Banderas is all kinds of fail to me. He was up there with Penelope Cruz from his Almovodar films and then he married fake ass crazy woman Melanie Griffith. If you doubt this, look at her website!: http://www.melaniegriffith.com/home.html
@Cheap Shot: I couldn't agree with you more. "Tony Flags" was great when he was a Spanish actor, living in Spain and selectively taking on quality roles. He was fantastic in Women on the Verge, among others. He moves to the US, marries a botox addict, takes on stereotypical roles for Hispanics and becomes the punchline for jokes ... it's truly a tragedy.
@blix: I think her mother (Tippie Hedren) is such a goof that it explains everything about Melanie.
Tippie is a huge animal fan, and she lives on some sort of animal preserve. I once heard a radio interview with her where one of the animals got loose and she had to hang up, it might have been the funniest thing ever. Nothing more awkward than a morning-show host wondering if his interview subject got disconnected because she was being mauled to death by a wild animal.
Only a very tiny percentage of the population has any idea what algorithmic engines are like to design and operate, and I'm one of them. Having looked at the ban/unban pattern, I find Amazon's explanation of a catalog error as totally plausible.
I believe them, that this is a categorization error, especially your man from France -- I once outsourced a medical classification system, and when I got it back the New Delhi-based team had classified homosexuality as "a mental illness of the genital area". This is one node, mind you, buried in about seventy pages of medical jargon, intended for Western content. I caught it before we launched it, but I can only imagine what would've happened if that team had been working on tagging rather than creating the classification structure. And when I'd gone looking for the tags, at first glance it would've just read "Homosexuality".
Considering all this blew up on Easter weekend, when everyone would've been away from any logs, I'm not surprised PR didn't have an immediate answer for the masses. Discovering the glitch is one thing; crawling through the enormous Amazon taxonomy to find what's throwing it? That's a nightmare.
@limber: I was with you right up till the end - I used to do taxonomy work for BN.com. I know how this happened, in the same way you do. But I disagree with the PR. Even if you haven't unraveled what's going on, for something like this you don't wait to solve the problem to make a statement. You say, "We think we know how this happened, but it's extremely complicated and it'll take us a while to get to the bottom of it. That said, it was NOT any sort of executive decision, it is NOT a policy decision, and we're very very sorry that we messed up." You make it clear, in other words, that you understand that whole categories of books don't suppress themselves. And that untangling the mess is going to take a while.
@ljnd2: That's fair, yeah -- things would have been a lot better with specific language to try and still the waters. I don't know much about the art of PR, and frankly people have been so worked up, I'm not sure they'd've listened -- they're out there calling for scalps, arranging boycotts, demanding discounts and donations. PR could've done a much better job, I'm just not sure how effective it would've been.
Way to make a big deal out of nothing, really. I've read a lot complaining and criticizing Amazon's response and handling of the situation, but I really don't see anything they've done as particularly craptastic.
Owen (the author of this article) - you really need to fix the headline. It was not 57,310 gay books, just 57,310 books. Please read the statement that you've quoted!
It's interesting that people seem to want to believe this is Amazon revealing a never before exhibited secret homophobia, rather than trolling or sabotage from a third party just wanting to create trouble.
@Worst Spelling Ever: I don't wear chartreuse and I don't keep a bottle of vodka behind the living room couch so I AINT YOUR MOMMA. Now, when you going to get a job in an office and find a nice girl your age and make your real momma proud?
@Worst Spelling Ever: Are you implying that you're having immortal relations with Ryan Tate? I'm sure I'd be disgusted if I saw photographic evidence of such acts.
No. I still doubt it was a script kiddie and an army of low-paid kids in internet cafes in Uzbekistan, as much as I doubt the de-listing had anything to do with gay hate. The guy I talked to inside Amazon says it was an internally initiated tagging of 58,000 titles as "adult." And with the surfacing of those emails sent by Amazon reps to de-listed authors informing them that indexing their books, even the really silly ones on boy-on-boy loving with horses or whatnot, is "inconsiderate." To taste, maybe. But that's all.
The real question is, where's that Bezos on a Bearskin rug shot when we need it, Sweaterbear?
"What to make of people who don't want to believe this was a prank? They're left with the notion of Amazon.com pursuing homophobic censorship..."
False dichotomy. There are myriad other explanations, including the possibility that each book was tagged and/or reported by individuals in an organized or unorganized effort by people with particular religious sensibilities, so that content which offended was no longer displayed. I'm not suggested that's definitely what happened, but this hacker's story has already been debunked and doesn't reflect the actual evidence, which seems to be that authors have been complaining about this sort of things for months and the issue's just reached critical mass.
@Robert Stribley: I've only seen one author's complaint, the guy who wrote the gay DC stripclub book. How many others were there? If it's less than 10, I wouldn't be surprised that Customer Service just fixed them on a case-by-case basis, rather than diving into the tags.
I agree with you that the problem probably didn't reach the critical mass needed to get it bounced from CS to IT; it's just weird that people are canceling their accounts and being so reactionary when there is so little backing up the Amazon-hates-gays theory.
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
World Peace has arrived!!!
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
Tippie is a huge animal fan, and she lives on some sort of animal preserve. I once heard a radio interview with her where one of the animals got loose and she had to hang up, it might have been the funniest thing ever. Nothing more awkward than a morning-show host wondering if his interview subject got disconnected because she was being mauled to death by a wild animal.
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
04/14/09
I believe them, that this is a categorization error, especially your man from France -- I once outsourced a medical classification system, and when I got it back the New Delhi-based team had classified homosexuality as "a mental illness of the genital area". This is one node, mind you, buried in about seventy pages of medical jargon, intended for Western content. I caught it before we launched it, but I can only imagine what would've happened if that team had been working on tagging rather than creating the classification structure. And when I'd gone looking for the tags, at first glance it would've just read "Homosexuality".
Considering all this blew up on Easter weekend, when everyone would've been away from any logs, I'm not surprised PR didn't have an immediate answer for the masses. Discovering the glitch is one thing; crawling through the enormous Amazon taxonomy to find what's throwing it? That's a nightmare.
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
thought. jezehellers are bots?
04/14/09
Logic takes a holiday.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/14/09
Occam's Razor loses again.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
@secretagentman: You are a filthy filthy dirty man.
04/13/09
@secretagentman: Nice!
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/14/09
04/13/09
The real question is, where's that Bezos on a Bearskin rug shot when we need it, Sweaterbear?
04/13/09
False dichotomy. There are myriad other explanations, including the possibility that each book was tagged and/or reported by individuals in an organized or unorganized effort by people with particular religious sensibilities, so that content which offended was no longer displayed. I'm not suggested that's definitely what happened, but this hacker's story has already been debunked and doesn't reflect the actual evidence, which seems to be that authors have been complaining about this sort of things for months and the issue's just reached critical mass.
04/13/09
I agree with you that the problem probably didn't reach the critical mass needed to get it bounced from CS to IT; it's just weird that people are canceling their accounts and being so reactionary when there is so little backing up the Amazon-hates-gays theory.
04/13/09
04/13/09
tina = christina = christy = crystal = crystal meth
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09