The problem with book reviews is that you need to have read the book to
realize that the book reviewer is full of balloney. So, in the past,
reviewers could go on forever without any form of accountability. Even
publishers were in on it: the (then) editors at Random House prevented
me from being tough with Easterbrook to avoid upsetting the New York Times.
Now, reviewers have skin in the game.
Recall l that the idea of SITG is to prevent anyone from having
powers over citizens with impunity.
You can actually expose their reading deficiencies, actually forcing the reviewer to read the book.