amazon update

From the New York Times.

From the BBC.

An “error,” huh? One that affects gay and lesbian literature and not vibrators? Okay then. Whatever you say, amazon.

On a totally different note, I dislike the way the BBC article talks about bloggers and the general internet community, and about how quick they/we were to jump to conclusions about amazon.com’s behavior. Like, our reaction was an irrational thing—we leapt to conclusions before gathering all the facts, and were too eager to point the finger at big, bad amazon. Like we made too big a deal out of it.

I’m sorry. I tend to dislike discrimination. Just a… thing… that I have.

And even in the unlikely event that this was some magical glitch, the fact that amazon seems to not care at all is almost as disgusting to me as if it were deliberate discrimination. Amazon is just trying to brush it under the rug (something the major news agencies seem to be helping with—those two articles were NOT in easy-to-find front page sections) as if we really shouldn’t be concerned about it. “No no guys don’t worry just a slight mistake won’t happen again!”

Maybe I’m cynical. Okay, no maybe about it. I am cynical. But until it is proven otherwise, I am going to be suspicious of the amazon.com activities. Innocent until proven guilty, sure. But also suspicious.

Advertisements