Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

LOTR - frodo santa

Amazon has made a decision to strip the sales rank of LGBT books, so that they won’t appear on best seller lists. Vixialicious on Livejournal’s post on the subject is much better than anything I could’ve said.

It’s not pornography, it’s not erotica they’re going after. It’s all LGBT literature. Looking for a list of the best college guides out there? Well, the one put out by the Advocate won’t be on there. How about a list of the best Young Adult series? Well, you aren’t going to find Rainbow Road, no matter how many copies have been sold.

If they are looking to truly remove ‘adult materials’ from their search lists, why are the novels depicting graphic heterosexual sex still there? What criteria have they applied to determine what should be labeled ‘adult?’

And most importantly, WHO ELECTED AMAZON TO BE THE MORALITY POLICE?

Epic Fail, Amazon. I’m a very regular customer, but you’re on notice and am not getting any more of my money. And to do my part in the Google bombing, here’s a link to the Smart Bitches Trashy Books page for Amazon Rank.

Here’s the top hits on ‘homosexuality’ in amazon.com right now:

  1. A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality
  2. Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality, Revised and Expanded Edition.
  3. For the Bible Tells me So
  4. Can Homosexuality be healed?

And the same search on amazon.co.uk:

  1. Can Homosexuality be healed?
  2. A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality
  3. Stories from the War on Homosexuality [DVD]
  4. homosexuality is fun Decorated Mouse Pad
  5. Immorality in the Church: Homosexuality [CASSETTE]

And so on and so forth. Are you KIDDING ME? I have no words angry enough for this.

Mirrored from This Space Blank Comment here or there.

Comments

( 14 comments — Leave a comment )
[info]crantz wrote:
Apr. 12th, 2009 10:25 pm (UTC)
I wrote a letter a few minutes ago to Amazon, and I'm just incredibly, incredibly confused.
[info]krazycat wrote:
Apr. 12th, 2009 10:28 pm (UTC)
I'm not confused, I'm angry. This is outrageous.
[info]crantz wrote:
Apr. 12th, 2009 10:41 pm (UTC)
My confusion stems from being unable to understand why they would do this. That's not to say I'm not pissed.
[info]krazycat wrote:
Apr. 12th, 2009 10:42 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I get you. I don't understand it either, have they completely lost their minds?!?
[info]zombieflowers wrote:
Apr. 12th, 2009 11:39 pm (UTC)
o hay, beat me to it. whatever, this needs to be posted about endlessly, this is fucked. up.
[info]alletiders wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 10:01 am (UTC)
Did I take a wrong turn somewhere and end up in 1909? Holy crap, Amazon.
[info]jamaisneutral wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 10:06 am (UTC)
Bastards! Surely something must be done
[info]krazycat wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 12:20 pm (UTC)
They're now claiming it was a technical glitch. Yeah, right.
[info]porlock wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 11:01 am (UTC)
Really not trying to cause trouble, but I'm honestly confused about this whole thing. I got the impression that some of these books were not even findable if you search, but found every one I looked for (lesbian/gay fiction), no problem. And then, the sales rank has gone from Lady Chatterley, which (I think) is largely het, but you can still find a rank for Mapplethorpe's books of homoerotic photography. And a quick search for 'coming out guide' has given me over 1,000 results. And anyway, who actually buys books by looking at the sales rank?

And as for the results for the 'homosexuality' search - I sitll don't understand. Tipping the Velvet isn't called 'Tipping the Velvet - a homosexual novel', so it doesn't surprise me that those are coming up because they have 'homosexuality' in the title and, well, I'm sorry, but I'm not suprised that these books are being searched for a lot in the US. And as for the UK list, two of those five I don't see as neccessary 'anti-homosexual'. If you google No3, you will see that it is a doc about the struggle for gay rights, and no 5 - well, homosexuality in the church IS immoral, within the church.

Like I said, I'm confused, but this is all over Twitter and my flist, and I'm just not 100% sure what it is that I should be getting cross about. I'm beginning to think I'm late to the party and they've sorted it all out.
[info]porlock wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 11:05 am (UTC)
and no 5 - well, homosexuality in the church IS immoral, within the church.

To clarify, I'd fully expect something like that to turn up under that search.
[info]krazycat wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 11:49 am (UTC)
No, they are findable if you search for a title directly, but only if you know what you're looking for. But removing the sales rank removes something from topic search and best seller lists - which is significant as when you do searches in amazon, they are sorted by popularity, which is where the sales rank would come into play the most.

The search I did is more an example - because I did a search and it was almost completely stripped from positive literature. The significance is more that anything remotely promoting homosexuality has been pushed downwards in searches on purpose

Cleolinda has a pretty good summary post.
[info]porlock wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 12:33 pm (UTC)
Ah, OK. I've never used Amazon like that myself, so it didn't really register. I usually know what it is I am looking for, and usually which edition as well, so wouldn't have noticed the issue (plus I usually sort by price as well).

I see what you mean about your searches - again, I think it doesn't help that all of this seems to affect Amazon in a way that doesn't tally with the way I use it. Now I see how it does change things, it makes more sense.

Thanks for clearing it up!
[info]krazycat wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 12:34 pm (UTC)
Happy to help :)
[info]krazycat wrote:
Apr. 13th, 2009 12:16 pm (UTC)
Dear Author explains the technical implications in a very good way here.
( 14 comments — Leave a comment )