Reviews on Amazon are becoming attack weapons

[soulfuldog]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I enjoy the reviews and find them helpful. It's pretty obvious when they are either too praising or too punishing, but between the blurbs, samples and 'averaging' the reviews I can generally tell if a book fits my needs or not. Not always of course -- even with all of that duds still slip through.

+1
A little bit of common sense to average them out, some additional reviews from somewhere like goodreads, and I find the reviews quite helpful.

Originally Posted by DianNC

For instance, I saw these incredible reviews for The Sea of Tranquility at goodreads the other day and before I knew it, I owned it!!

Nice, that looks a cracking read..... not normally my type of book, but I've added it to my wish list and might just buy it

[pidgeon92]

Originally Posted by Blossom

It isn't just books. It happens with music too.

It happens with everything. Have a look at one of my new favorite time wasting websites:

http://leasthelpful.com/

[Anabran]

"When others try to influence what we can and cannot read, that is censorship. Period. If it affects Amazon's ability to sell its product, that is also a form of censorship, too. Amazon should stand up to this kind of thing; as an author, it sends chills down my spine."

Only the Government ,with its prevailing Authority, and ability to take punitive action under color of law can actually commit "censorship"
Every other effort by private citizens and other interest groups is just "free speech"

By your argument people in this site/forum were guilty of "censorship" when they (deservedly IMHO), trashed that AWFULL "50 Shades of grey" sex novel as they defacto sought to prevent others from reading the book/s.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by ereadingdotcom

When others try to influence what we can and cannot read, that is censorship.

If that were true, every book review, good or bad, would be censorship.

I don't agree that censorship can only be done by governments, but I do believe it requires the power to remove something from sale. Unless bad reviews cause Amazon to unlist the book, it's not censorship. It's one corner of the market yelling "We think you shouldn't buy this because it sucks!"

In the US, at least, they have the right to do that for any reason they like.

As a consumer, I find it depressing. A free and open market is where you decide not to buy if you don't like a product, not force it out of the marketplace because you and a group of your friends don't like it.

In a free and open market, I am quite comfortable encouraging my friends to boycott some products, and hoping that the boycott will drive them out of existence. You seem to be saying that trying to convince other people to avoid what you dislike is censorship.

Part of the glory of the internet age is crowdsourced activism. That works both ways... Homestuck gets its 2-million-dollar kickstarter, and the Michael Jackson book gets panned by people who haven't read it but object to it existing. Shrug.

(I think what they're doing is vile. I don't think we have, nor should have, laws against vile behavior. That kind of thing should be managed by community ethics, not legalities.)

[QuantumIguana]

By your argument people in this site/forum were guilty of "censorship" when they (deservedly IMHO), trashed that AWFULL "50 Shades of grey" sex novel as they defacto sought to prevent others from reading the book/s.

It's perfectly legitimate to have a negative opinion of a work. It is a quite a different thing to pretend that you read it in order to give it a fraudulent review. Saying "50 Shades of Gray sucks" is fine. Pretending you read it and giving it a review would just be dishonest.

[Anabran]

"It's perfectly legitimate to have a negative opinion of a work. It is a quite a different thing to pretend that you read it in order to give it a fraudulent review. Saying "50 Shades of Gray sucks" is fine. Pretending you read it and giving it a review would just be dishonest."

Dishonest?? yes
Censorship??
(restricting another's free speech) -no

One could embark upon a vindictive, mean spirited campaign against anyone with ZERO knowledge of the person, Author, Director etc works.
with the sole purpose of Discouraging others from reading/ viewing the subjects works

And one might be guilty of Dishonesty or even Slander or libel

but censorship -nope.

[Anabran]

..And I would add PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS supercede "free speech" rights.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by Anabran

Dishonest?? yes
Censorship??
(restricting another's free speech) -no

One could embark upon a vindictive, mean spirited campaign against anyone with ZERO knowledge of the person, Author, Director etc works.
with the sole purpose of Discouraging others from reading/ viewing the subjects works

And one might be guilty of Dishonesty or even Slander or libel

but censorship -nope.

I didn't say a word about censorship. You said:

By your argument people in this site/forum were guilty of "censorship" when they (deservedly IMHO), trashed that AWFULL "50 Shades of grey" sex novel as they defacto sought to prevent others from reading the book/s.

I pointed out that they weren't the same things, that there is a difference between the two scenarios. If people were giving dishonest reviews of 50 Shades it would be as objectionable.

I object to fraudulent reviews, but I wouldn't call it censorship. In any case, it is not the case that only government can censor, it is just that it is only illegal for the government to censor.

[Anabran]

"I object to fraudulent reviews, but I wouldn't call it censorship. In any case, it is not the case that only government can censor, it is just that it is only illegal for the government to censor."

We are in Agreement.

[GrannyGrump]

pidgeon92

Have a look at one of my new favorite time wasting websites:

http://leasthelpful.com/

Great. Now I'll get in trouble for missing a deadline at work because this site is TOO addictive, I keep hitting the "next" button. Clueless reviews are almost as funny as intentional snark.

karma for you, because I needed a laugh today.

[doubleshuffle]

I have already told some friends about my passion for aluminium foil. I think this might be the place to share my passion with the world.

For Aluminium Foil (Industrial Size!) and Free Customer Review Speech!!

[sky_kama]

I always like to read reviews of books, dvd's on amazon. But this is crazy what happened with the MJ book.

What always annoyed me is that people gave 1 star reviews if they did not receive the article of when it was damaged or if the DVD could not be played on their DVD player. I would say.. go to costumer service in stead of giving it a bad review.

But well, where people come and people have been things will get messed up.

[Ripplinger]

They could easily solve the problem about fake reviews if they only let people who have purchased the book from Amazon leave a review about it or a comment from the account that purchased it.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Truth!

You forgot: "justice, and the American way!"

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

God, that is a depressing thought.

No, what is a really depressing thought is thinking I might have to live in the Kansas of today, the bastion of what you think is depressing thought. I bet Sam Brownback, the Kansas governor, thinks Harry Potter is demonic and has not read any of the books.