?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Amazon Follies

On Amazon.com two days ago, mysteriously, the sales rankings disappeared from two newly-released high profile gay romance books: “Transgressions” by Erastes and “False Colors” by Alex Beecroft. Everybody was perplexed. Was it a glitch of some sort? The very next day HUNDREDS of gay and lesbian books simultaneously lost their sales rankings, including my book “The Filly.” There was buzz, What’s going on? Does Amazon have some sort of campaign to suppress the visibility of gay books? Is it just a major glitch in the system? Many of us decided to write to Amazon questioning why our rankings had disappeared. Most received evasive replies from customer service reps not versed in what was happening. As I am a publisher and have an Amazon Advantage account through which I supply Amazon with my books, I had a special way to contact them. 24 hours later I had a response:

 

In consideration of our entire customer base, we exclude "adult" material from appearing in some searches and best seller lists. Since these lists are generated using sales ranks, adult materials must also be excluded from that feature.

 

Hence, if you have further questions, kindly write back to us.

 

Best regards,

 

Ashlyn D

Member Services

Amazon.com Advantage

 

Yes, it is true. Amazon admits they are indeed stripping the sales ranking indicators for what they deem to be “adult” material. Of course they are being hypocritical because there is a multitude of “adult” literature out there that is still being ranked – Harold Robbins, Jackie Collins, come on! They are using categories THEY set up (gay and lesbian) to now target these books as somehow offensive.

Now in fairness I should point out that Amazon has also stopped ranking many books in the "erotica" categories as well which includes straight erotica. But that's a whole other battle that I'll leave to the erotica writers to take on.

 

Now I could probably convince the automatons at Amazon that The Filly is YA and therefore not “adult” in the least, and I could probably even convince them to reinstate my ranking.  But if they are excluding books just on the basis of being “gay” then by all means exclude mine too because I don’t want them just to reinstate the “nice” gay books, they need to reinstate all the gay books and if they are really going to try and exclude so-called “adult” material, then how come this has an Amazon ranking?

 

Here is a screencap of the case log from Amazon. Keep clicking on the image to make it bigger

************For everyone who has commented on my blog - Thank you very much. and everyone who has asked if they can use my name and link back to me. YES please do. Spread the word. Amazon will be beside itself in the face of all this fury!

*******UPDATE**************
Publisher's Weekly now has a story here, that an Amazon spokesperson claims this is all a glitch and they have no such new policy.  My caselog is still active in my Advantage account with the response from customer service rep Ashlyn D. Also I'd like to point you to this blog of an author who received this same response from Amazon back in February. Amazon has some 'splainin' to do!

***********UPDATE #2******************
As of 8 AM this morning (April 13th) The Filly has had its ranking reinstated by Amazon.  I also noticed Alex Beecroft's False Colors was reinstated as well.  Many others are not, so they haven't fixed the "so-called" glitch as of yet.

*******FINAL UPDATE******************
Amazon has released a statement of apology stating that it was  an "embarrassing and ham-fisted cataloging error" that pertained to 57,310 listings.  They also say that It has been misreported that the issue was limited to Gay & Lesbian themed titles.  So it's over.  Amazon admits they goofed, and I, for one, shall give them the benefit of the doubt and say I do not believe that there was any malicious intent. Case closed.

Tags:

Comments

( 411 comments — Leave a comment )
Page 9 of 11
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] >>
john_plum
Apr. 13th, 2009 10:13 am (UTC)
real issue is not gay censorship
"Now in fairness I should point out that Amazon has also stopped ranking many books in the "erotica" categories as well which includes straight erotica. But that's a whole other battle that I'll leave to the erotica writers to take on."

One more gay campaign then, never mind the real issues, no a principle of fairness then?
Its clear that what they mean by 'adult' is erotic stuff that children are thought best off not bothered with, or exposed to, just like we don't perform sex in front of them.

steviesun
Apr. 13th, 2009 11:12 am (UTC)
Apparently many books listed as being stripped are now showing up in the search. Has this been fixed?
lexin
Apr. 13th, 2009 11:43 am (UTC)
My random experiment shows Erastes and Beecroft showing up on a search of amazon.co.uk but without sales rankings.

(no subject) - erastes - Apr. 13th, 2009 11:45 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - lexin - Apr. 13th, 2009 11:53 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - steviesun - Apr. 13th, 2009 03:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
catmint_1984
Apr. 13th, 2009 11:47 am (UTC)
Reckon we should organise some kind of boycott of Amazon - so set a date/set dates (not sure if a day will be long enough; maybe a week?), spread the word and get as many people as possible to not even go on the site and to not buy anything from them, whether it's direct from their stocks or through the proxy stuff?
curse_of_avalon
Apr. 13th, 2009 01:45 pm (UTC)
I was informed by a friend today of what has been going on and was linked to your journal.

I guess you've heard a 1000 times by now how much this sucks.

As I was just about to write an e-mail to Amazon my news ticker sent me word about this from the Associated press and the interview with the glitch thing. Highly suspicious.

I wish you'd just send the reply you got from amazon to those news stations.


akuma_river
Apr. 13th, 2009 02:15 pm (UTC)
FYI.

I find it odd that the novel side of gay and lesbian books are the only ones being effected because they haven't touched any of the graphic novels. Not the hard core violence ones, not the horror ones, hell not even the porny ones including gay and lesbian couples.

Only the books listed in the gay and lesbian category is being effected.
pierceheart
Apr. 13th, 2009 02:43 pm (UTC)
Spread this one far and wide:

Oh, I think there's something even MORE insidious going on here: it looks like it's partly what everyone fears (censorship by a private company) AND Amazon trying to boost Kindle sales:

Why do i believe this:

Running with Scissors: a Memoir in paperback, NO SALES RANK.

Running with Scissors: a Memoir in Kindle, WITH SALES RANK.

hat tip to gina_stormgrant

see which books which don't have sales rankings in their hard copy, still do in their kindle versions.
aimznemesis
Apr. 13th, 2009 03:16 pm (UTC)
Here via various links on my friends' list - I have linked back to this post. I can't believe Amazon would pull a stunt like this.
thepheenixeyri
Apr. 13th, 2009 03:26 pm (UTC)
Holy crap this is insane.

I now wishi I didn't have a giftcard for them that I need to use, and it's too bad that a lot of the books I want are sort of... yeah... it's kinda the only place I can get them.

It looks like I'll have to do some poking around to see if B&N has the same stuff. Amazon=fail.

BTW hi. :)

And good luck.
leewindauthor
Apr. 13th, 2009 03:27 pm (UTC)
Looks like Amazon is fixing this...
Mark, I just checked a few books, including yours, and I see the sales rankings now. Has it all gone back to "normal?" or is it just the few that made the most noise?
Thanks for spreading the word!
Namaste,
Lee
markprobst
Apr. 13th, 2009 04:11 pm (UTC)
Re: Looks like Amazon is fixing this...
Hey Lee, good to see you here. I've had a hell of a time keeping up with the comments (reading them that is, I couldn't possibly respond to each one!)

It appears just the titles mentioned in the petition have been re-instated. Most are still de-ranked. So the "so-called" glitch is not yet fixed.
myths_by_kynx
Apr. 13th, 2009 03:29 pm (UTC)
Linking to this post from journal, hope you don't mind.
pierceheart
Apr. 13th, 2009 03:36 pm (UTC)
intentionally run script, so some troll claims
fragment3
Apr. 13th, 2009 04:42 pm (UTC)
Shame on Amazon, thanks for your calm assessment of what is up
Hello, I am also an author, though not of work which anyone can typify as falling into any specific "sexuality" or "sexual content" category (poetry--I think we fail to end up ranked at all, since so few poetry books sell much!), but I was pleased to read your posting regarding this amazon issue, and also your addition about having your ranking reinstated. This practice is quite unnerving by amazon, and I appreciate your calm, fair assessment of their unacceptable behavior. It helps us readers and writers keep our eye on Amazon, and on practices which might go unnoticed but should NOT. I was enraged to hear what they were up to, and hope that everyone will flood them with emails and letters and take a stand to ensure that such a powerful global monopoly does NOT try to silence an enormous number of wonderful authors and books merely on the basis of the “sexual orientation” of their characters in fiction, or their own lives in nonfiction, not to mention the books to help children understand single-gendered parents, etc.

Such a backward practice in this day and age is saddening, and those responsible for it at Amazon should be ashamed.
ixchelmala
Apr. 13th, 2009 05:15 pm (UTC)
FYI...
You were linked by The Guardian
elerman
Apr. 13th, 2009 05:42 pm (UTC)
Amazon
Dear Mark: Over thirty years ago, when The New York Times Book Review suggested my first book of poetry should be rated "Double X," presumably because young girls (I was about 21 at the time) weren't supposed to be writing about being gay, I was astonished that people who supposedly cared about literature would even bring this up as an issue. Today, I am amazed to be revisiting this same type of homophobia via Amazon. Good grief!
Eleanor Lerman
www.eleanorlerman.com
sparkane
Apr. 13th, 2009 05:55 pm (UTC)
it's likely a technical problem.
Hi Mark. I don't know how much you work with computers/web applications, or whether someone has already said this in your comments. A friend pointed me to your post, but I can't now read all the comments to see if I'm duplicating. However, if it's a repetition, maybe that's good.

I do web application programming. Consider the following:

a) Amazon's book categorizations likely number in the thousands and are, from a logical/application point of view, completely abritrary. There are millions of books, which means there are tens of thousands of *wrong* categorizations. There are categories we users never see. The management of all this is extremely complex; this is certain.

b) The response you received is from someone who has no knowledge of what is going on technically, with regard to book categorizations; this too is certain.

Occam's Razor suggests that what is really going on here is: the woman who responded to you simply sent you the easiest response based on how you worded your questions and her understanding of what it all meant. That it's *obviously* an inadequate response means either you weren't sufficiently clear, or she's lazy or stupid (can't tell, as you haven't quoted your own email).

The quoted policy, on the surface, makes complete sense - no one mixes adult stuff in their bestseller lists - and for this reason, it simply can't be new; nor does the response state it as such, explicitly. You state it to be new, but really, that can't be right. This as well makes me think there was a misunderstanding.

None of this is to say you shouldn't be pissed off about this fuck-up. I just wanted to give you something like an insider's point of view, in hopes it will reassure you there isn't some kind of discrimination going on.

As you yourself mention, this error has also affected some erotica. This is most likely a mis-categorization mistake. If I'm right, this is going to be a real pain for Amazon to fix, because it will mean re-categorizing each affected book, item by item (probably by removing the erroneous category from the book entry).
gryphonwing
Apr. 13th, 2009 10:05 pm (UTC)
Re: it's likely a technical problem.
That would make sense if this was about categorization. It's not; it's about removing the sales rank numbers from some books. No one has brought up the miscategorization of books, have they? The kicker is that they've been stripping sales rankings from GLBT books regardless of their categorization.

"Heather has Two Mommies" is really really really far from erotica.

I think the CS person who sent that message might well have been overworked, badly trained, and grasping at straws. I think it's more likely she answered as best as she could with something rather close to the truth, which Amazon would now like to pretend is not true. I'd hate to be Ashlyn D right now.
Re: it's likely a technical problem. - sparkane - Apr. 13th, 2009 11:43 pm (UTC) - Expand
Re: it's likely a technical problem. - sparkane - Apr. 14th, 2009 03:11 am (UTC) - Expand
Page 9 of 11
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] >>
( 411 comments — Leave a comment )