Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Press File

Press File 111 LOGOS 15/2 © WHURR PUBLISHERS 2004 This is a story about morals. Some authors have been writing laudatory reviews of their own books and Amazon has been publishing these reviews a n o n y m o u s l y. T h e i r c o v e r w a s b l o w n w h e n Amazon’s Canadian site “suddenly revealed the identities of thousands of people who had anony- mously posted book reviews on the United States site”. The accidentally revealed names were not only those of self-promoting authors but also of people with grudges to settle, axes to grind and prejudices to promote. One author, John Rechy, defended his five-star rating of his own book on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t h e w a s s t r i k i n g b a c k a n o n y - mously against those who had trashed his book anonymously. Ms Harmon’s article is readable reportage but t h e s t o r y b e g s f o r e d i t o r i a l c o m m e n t . S h o u l d Amazon be publishing anonymous reviews? In f a c t , s h o u l d A m a z o n b e p u b l i s h i n g a t a l l ? A n Amazon spokeswoman said that revealing the names was “an unfortunate error”. She should have admitted that the publishing of anonymous text – which has a long history – is the responsi- bility of those who publish it. Those who act only as confidential post boxes, merely providing a wall over which unnamed parties can throw stones and bouquets, cannot be called publishers. As a result, Amazon reviews have lost credi- bility. Positive reviews, Ms Harmon reports, are suspected of coming from authors’ friends and f a m i l y ; n e g a t i v e o n e s a r e “ s c r u t i n i z e d f o r t h e digital fingerprints of known enemies”. Yet the feature, “numbering ten million and growing by t e n s o f t h o u s a n d s e a c h w e e k ” , r e m a i n s v e r y popular. The episode illustrates once more the fallacy engendered by the Internet that anyone can be a publisher. Authentic publishing implies trust by the reader, signified by “the imprint”. For example, the jewel in the crown of the venerable Publishers We e k l y , r e s p e c t e d a n d t r u s t e d b y l i b r a r i a n s , publishers, booksellers and readers, is its reviews of forthcoming titles (“PW Forecasts”). They are always measured and balanced. None of them is signed by the reviewer but the imprimatur of PW s t a n d s b e h i n d t h e m a l l a n d t h e n a m e s o f t h e r e v i e w s t a f f a r e o n t h e m a s t h e a d . T h e r e a d e r knows that the reviews have been deliberately w r i t t e n a n d r e s p o n s i b l y e d i t e d . ( I r o n i c a l l y, Amazon includes some of them on its site.) I f a p e r i o d i c a l o r a n e w s p a p e r c h o o s e s t o publish an article anonymously or pseudonymously it takes over the authorial responsibility. It says to the reader: “This piece, with which we do not necessarily agree, in our opinion, deserves to be read.” Equally, it is the publisher’s job to decline to publish responses which hide personal motivations in anonymity. People do not wear masks at public meetings. Not surprisingly, Amazon is under criticism from its readers, and not only because of the acci- dental leak of names. “The growth of electronic c o m m e r c e h a s s p a w n e d a n e w k i n d o f c r i t i c a l authority – one’s peers” writes Ms Harmon. OK. But let them put their names to whatever they say. Gordon Graham Amazon glitch unmasks war of reviews ( New York Times of February 14, 2004 by Amy Harmon) PRESS FILE LOGOS 15.2_CRC1v4 7/6/04 3:57 AM Page 111 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Logos Brill

Press File

Logos , Volume 15 (2): 111 – Jan 1, 2004
Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/press-file-Z1XIhQUaLu

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2004 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0957-9656
eISSN
1878-4712
DOI
10.2959/logo.2004.15.2.111
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

111 LOGOS 15/2 © WHURR PUBLISHERS 2004 This is a story about morals. Some authors have been writing laudatory reviews of their own books and Amazon has been publishing these reviews a n o n y m o u s l y. T h e i r c o v e r w a s b l o w n w h e n Amazon’s Canadian site “suddenly revealed the identities of thousands of people who had anony- mously posted book reviews on the United States site”. The accidentally revealed names were not only those of self-promoting authors but also of people with grudges to settle, axes to grind and prejudices to promote. One author, John Rechy, defended his five-star rating of his own book on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t h e w a s s t r i k i n g b a c k a n o n y - mously against those who had trashed his book anonymously. Ms Harmon’s article is readable reportage but t h e s t o r y b e g s f o r e d i t o r i a l c o m m e n t . S h o u l d Amazon be publishing anonymous reviews? In f a c t , s h o u l d A m a z o n b e p u b l i s h i n g a t a l l ? A n Amazon spokeswoman said that revealing the names was “an unfortunate error”. She should have admitted that the publishing of anonymous text – which has a long history – is the responsi- bility of those who publish it. Those who act only as confidential post boxes, merely providing a wall over which unnamed parties can throw stones and bouquets, cannot be called publishers. As a result, Amazon reviews have lost credi- bility. Positive reviews, Ms Harmon reports, are suspected of coming from authors’ friends and f a m i l y ; n e g a t i v e o n e s a r e “ s c r u t i n i z e d f o r t h e digital fingerprints of known enemies”. Yet the feature, “numbering ten million and growing by t e n s o f t h o u s a n d s e a c h w e e k ” , r e m a i n s v e r y popular. The episode illustrates once more the fallacy engendered by the Internet that anyone can be a publisher. Authentic publishing implies trust by the reader, signified by “the imprint”. For example, the jewel in the crown of the venerable Publishers We e k l y , r e s p e c t e d a n d t r u s t e d b y l i b r a r i a n s , publishers, booksellers and readers, is its reviews of forthcoming titles (“PW Forecasts”). They are always measured and balanced. None of them is signed by the reviewer but the imprimatur of PW s t a n d s b e h i n d t h e m a l l a n d t h e n a m e s o f t h e r e v i e w s t a f f a r e o n t h e m a s t h e a d . T h e r e a d e r knows that the reviews have been deliberately w r i t t e n a n d r e s p o n s i b l y e d i t e d . ( I r o n i c a l l y, Amazon includes some of them on its site.) I f a p e r i o d i c a l o r a n e w s p a p e r c h o o s e s t o publish an article anonymously or pseudonymously it takes over the authorial responsibility. It says to the reader: “This piece, with which we do not necessarily agree, in our opinion, deserves to be read.” Equally, it is the publisher’s job to decline to publish responses which hide personal motivations in anonymity. People do not wear masks at public meetings. Not surprisingly, Amazon is under criticism from its readers, and not only because of the acci- dental leak of names. “The growth of electronic c o m m e r c e h a s s p a w n e d a n e w k i n d o f c r i t i c a l authority – one’s peers” writes Ms Harmon. OK. But let them put their names to whatever they say. Gordon Graham Amazon glitch unmasks war of reviews ( New York Times of February 14, 2004 by Amy Harmon) PRESS FILE LOGOS 15.2_CRC1v4 7/6/04 3:57 AM Page 111

Journal

Logos – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2004

There are no references for this article.