Amazon Book Reviews: Portal for Censorship by the Multiple Personality/Suvivor Community

Amazon.com has a component of their book section devoted to book reviews. It is used by people interested in the opinions of others before making a purchase and offering readers of their books to post a review.

Unfortunately, the Amazon book review section was reduced to a political vehicle for those supporting the existence of multiple personalities to censor those like me who hold an opposing opinion, thus rendering Amazon’s effort to offer book reviews useless rubbish.

I request that Amazon either figure out a way to police book reviews or shut down the whole system because it is dysfunctional and used to censor opinions. It would be a huge task for Amazon to police book reviews, but simple algorithms show that some book reviews are more active than others.

Censorship is a Huge problem on Amazon.com book reviews. Anyone using Amazon.com book reviews as a vehicle to determine opinions about publications is being duped into believing all opinions are allowed.

I have been trying to follow reviews of Judy Byington’s book: Twenty Two Faces – a book about multiple personalities and associated topics –  but it is impossible due to the repeated politics of this particular discussion. The multiple community has launched a political movement to censor dissenting opinions and it is working because they vote a comment as “not forwarding the conversation” when the book reviewer does not agree with their plight and opinion.  http://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Two-Faces-Extraordinary-Multiple-Personalities/product-reviews/B0095GQ78O/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

There is also a component of the politics of Twenty Two Faces whereby the multiple community asks that others vote their comments as “yes” helpful and then ask that they vote the book with 5 stars “so it stays on top”.

Censoring opinions using popular votes generated by politics should elicit outrage by anyone who buys and reads books!

What I find interesting in the Byington Twenty Two Faces book reviews is that people who question the existence of multiple personalities do not censor multiples and the survivor community – this is an interesting fact. What do you think about this?

I oppose all forms of censorship. This blog is free of censorship and always will be. There was only one incident that I found intervention necessary when this blog was young. Since then, I decided that all I opinions expressed here will be uncensored, unaltered, and permitted publication.

I have not finished reading Byington’s book and have not left any comments reviewing it except on a literary criticism level..I remain appalled that censorship is a major component of this discussion and it is impossible for anyone to follow it without clicking on “show this comment anyway” after a political move by the survivor community had the commenter’s post deleted.

I pose this question: If multiples want to be heard, why do they censor others?

Update: 11/29/12. 01:04 EST

I made a dozen or so comments on Amazon repeating that I object to the censorship. I evidently tricked off their sensors and they removed all the objections. I offer this because I’d hate to have you think Amazon is actually being pro-active to cease the censorship going on in their book review section.

Update 11/30/12. 17:30 EST

Just finished an online conversation with an Amazon rep and they were gracious and reinstated my ability to post.

Problem is, I also asked them to check into the censorship and skewing of results. Their reply:

Me:  anything you can do to keep people from skewing votes?
Amazon: I’m afraid that I cannot do that Jeanette.

There ya have it. Amazon could care less. Sell books- hell with accurate voting & repeated censoring on the book review section.

Censorship

Censorship (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Deutsch: Logo von Amazon.com

Deutsch: Logo von Amazon.com (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Advertisements
Leave a comment

8 Comments

  1. Rage of Those Interrupted

     /  12/01/2012

    You say: “I request that Amazon either figure out a way to police book reviews or shut down the whole system because it is dysfunctional and used to censor opinions. It would be a huge task for Amazon to police book reviews, but simple algorithms show that some book reviews are more active than others.”

    The Amazon review process censors opinions by allowing every opinion to be published! Let’s fix that by only allowing the opinions that I agree with to be published and only allowing the people that I like to vote on comments!

    Sweetie, that’s so not how censorship works. In fact, that’s the exact OPPOSITE of how censorship works. If people want to vote up or down on comments and rate books and comments to support a book, well, that’s kind of how it works. That’s not censoring anyone. Having to click “Show this Comment Anyway” doesn’t censor comments as the comments are still actually there. Allowing people to rate books and comments according to relevancy or accuracy is how you can get a good idea of the number of people who do or don’t like a book, which can show you if it is or is not worth buying. That’s not censorship; that actually gives consumers more power by allowing opinions to be heard not only in regards to the book but also in regards to other ratings of the book.

    If Amazon repeatedly told you it’s a not a problem, maybe that’s because it really is a good business move that hurts no one. Ever considered that? Or does that not make you feel persecuted enough?
    Oh, whoops, I said something negative about you at the end. Guess my whole comment is irrelevant!

    Also, in regards to “censorship,” following that link and hitting show one star reviews shows many well received criticisms, some of which have many comments for both sides of the issue. I honestly don’t see where you have a problem.

    Like

    Reply
    • Perhaps in a fluffy world, that’s how ratings would work. If you were aware of this book review, you would know that this discussion is political, not a true book review and discussion section.

      Like

      Reply
  2. Jeanette, can you clarify what you’re meaning here… are your reviews being removed, or are they being voted down? Are you meaning comments, or reviews?

    Sorry to ask so many questions, but having just spent a rather amusing time looking at the to and fro in the comment section, I’m not really sure what you’re meaning. It looks as if there is the usual dysfunctional debate happening, with the usual players… so what is the problem? There are reviews which give the book 5 stars, and those which give the book 1 star… there are comments which question the reviews of all groups…

    I’ve been given the diagnosis of DID, yet I’ve never tried to censor you… Generalisations are always a bit dangerous 🙂

    Regards,
    CG

    Like

    Reply
    • Gees, CG. I was taking you seriously until the swat at me in the last sentence.

      You are the one I censored on this blog and mentioned it in this post. Had you not taken the chance to make a swing at me in your last 2 statements, I’d answer your questions. Sorry, not giving you any more of my time and attention.

      Like

      Reply
      • Hi Jeanette,

        I’m sorry that what was meant as a good natured correction of a bold statement was seen as a personal swipe.

        I do hope that dissenting reviews and comments aren’t being removed… I for one, found a 1 star review of “When Rabbit Howls” to be particularly helpful when evaluating that book. We do need different opinions within this world, and for those to be expressed. I do agree that abusive comments and reviews should be removed, but not just because they are of a differing opinion to my own.

        Kind regards,
        CG

        Like

        Reply
    • Surely, Castorgirl you are aware that our discussions start off fine and then I’ve been verbally attacked and been accused by you of copyright infringement over and over and over. It was not true but you refused to let it go. I don’t generally mind attacks, which I view as different from debates and discussions, but it got tiring. That is why I am hesitant to converse with you at this time.

      Like

      Reply
  3. This is very puzzeling to me. I am Canadian but I thought that Americans had Freedom of Expression, and I thought that particular freedom was held very dear by all of its citizens, that it was an important part of their Constitution. Am I wrong ? Can Amazon.com disregard that fundamental freedom of the Amercian people without risk of losing the dollars of the American people they are trying to sell their books to ? Apparently Amazon thinks so if they are censoring the thoughts of American people who want to leave comments on their book review site. Maybe they should change their name from Amazon.com to Chinazon.com .

    Like

    Reply
    • Well Roma, Americans in this instance, have no respect for freedom. Censorship is shameful. Not to sound goofy, but our forefathers gave their lives for this liberty. For the multiple/survivor community to trounce all over it is beyond shameful. It does not silence people, thankfully – it brings light to their actions.

      Like

      Reply

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s