||[Apr. 12th, 2009|06:37 pm]
Irony. We HAVE had one of our books de-ranked, but I didn't realize it because I didn't know the book had been added to amazon. |
Why didn't I know? Because it's not showing up in amazon searches for Moira Rogers. Cuz, well, it's been de-ranked.
ETA: OKAY ALSO HI
The next time I see someone bitch that there are way more objectionable things on amazon, like those trashy romance books, I'm gonna cut someone. Because #1) sex is not objectionable and saying so is undercutting the entire point of "no censorship" and #2) if anyone at all was remotely paying attention they'd know that entire romance publishers and lines ARE being hit regardless of teh gay content.
Wow I'm a wanky bitch who needs to go to bed. Or, you know, drink more vodka.
So, how are we supposed to find these books? Surely they should just stop selling them if they aren't going to show in searches.
You have to go into the book area to search. So you CAN still find them, you just have to not search from the main page.
This whole thing is inane.
Did you know that IMDb has a similar filter on adult film stars? It unsets if they have what is perceived to be "legitimate credits".
As a result, you can find Traci Lords and Katie Morgan, but not "Ashley Blue" on a non-advanced search. Originally, there was no filter, and then there was.
(I looked up Katie Morgan originally after her HBO special, then tried to find her again awhile later. I ended up only being able to find her IMDb page via a link off of Wikipedia. Irritating as hell. Now you can find her again, since she has a "legitimate" film credit-- which, clearly, her HBO interview was not. Go figure.)
I did NOT know that, but it has to be new because I've looked up some people before and I just went back and tried to find Randy Spears and I had to do this CRAZY dance around to get to him.
That is for serious unfunny. (Though Amazon owns IMDb right?)
Though Amazon owns IMDb right?
I don't know. But, yeah-- they probably do, what with the links to buy the movies at Amazon on every page.
Yep, I'd seen that recently in a rundown (I think on Dear Author or SBTB actually?) and I just scrolled down to the bottom of the site and it says this:
An Amazon.com company. Advertise on IMDb. License our content.
"As of around 4 p.m. on Sunday, plugging the search term "homosexuality" into Amazon.com returned top links to "A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality" and "You Don't Have To Be Gay." Click image to see a larger screen shot."
The next time I see someone bitch that there are way more objectionable things on amazon, like those trashy romance books, I'm gonna cut someone.
I think the point of people bringing up the stuff with het sex, violence, etc. is just that Amazon claims that they are deranking "adult content" but the fact that they aren't deranking everything that could be thought of as "adult content" shoots holes in their claim. It's been pretty clear that they are specifically targeting gay-friendly content, whether it involves explicit sex or not. I doubt that most people--if anyone--bringing up the other arguably "adult" material want ANYTHING to be censored. They're just pointing out that Amazon is a bunch of lying liars who lie because what they claim they're trying to do is definitely NOT what they are doing.
And it doesn't matter if Amazon simply fucked up the manner in which they were trying to censor some stuff; the fact that they were doing it at all, that they bowed to anyone's demand to do this, is the big problem. The place where they fucked up wasn't that the programmers put on the case didn't know what the hell they were doing; it was that anyone told them to do this in the first place.
I did a big slightly more coherent post on this on LJ, but yeah. I know what they're doing, and it's not even targeting gay-friendly stuff... Dear Author pretty much argued to my satisfaction that it was done entirely based on what categories and keywords books were given. (I already assumed it was some sort of algorithm, it is impossible to do this sort of thing by hand on millions of products.)
HOWEVER, no. Not everyone is just trying to make an example. Some people are actively telling me that it is okay to filter out legit adult stuff. Which I guess is their opinion, but I reserve the right to find that a shitty opinion.
Rather, it's not JUST targeting gay-friendly stuff...let me make it clear that I think labeling the entire category of gay/lesbian etc FAR WORSE. Because I do.
Demon cat loves Amazon! D:
It is appropriate that her name is Pandora, no?