whole help file and watched all the videos and really learned all about it, which was to my benefit anyway. I couldn’t compare it to Logos and Accordance but could still comment on how some things work compared to other software and write a lot about what I like and don’t. What a great opportunity that was. I still use it almost everyday.

    I think your reviews from a less technical perspective are good too since that’s where most people are, not that I’m a software engineer or anything like that.

    I was surprised at how short some of the reviews on their site are but then I’m pretty sure they said they wanted them concise. I suppose it doesn’t actually cost them $350 but that’s still how much it’s worth.
    Jeff

  37. Kevin: Well I appreciate your appreciation of my appreciation! And I’m glad that my reviews have provided sufficient information for you to make a decision on some book purchases.

    You’re much better equipped to review software than I am so I look forward to your reviews. I already know some of your feelings about BW’s lack of capabilities on certain things. I can’t wait for the full writeup and comparison.

    Jeff: I remember your reviews. They were pretty substantial and showed that you took some time to familiarize yourself with the product. The be honest, my review will never be complete, although the “official” review was presented and posted on the BW website a long time ago. I’ll continue to drop notes about things as I encounter them because I really am intrigued by the software and as I progress in my studies I know I’ll have to access more features than I’m using right now.

    As far as Logos goes, I was blessed to be a beta tester for Logos 4 and with that they hooked me up with one of their Scholar’s Library packages (the one with the least resources which was still a heck of a lot of books and Bibles!). That wasn’t for review though. But Logos 4 is another thing that I know so little about but will continue to make note of as I learn more. I wouldn’t compare it to BW8 though since I see them as having very different emphases (BW for exegesis and Logos for building a digital library).

  38. It’s the Nick and Kevin Mutual Appreciation Society! On teh internets!!!1!!!!

    I share your perception regarding Logos, too. I always thought of it as more of an electronic library tool, and they do well at that, but seem kind of late to the game with the Bible program aspect. There was always a Bible there, of course, but more as a text that would pop up when you click a link in one of the digital books.

    One of the things that needs to be done with all these programs is the ability to incorporate books of your own creation, without any limitations, whether Bibles to fit in the Bible part, or just e-books of some sort. The various programs differ widely in that respect, with none being ideal, I think. More on that later!

    Well, anyway, I’ll figure something out. Jeff’s practice of reading through the help files is an excellent one. Thanks, Jeff!

  39. Oh yeah Nick, I remember you having Logos stuff. I had/have to try to not be jealous. Having the Scholar’s Library with BECNT etc. in electronic format would be unimaginable although even now more are being added to many of the good series’s (series plural?).

    Thanks for the comments. I’m the type that likes reading owner’s manuals so it was nice to go through them. Nice thing about BW is they have guides for certain tasks (exegesis, sermon prep, etc.) and then details of everything in the program.

    I still use e-Sword for ‘dead people’ commentaries which probably beats out anyone, at least for free or no extra cost.
    Jeff

  40. Kevin: Even if they all had the capabilities you hope for I wouldn’t know how to use them.

    Jeff: I’d love to have the BECNT and NICNT/NICOT volumes for Logos but sadly, my package didn’t include any of them (but I can’t complain, it was free). And e-Sword is a gift from God! It’s amazing for being free. I used it with profit for years before discovering Logos and BW.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s