Amazon halts tit-for-tat critics

Charles Davis writes "Authors and publishers face credit card barrier to anonymously puffing their books.
The world's biggest online bookseller, Amazon, is to clamp down on anonymous reviews of titles on its website in an attempt to curb excesses of back-stabbing in the competitive world of publishing.
After mounting concern about abuse of its open door policy regarding feedback, Amazon has begun a new system, Real Names, which requires reviewers to provide their credit card details before posting a comment.

The change, which was quietly introduced earlier this month, is intended to put an end to authors and publishers anonymously showering their own books with praise while trashing the work of their rivals. An Amazon spokeswoman said: "This is the latest step in an ongoing effort to continually improve the content of the site."
More at
Guardian "

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yes, they are making you de-anonymize

I've already experienced this new Amazon policy firsthand; you have to jump through a number of webpage hoops to re-establish your reviewer identity, including opting whether to use your real name or a "pen name," before they let you post a review now. It strikes me as all very red-tapey and odd, although I understand why they're implementing the policy.

As for the non-anonymous posting policy here at LISNews, I have noticed a sharp drop-off in comments posted (of all kinds, not just political ones) since it was implemented. I don't know what conclusions to draw from that -- I have no problem with the concept of posting non-anonymously -- but it's an observation.

Re: non-anonymous posting policy here at LISNews

I just checked, so far this month, which is pretty much over, there has been 1300 comments, last month there were about 1350.So I'm not sure I'd say sharp drop, but there are fewer.

Re: non-anonymous posting policy here at LISNews

Interesting. I guess my perception was inaccurate.

Syndicate content