EricHoefler.com

If you don’t already know about the “#amazonfail” controversy that occurred over the weekend, these sources will get you caught up:

• Neil Gaiman’s explanation of his involvement
• Two possible explanations for the problem: thing one and thing two
• Publisher’s Weekly summary and Amazon’s first official response

From these, it should also be clear why all of this matters: Amazon is, for better or worse, the everyman’s online public library, the first or second stop in researching any published work, and the place most people go first for book recommendations and reviews. So when something—a glitch, stupidity, or malice—prevents books from appearing in searches or causes them to lose their rankings, it’s a problem. And when that something appears to be tied to Amazon’s assessment of what is or is not “adult” material, then concerns about censorship and sexual discrimination are justly raised, particularly given other Amazon fiascos (like the removal of negative reviews).

Still, Amazon is in a tough position. On the one hand, most people don’t want searches for “girl scout cookies” to bring up inappropriate content. And of course, who gets to define “inappropriate”? On the other hand, how do you automate control of searches in such a way that it doesn’t become an automated arbiter of morality? This is not to say that de-ranking and/or hiding books based on whether or not they reference GLBT lifestyles is excusable, even if it is an accident. I’m just saying, it’s a tough and very public high-wire to walk.

What concerns me most, though, is that Amazon really does seem to be the public library and recommendation engine for the masses rather than, well … actual libraries or better-moderated resources. Because being a library is not Amazon’s job. Amazon is a business, there to sell things to the people who want to buy those things. This is one more example of the often-dangerous blending of commercial and informational interests.

Our buying habits turn over information to Amazon that they use to try to sell us more things. On the surface, this doesn’t seem much different from Amazon trying to provide us with additional information that matches our interests. And maybe it’s not. Except that fundamentally, it really is. Because providing is not Amazon’s priority (nor should it be). Selling is.

Amazon is not your friend, there to make helpful recommendations or further your research or expand your perspective or provide the best sources of information. It’s your pusher, there to sell you things it thinks you’ll like. And most of us are already hooked.