Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Roboform, crippling the export function and Bits Du Jour censorship

<< < (4/9) > >>

cyberdiva:
there's two amazon comments threads AFAIK, but both those threads are about reviews being paid for. I havent heard of reviews being censored...
-tomos (September 13, 2012, 05:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
I too am astonished to hear that a negative review by 40hz was taken down on Amazon at the request of the book's author.  What possible justification could there be?  Yes, I'm aware that some positive reviews are paid for, and some negative reviews are concocted by competitors, but Amazon's agreeing to remove a presumably knowledgeable review boggles what's left of my mind.

40hz:
there's two amazon comments threads AFAIK, but both those threads are about reviews being paid for. I havent heard of reviews being censored...
-tomos (September 13, 2012, 05:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
I too am astonished to hear that a negative review by 40hz was taken down on Amazon at the request of the book's author.  What possible justification could there be?  Yes, I'm aware that some positive reviews are paid for, and some negative reviews are concocted by competitors, but Amazon's agreeing to remove a presumably knowledgeable review boggles what's left of my mind.
-cyberdiva (September 13, 2012, 08:07 PM)
--- End quote ---

(Correction: it was the film school book rather than the tech book review that was taken down by request.)

I had strongly suggested that the author might have spent less time being so self-righteous and spent more time focused on his main topic. I'm guessing that that part was protested as a personal attack of some sort - which is something I later learned (from an acquaintance who sells through Amazon) could get a review taken down. I tried to get it clarified what had happened. But all I got back from Amazon was that it was removed by request. [Note: If I still have a copy of that e-mail (extremely doubtful since it was around 2004/5) I'll post it.]

As to why the tech book review disappeared, I have no idea. It was a critical review, but no more strongly worded than anything else I've seen up  there. However, one day it was there. Then, a few weeks later, it wasn't.

Note too that this all happened some years ago, before any of this user review stuff was taken that seriously. So there may have been other policies or practices in effect at the time. I think you now need to actually buy the product from Amazon before you're allowed to review it. There was a time when you didn't. All they did back then was include an indicator as to whether or not you were a 'confirmed' (i.e. you bought it from Amazon) owner of the product.

Either way, I haven't written an Amazon review or given a rating on anything I've bought from them since. Nowadays, I just shop there because I like their service and selection.

TaoPhoenix:
"There was a time when you didn't."

I think that's correct. I reviewed an item on Amazon years ago before I had worked out my web strategy of staying mostly below the radar while learning the ropes.

cyberdiva:
I think you now need to actually buy the product from Amazon before you're allowed to review it. There was a time when you didn't.
-40hz (September 13, 2012, 08:32 PM)
--- End quote ---
Hmmm....I'm under the impression that you still do not have to have bought the product from Amazon to post a review.  I've looked at a number of different products on Amazon lately, and I recall seeing reviews that specified other places where the writer bought the product he or she was reviewing.

40hz:
I became curious enough that I decided to Google using "Amazon remove negative reviews" and found some discussions over at Amazon about events similar to what I experienced.

One post from 2008 described an experience virtually identical to mine where another reviewer ran afoul of the same unpublished review guideline:

It's a little long... In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2008 4:15:36 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 15, 2008 4:18:12 PM PDT

gentle as a daisy says:

No one should doubt by now that Amazon won't hesitate to remove a negative review, but here's some more evidence (that has the kind of irrational quality that has characterized most of my dealings with Amazon):

- I posted a negative review that was removed, apparently upon complaint by the author of the book I reviewed

- Amazon's explanation was that:
"Our guidelines do not allow discussions that criticize authors or their intentions."

Wow! That knocked my socks off. Reviews shouldn't be permitted to criticize authors or their intentions? Really? I can't say, for example, that "Author X's historical fiction intended to depict 19th century marketing practices accurately, but the author failed in that intention as can be seen from the following examples"?

Worse yet, check out the Amazon reviewing guidelines: there *are* no injunctions against criticizing authors or their intentions.

The root problem as I see it is the lack of transparency in the removal-decision process. Customers (remember when Amazon was "consumer-centric"?) have access only to Customer Service, *not* to the mysterious "Review Team" that makes the editorial decisions concerning review removal. Customer Service mediates between the consumer and the Review Team. There is no direct channel of communication to the Review Team. The end result is the kind of message I've quoted above, which justifies the removal of a review on the basis of a violation of a guideline that doesn't exist.

The appropriate way to respond to a situation like this is to recognize that the entire review environment within Amazon is a farce, and the obligation of the reviewer is really to capitalize to one's best advantage on the opportunities for parody, satire, and the theater of the absurd. Under the circumstances, the only kind of review that should be considered offensive is one that presents itself seriously and straightforwardly as an objective review.
--- End quote ---


I also spotted many comments about how 1-star ratings seemed to mysteriously vanish. And reports of how many who questioned why were routinely told it was because of "server problems." This prompted one person to observe how curiously "selective" Amazon's server problems were, since it never seemed to happen to 5-star reviews.

Even more interesting were the allegations of self-censoring on the part of those who wanted to get (or maintain) "top reviewer" status. From some of what I read, I gathered that posting negative reviews could jeopardize your "top" rating if enough people voted your reviews "unhelpful." Apparently some authors mobilized their fans (or had a boatload of phony IDs) in order to carpet bomb negative reviewers and damage their credibility. As one guy said, there seems to be some books and authors you just don't give a bad review to on Amazon.

If true, it shouldn't surprise. There's no system so bulletproof that somebody won't eventually discover a way to game it. Especially if there's money to be made by doing so.

However, while all this was interesting to read, it mainly seemed to be happening between 2007 and 2009. I didn't see anything recent about this sort of thing.

Hmm...I wonder if Amazon eventually got more consistent and transparent; - or if 'the word' got out and people mostly gave up on posting negative reviews and comments over at Amazon...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page