Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
As far as Amazon using whatever algorithms/data they use to disqualify reviews: I don't care. Neither should anyone else posting reviews there (IMO). If someone takes an inordinate amount of pride in the reviews they write, they should be posting them somewhere where THEY control the content. Not giving them away to a retail giant who might break your heart by removing them (for whatever reason they choose to do so).
I can only think of two reasons someone would be upset because their review of a book was removed from Amazon:
1) They were proud of it (but not enough so to save/post it elsewhere for backup)
2) Their reason for writing it was something other than giving away their fair opinion of a book.
I can understand #1, but I suspect that doesn't represent very many people at all. Which leaves #2.
|
You nailed it.
It is one thing to review functional products like computers and furniture, gadgets and stuff. Even CDs and DVDs have aspects where hearing somebody else's experience is useful beyond "I liked it/I hated it". And those kind of reviews cone from the Consumer Reports world of consumerist culture. Those reviews focus on the product and its suitability to mission.
But book reviews come from the incestuous tradpub world where reviews serve the interests of the publisher or the reviewer more than the consumer. And too often literary reviews have been instruments of power and nepotism and backscratching. A lot of that tradpub legacy has filtered into the online review system in places like goodreads and Amazon with cliques and promoters bringing things to the table that don't really help consumers. Promoting the work of a friend or acquaintance just because you like them doesn't help consumers any more than dropping one-star reviews on a title because it is DRM'ed.
Goodreads can tolerate some of it because it is a social network so some fanboyism is to be expected but there isn't much room for that kind of shilling (pro or con) at a commercial site.
No more than there is room for commercial activity and sockpuppet shills right here.
Mobileread has standards it enforces and so does Amazon.
And I can think of at least once when the mods here used forensics to unmask shills. Wikipedia, too.
Amazon having deeper pockets means they can afford further-reaching tools but the principle is the same: each site has a mission and a culture to protect as best they can. Any available legal tool is fair game and last I heard spiders were perfectly legal.
Neither side is going to be a hundred percent accurate but both have a right to draw the line as they see fit.
And, hey, if Amazon disallows your review, why not take it to Apple or Kobo?