Jan. 1st, 2017

marlowe1: (Teddy Bear)
I have been purged from the Amazon reviewers. This would be a minor annoyance but for the fact that I have also been on Amazon Vine. I also have a great deal of writing on those Amazon reviews that are now gone never to be seen again. While there are dumb reviews, I would often go through Amazon and read my old reviews and be happy to see some turns of phrases.

So now that I have been purged from Amazon and purged from Amazon Vine (so many free items will I never get again) I am thinking more about Amazon and their bullshit policies. I am also not going to be buying anything from Amazon anymore but since I have racked up about $4000 in charges on Amazon at 25% interest, I think that is more of a sound fiscal decision rather than a boycott, but also fuck Amazon.

The problem is that this new bullshit standard is based on the idea that no one should ever review any book by their friends. If you know any author, you are going to get banned if you review their book. Doesn't matter if you say that it has good points and bad points. Doesn't matter if you write a comprehensive book review that recommends it to some people and lets other people know that they might not like it. Doesn't even matter if you fucking hate it and you are following some kind of ethic by honestly saying that you hate it. If you know the writer, you are banned, purged, gone.

To make matter worse, this is based on the narking standard that is the Amazon business model. Since all Amazon employees can back stab each other anonymously, why not let the Amazon customers participate in the fun. You know that a good review is being written by a friend of the autor? Turn them in. If you see Neil Gaiman giving a good review to Alan Moore's latest book, well fuck Neil. What the hell is he doing writing a good review of Watchmen and giving more insight into Moore's process than you would get from that woman who wrote 5 reviews a day by cutting and pasting the back cover blurb? Bye Neil. Don't you dare review another book.

The people that this standard is not likely to catch are the people who are reviewing their friend's self-published zombie book. Oh sure, they might get cut off eventually but no one gives a fuck about Malina Roos and Book Sandworm and their glowing review of Dead Christmas: A Zombie Anthology, edited by the ever stupid and perpetually crappy Anthony Giangregorio (whom I usually refer to as Tony G). Well they might give a fuck about those fake reviews but not enough to crack down on them. They are too busy trying to get reviews taken down for giving their shitty self-pub book a bad review and going after the good reviews that the reviewer did.

I get that Amazon doesn't want sock puppets or fake reviewers or people getting paid to review books on their site. There was even a club where people were getting free books to give them good reviews (or discounts) that wasn't part of Amazon Vine. It was just a different group that gave discounts for Amazon reviews. Or subsidized Amazon Reviews.

But really who gives a fuck? Why does Amazon give a fuck? Yes, Amazon has gotten so pissy and so cranky about it recently because people were manipulating the sales ranks and the "what Amazon shows you" ranks by getting their friends to review books but so fucking what? Why is it Amazon's role to police their reviews beyond profanity and racist rants? Is it really going to hurt Amazon if dozens of people buy one of Tony G's shit books based on the reviews? Amazon makes money from selling books. They also provided a platform for reviewing books that managed to make them very popular.

So now Amazon is biting the hands that feed them because they don't want to eat what they are getting. Now that Amazon is still not making money but looks just as fake wealthy as it has always looked by undercutting its sales and being on the same suicide track as the Gold Standard (as long as it cuts its prices down to bookstore discount it can't make money, but if it raises its prices it loses its customers) it thinks it can take a principled ethical stand. But there are no principles and ethics in its stand. It's just a way to look like it cares about the reviews.

Only it merely lost the customers. The dirty secret of Amazon is the fact that most of the customers came to review books and then got sucked into the easy buying and the easy credit and just started buying things more than it was reviewing them. But they were still reviewing and that is the fun of being on Amazon. If it was just a bookstore, no one would care. This is the kind of bookstore where you can bullshit with the guy behind the counter for a long time about whether or not you liked your books (I worked at Dreamhaven once and it was great like that) and talk to other customers. But now that there are plenty of people being cut off, fuck Amazon.

It really doesn't make sense. It seems to make sense but Amazon is a BOOKSTORE. The reviews are the selling point. If Amazon decides that it doesn't want most of its reviewers reviewing then why the fuck should they still buy from Amazon as opposed to ebay or BN or the local bookstore? The Amazon discounts are not that great - especially if you buy using Amazon credit.

So in order not to sell books to people who want to buy books based on friend reviews, Amazon cuts off plenty of other reviewers who will also not buy any books.

Stupid fucking Amazon cannot go bankrupt fast enough. Not that I'm hoping that Amazon will be one of the 2017 deaths (that's reserved for people like Trump, Rape Lawyer Alan Dershowitz, Ted Nugent, etc.) but I won't mind if it falls apart. The only problem is that since Jeff Bezos is the owner of Washington Post, the collapse of Amazon will make the Trumpies happy.


marlowe1: (Default)
Tim Lieder

September 2017

345 6789

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 24th, 2017 09:07 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios