>and found that a lot of these booktokers doesn't really understand that writting is an skill and some people aren't good at it, also that you can't talk positively about all the books just because some people might like them even if objectively they're bad for many reasons.

Writing, like all art, is a skill. But taste is subjective. While some books may be considered bad on a technical level, that doesn't necessarily mean it will detract from people's enjoyment of them. There's obviously something in these very popular books that many people enjoy. There's this pervasive elitism in many book spaces relating to the idea that modern, popular books are "less than." I think this idea unintentionally is intertwined with some problematic, unconscious belief systems.

That being said, I've definitely noticed a problem with toxic positivity regarding books and authors. This is a problem. I don't read Colleen Hoover, but I know she has a huge fanbase. Toxic positivity suffocates productive conversations, sometimes important ones that require critical reading, and the larger the fanbase, the more suffocating this will feel. This is not unique to Colleen Hoover, as I've seen it many times with Brandan Sanderson fans as well.

These are two separate points that have been sort of fused together without examining what's connecting them; capitalism. Books sell best by word of mouth. Developing a cult-like fanbase has proven to be an excellent way to make sales (think Hoover, Maas, Sanderson, anyone whose fans you wouldn't dare pick a fight with about the books because of their devotion to the books and authors). These things do not necessarily have to be perfect, they just have to inspire passion. Our very human love of storytelling and sharing is being exploited for profit.