The purpose of this bachelor thesis is to examine reviews written by users in library online catalogs, online bookstores and on the web community LibraryThing, in order to determine whether there are any differences in the way users review books, and whether these differences might explain why libraries experience difficulties in getting their users to review books. At the core of web 2.0 and library 2.0 concepts lies the thought of user participation, and larger libraries have sought to implement systems for reviewing and tagging items in the catalog in ways similar to online bookstores and other websites. By analyzing the contents of user reviews, however, this thesis shows that users express themselves differently depending on what kinds of literature they review, and in what context. Most notably, user reviews of ‘the Classics’ or canonized literature recognizes the high status of such literature, while users reviewing popular fiction express themselves in a way that admits that the reviewed titles are considered less valuable. There are also signs that books reviewed at online bookstores are seen as products or merchandise, while the reviews at the library to a greater degree treat the books as works of literature. The conclusion reached in this thesis suggests that there may be a relation between the image of the library as a defender of high culture and the perceived status of literary works, causing users to become hesitant to review books, feeling that they do not have the knowledge to describe or review them ‘correctly’.