Blogs and Stories
Is Amazon Really Anti-Gay?
Whether it was a “glitch” that de-listed gay-themed books from the rankings or the work of a hacker, Sara Nelson thinks Amazon has every right to decide what it wants to sell and how.
Call me crazy, or at least politically incorrect, but I think all this flap over Amazon’s removal of certain gay-themed titles from contention for its bestseller lists is more than a little overblown, not to mention naïve.
For those who abandoned BookLand over the holiday weekend, allow me to recap. On Saturday, a publisher named Mark Probst posted an item on his blog about how Amazon.com had stopped supplying sales rankings for a novel he’d published called The Filly. That the Internet retailer might have messed up is hardly news—Amazon regularly has glitches: A few years ago, Amazon Canada inadvertently revealed the names and email addresses of its anonymous reviewers; at regular old American Amazon.com, the site often loses track of editorial reviews it has licensed, and they don’t make it onto the site.
Still, something was funny about the de-listing of The Filly, a novel with gay themes: It came two days after the sales ranking disappeared from two more high-profile gay-romance books: Transgressions and False Colors. By Sunday, according to Probst, hundreds of similar books had lost their rankings. So Probst braved the Kremlin that is Amazon and eventually got a response from one Ashlyn D, a Member Services representative (publishers are considered “members” and get different customer service than consumers): “In consideration of our entire customer base, we exclude ‘adult’ material from appearing in some searches and bestseller lists,” Probst claims she wrote. “Since these lists are generated using sales ranks, adult materials must also be excluded from that feature.”
Moving certain books out of contention for bestseller lists doesn’t seem a whole lot different from moving them out of the display window or even, leaving them in cartons in the stockroom.
Well, the blogosphere went wild. Users tagged #amazonfail began Twittering, reporters began reporting, and early Sunday evening, Amazon reversed itself.This de-ranking was simply a glitch in the sales-ranking feature, another Amazon spokesperson person told several journalists; there is no new adult policy. Unsurprisingly, the blogger mob wasn’t buying it: “Glitch, my ass,” was one of the kinder remarks.
Clearly, this was no glitch—as Carolyn Kellogg on the L.A. Times blog Jacket Copy, among many others, noted. Since when does a glitch only affect one kind of book? (A more likely conspiracy theory claims the de-ranking was the work of a hacker.) And if I were Ashlyn D, I’d be waking up this morning worrying whether I still had a job. But the outrage, on Twitter, on blogs like Jacket Copy and Publishersweekly.com, seems disingenuous: as though people are actually shocked that something funny might have gone on.
Amazon, after all, is the retailer many in BookLand love to hate. While it only represents about 10 percent of the business (Barnes & Noble controls more than 35 percent), Amazon has consumer “mind share,” economies of scale, and some nerve: The online retailer provides enormous discounts to consumers, argues publisher discounts in its own favor, and now, with the Kindle, seems to have a stranglehold on the dissemination of e-books, as well. And there’s something about Amazon that isn’t exactly “nice.” For one thing, executives seem to work on the Beg Forgiveness, Don’t Ask Permission business model; when it launched the Kindle2 earlier this year, executives must have known there’d be an outcry among agents and publishers about “audio rights.” But they launched it anyway—and the minute BookLand squawked, Amazon reneged and offered an audio opt-out clause.
But Amazon’s biggest crime, at least for some consumers, is that it is helping to put the sentimental favorite—the independent bookseller—out of the race. (I can’t help seeing something biblical about Amazon’s rise; just a decade ago, it was Barnes & Noble that was the Evil Empire, crowding out the beloved indies; today it’s Amazon, which doth smite B&N as B&N once smote the little guy.) That book lovers seized on this recent de-listing scandal as a vehicle through which to vent their frustration and rage at big bad Amazon makes perfect sense; to have a politically correct hook on which to hang one’s argument makes whatever revenge one might wreak all the sweeter.









love it. oh the astronomical publicity for those books.
I heard that "The White Swallow" was Amazon's number one book until someone got all ooky about the title. True story.
What happened to fairness.
Publishing a major bestseller list surely comes with a certain responsibility. It's more than window display. What would we say if the New York Times bestseller list intentionally excluded books by women, for example? You argue that Amazon.com is "just" a retailer and has the right to dress its window as it chooses, but even a corner store has a certain public responsibility. I believe even Amazon.com would agree.
Sandra Gulland
ll me crazy, but I don't think it's right for Amazon to post a book's sales ranking unless the number is the book's, er, sales ranking.
If some books are stripped of their rankings, it implies others have their rankings boosted artificially, no?
Good point.
Sara this is a great perspective, but my view (and I think a lot of us in Bookland) do understand that a bookstore, even an online one, can move and shuffle books at will. The issue (at least for me) isn't that Amazon did this, it's that they think they can. While they may not have the lion's share of sales industry wide, they are pervasive. Amazon is everywhere. They are also publisher and now known for putting ebooks on the map.
Yes, retailers and e-tailers can move, shuffle, even exclude books if they want. But what makes me nervous is that when a company like Amazon is allowed to determine what we read or have access to, where does it stop? Boycotting a book like the OJ tome is one thing, excluding a market is another. Not the least of which is, where's the explanation? Where's the apology? Are they so big and powerful that they no longer need to address a customer concern?
Oh guys, this was a hack. How embarrassing.
http://community.livejournal.com/brutal_honesty/3168992.html
"...but isn't it up to the bookseller to decide what the market wants, what it will sell and how it will sell it?"
Actually, it *ISN'T* and I'm fed up with other others (publishing companies, Amazon, critics, and the like) dictating what I should and shouldn't read. While I may find books like MEIN KAMPF, IF I DID IT, books by Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh, etc., anything from distasteful to down right offensive, the last time I checked we still live in a country that guarantees every citizen the right to free speech. As a consumer in a free market economy, I would expect a company like Amazon to provide for those wants and needs without bias or gate-keeping of any variety.
Consumers drive demand, and booksellers respond---that was the lesson of this weekend. Was Amazon being anti-gay? Absolutely. And they got spanked hard. Their stock price even fell 2.1% Monday. And now I keep hearing from my friends that this, combined with Amazon's poor customer service rep, has them fleeing permanently---gay and straight customers alike. For a moment, the lights came on in Santa's Workshop over there and no one liked what they saw.
Also, Sara Nelson, the whole Twitterstorm about Amazon was that actually customers DID notice. So, your point about the general customer is wrong.
Your arguments are disengenuous on several levels, but here are the top 3:
1. Arguing strict legal rights/parameters is always the lowest common denominator in arguing right action. I am equally within my legal rights to join the Ku Klux Klan as I am to donate 10% of my income to educational programs for homeless children. That the two actions are equally legal does not, however, make them of equal ethical or social worth, nor entitled to equal reinforcement and support by society at large. That something is merely not illegal does not make it morally acceptable.
2. By your own logic, excluding certain titles--based not on popularity within the marketplace but on a different (and some might argue arbitrary) set of criteria--defeats your own logic that Amazon, like any other retailer, is seeking to best serve its consumers by providing them with the products they most want. If those products can't be ranked competitively, their desirability to consumers cannot be determined.
3. As for your equation of OJ Simpson's book with gay/feminist titles, please see my first argument above. While it may be true that the decision to exclude any book is technically equatable with a decision to exclude any other, there is certainly a vast ethical gulf between refusing to profit from a murder and disenfranchising entire groups of people based on sexual orientation. You cannot, I hope, seriously seek to equate the two morally?
Typical corporate bullpucky: blame a nonexistant hacker for cowardly homophobic policy. It's going to cost them because we "adults" buy lots of books...but not from Amazon anymore. I'll buy my books from gay-friendly retailers. Amazon...don't you guys realize that your very name is a little...gay?
If you are not a homophile in today's climate you are objectively homophobic.
Gimme a break, what ever the reason who cares?
There are plenty of other book retailers to buy from, so move on and buy from them!
A decline in sales might show the Amazon giant!
The point is that I don't need or want Amazon or anyone else telling me what is appropriate to read - gay or not! That is called censorship & it is total bs! A lot of people believe in different things and all should be available if you want to read them. That simply comes down to free speech... Keep adult material in the adult section & not to be purchased by minors but otherwise leave it alone! And please, please, please leave the gay commuity alone. The whole argument has gotten so tired & boring! GET OVER IT ALREADY!!!
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
What a bullshit argument. If Amazon has issue with these books, then they shouldn't be selling them. If they are going to sell them, then list the sales ranking fairly. They can't have it both ways. If they want to continue trying to, they can say goodbye to a lot of sales.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.