Goodreads UX: indispensable, but unsatisfying

Despite being a cornerstone in the community, Goodreads has continually disappointed its ample user base with bad usability.

Lately, I’ve been channeling my inner middle schooler and devouring books. I remember when I would load up on six or seven hardbacks from the library, only to return for more within a week and a half. I would keep track of my reads in a spiral bound notebook, rating each books’ merit in gel pen hearts.

Thanks to the world slowing down a bit (just a bit) under the threat of COVID, lots of lapsed readers are hitting the books once again. Today there are better ways to track and review books, even if I find myself missing the sparkly charm of gel pens. That’s just me. The most popular method by far is Goodreads, a platform that boasts approximately 90 million users. In some instances, glowing reviews on Goodreads outweigh even the most scathing of New York Times editorials.

Considering all this, Goodreads must be beloved by bookworms, authors, and the growing community of book influencers. But that isn’t the case. Goodreads is used grudgingly–users log on with the expectation of usability issues. They find the interface frustrating and boring. They find it inefficient and outdated. And yet they continually use it because there’s little choice otherwise.

Because of its early start, having launched in 2006, Goodreads was able to establish itself as the place to discover and review books. After being acquired by Amazon in 2013, users expected change, even welcomed it… but the early aughts aesthetic and beige background remains to this day. Goodreads has a captive audience. It doesn’t need to change since no other platform has been able to usurp its dedicated community. Even so, that community is getting frustrated and–rightfully–expecting more out of the Goodreads user experience.

The complacency of Goodreads

At first, the 2006 look is nostalgic, charming. The serif font and busy interface harkens back to early social media where we…