[...] I had imagined Amazon's customer reviews as a refuge from the machinations of the publishing industry: "an intelligent and articulate conversation ... conducted by a group of disinterested, disembodied spirits," as James Marcus, a former editor at the company, wrote in his memoir [...] As I explored the murky understory of Amazon's reviewer rankings, however, I came to see [...] a tangle of hidden agendas-—one in which the disinterested amateur may be an endangered species.From Who is Grady Harp?, by Garth Risk Hallberg.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Slate.com: Who is Grady Harp?
Check out this article in Slate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Party on Garth! Excellent article and I was very happy to see the shout out to Vick from the Dayton Daily News.
I was surprised to read that Harriet Klausner claimed there was a conspiracy afoot to unseat her from her top spot! Oh Hurriet, people can be SO cruel....
Pfeh. Harriet can handle those detractors with one hand tied behind her back. Maybe even both hands!
I can't believe she came up for air long enough to make a statement like that. What is she worried about? She is cheating the system herself. Her "method" won't allow anyone else a chance of catching up.
She's not 'cheating the system': this system is set up for this kind of stuff. Protecting against the HK style of shilling would be very easy, yet it's not done, so what can it be.
Exactly. Why does she need to worry that someone is out to get her?
Emotional blackmail?
Have any of you checked the Amazon discussion boards for their take on the Slate article? Here is a representative comment from these integrity filled reviewers:
"Yes, and that's why I find it irritating that the article focused on 2 "celebrity reviewers" (whatever that is) with questionable voting or reviewing practices but mentioned none of the excellent Top Reviewers (including Top 10) whose integrity is unimpeachable. The guy consulted a blog written by a bunch of trolls who have been repeatedly banned from Amazon but didn't ask reviewers about the issues on that blog.
But journalists have questioned HK's output before and no one lifted an eyebrow, so I expect the same here. The writer's disappointment that the review of his book was solicited by his publisher comes across as naive and egotistical. It's a little weird."
The above comment is from someone who uses the name "mirasreviews". The consensus there is that it was grossly unfair for the journalist to speak to those of us on this blog, (Why?), that there was nothing new in the article, and oddly enough, several people there seemed to feel the journalist had been lurking on their discussion boards and got his information from them. And if you don't agree with Mira you're a troll, vain and egotistical, so there!
Indeed. 'misrareviews' is another industrial-looking review-belching outfit, so what do you expect? No one from this cabal of frauds will admit that they are frauds; instead that will keep assuming this posture of offended innocence at the first sign of the issue if their 'reviewing' being brought up.
of their reviewing.
Post a Comment