(Untitled)

[nautiluspq]

So, Amazon decided to cripple its search results by excluding "adult" material. This, of course, includes anything involving homosexuality. Except anti-homosexual books, naturally.

Summary here. Damn, they were so convenient to use, too. And what a perfect complement to just watching Milk this is.

ETA: This may be the work of a troll, or the

Comments

[sabra_n]

I need them for textbooks for another year, the fucking bastards. They'd better fix this or I could be hundreds of dollars out.

[mere_bagatelle]

Yeah, I read about that in some of the book-type news I've been following. That seriously sucks.

[foxfour]

i had been sort of willfully not following this whole thing, assuming it to be internet-thin-skinned-assery, but the inclusion of anti-homosexual books is distressing. fortunately, i don't need anything from them. in the foreseeable future.

[alors_indikaze]

The inherent problem in those assumptions is that legitimate complaints get the same kind of willfully-apathetic backlash as the thin-skinned complaints, but in different proportion to support, and that said proportions tend to break down based on the popularity of the defendant as much as the legitimacy of the complaint.

The only reason why this is as big as it is is because someone was actually dumb enough to make such a large mistake that it overwhelmed the kneejerk defenses people put up for this kind of bullshit. (Of course there still is a large number of people more than willing to push it all under the rug, and then they wonder why people bitch when they do)

[foxfour]

see the bantown analysis; i maintain skepticism that it is as willful as the immediate appearance suggests. what i was saying above, though, is that, on actually hearing details, it sounds like a legit problem.

so, to clarify what i said initially: pending any sort of clarity on whether it's a bantown, i am quite happy not using amazon. i had initially ignored this, but the details make it seem a worthwhile complaint.

and i'm not convinced by your assertion as to why it's so big-see bantown, again, for an alternate explanation. basically, viral-marketing of a scandal is an alternative explanation.

to reiterate: none of this skepticism will change my behavior of ignoring amazon until we get this clarified to my satisfaction.

[foxfour]

further note: the bantown analysis of the situation is interesting, but i am not sure how people outside of the company could perpetrate that-that is, i don't know enough about amazon's mechanisms to know whether that'd be feasible.

[alors_indikaze]

It also falls apart given that this policy/double-standard has been implemented incrementally over the past two months, rather than suddenly. That's an awful lot of preparation for a mere trolling attempt, not to mention the amount of time Amazon had to pick up on it.

The most likely explanation for this does involve abuse the rating system, but doesn't make Amazon look any better under the circumstances

[foxfour]

i have confidence in long-term concerted trolling. it doesn't absolve amazon, but it makes them guilty of something slightly different. IF this is a troll at all. which i am still not convinced of one way or another.

it seems like it should be pretty possible to write a script that'll slurp ratings info and see what that tells us.

i cannot continue this discussion in an LJ, thread, though; i think we'd get a lot of clarity-improvement in a person-to-person talk.

[nautiluspq]

Or the hacker's a fake (but still a troll). I don't know--the Easter weekend timing is awfully convenient, but apparently there have been isolated incidents of deranking gay books since February. At this point, I'm taking all accounts with some skepticism and not using Amazon until official clarification comes out in case.