Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon is Burying Sexy Books, Sending Erotic Novel Authors to the 'No-Rank Dungeon' (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

Samantha Cole, reporting for Motherboard: In the last few days, word has spread among independent erotica authors on social media that Amazon was quietly changing its policies for erotic novels. Five authors I spoke to, and several more on social media, have reported that their books were stripped of their best seller rankings -- essentially hiding them from casual browsing on the site, and separating them from more mainstream, safe-for-work titles.

[...] Most people browsing Amazon books might not notice or care about the best seller rank -- a number that's based on how well the title is selling on Amazon.com -- but it's part of an algorithm that influences how the book appears in search, and whether it shows up in advertisements, including suggestions from one product to the next ("If you like this book, you might like this book"). For independent authors and booksellers, this ranking is hugely important for visibility.

14 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. I'm OK with this... by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I search for books on dinosaurs, I don't really want to see a "romance" title about a guy and a t-rex having sex.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:I'm OK with this... by ElRabbit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It will be OK until Amazon decides that book on dinosaur may be offending for a certain category of people (fundamentalist) and then send them down the drain too. Hidding erotic book is just the first step to send us back to Middle Age

    2. Re:I'm OK with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you read up on the "slippery slope fallacy", they'll usually list it as a "potential fallacy", as if what someone says it could lead to does in fact happen, then the original argument was in fact not a fallacy. For example, if the government says that they want to monitor all internet traffic to look for child porn, and I say it needs to be disallowed because they might use it to monitor all citizens, officially that's a slippery slope fallacy, but then you hear about PRISM, and it turns out my argument may not have been such a slippery slope after all.

      Basically, dismissing an argument based on "slippery slope" really isn't a valid dismissal in any case except the most outlandish slippery slopes. If it's possible, it must be considered.

    3. Re:I'm OK with this... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Only if your entire history is less than 50 years old.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    4. Re:I'm OK with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you search for "sex" on Amazon, you are doing it wrong... on many levels at that.

    5. Re:I'm OK with this... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All the evidence is that it works the opposite way. Society becomes more permissive over time.

      There are many, many counterexamples. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq after the US invasion, Victorian Britain, the rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire. These are all examples of societies becoming less morally tolerant and more repressive.

    6. Re:I'm OK with this... by Askmum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I search for books on dinosaurs, I don't really want to see a "romance" title about a guy and a t-rex having sex.

      You may be trolling here, but this is actually an example of the creepy kind of censorship that is very prevalent these days. Just like Google removing KODI from their autocomplete.
      This is censorship and censorship sucks. We should stand up and fight companies who do this, not make jokes about it. Because at the end, there will be nobody who can make the joke.

    7. Re:I'm OK with this... by rgbatduke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are two really important problems with this:

      a) Where do you draw the line? Is Stranger in a Strange Land "erotic"? How about Lady Chatterlie's Lover? Is it "eroticism" that we hide, or do we hide books with politically incorrect content, such as books that refer to persons of color as ni**ers or w*gs? Do we hide books that might make some particular group feel bad? Do we hide poltical books?

      If Amazon starts hiding every single book that has a sex scene in it, it will become Amazon for Kids. We'll be thrown back to the last century, only worse, as Amazon is well on the way to becoming the only viable bookseller in the country, and its browsing algorithms are already super dangerous in terms of raising any new book or casting it down to oblivion, no matter how good or bad it might be. Sure, many books with erotic scenes aren't porn, but again, where do you draw the line? On what basis?

      b) Who decides? This is the really terrible thing -- not only is there no clear line, but whatever criterion they come up with for a line is being implemented by some overworked human who probably has no time at all to actually read the books that they are effectively "banning", hiding from nearly everybody. This isn't even malicious censorship -- it is censorship by the lazy, censorship by the unqualified, censorship by a bored clerk somewhere.

      I say this as the author of a book that is not porn, it is actually at least an attempt at actual literature, that has erotic content (it's a book for grown ups to be sure) that has been classified without my knowledge or consent as "erotica" by Amazon and hidden so securely that when I tell people about it, they often can't find it searching for it by name.

      And that s**Ks.

      (And by the way, /., putting a "lameness filter" on my submissions that prevents them from happening if they contain ni**ers and w*gs spelled the right way in a context where I'm using them in an intelligent conversation is an example of exactly the same thing. Leaving me pretty damn mad...)

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
  2. Re:Nothing to see here.... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one is claiming it's a 2nd amendment or free speech issue. The issue here is that Amazon is such a dominant force for modern literature that authors are now pretty much beholden to whatever whims they decide to act upon.

    Author Jenny Trout had every book in her contemporary erotic romance series The Boss (written under the pen name Abigail Barnette) stripped of its rank and reclassified to remove it from the Romance category. She told me in an email that Amazon is “the bread and butter of every indie out there.” She says she sold half a million copies through Amazon in a three-year period, compared to 35,000 at every other retailer combined. Her series was de-ranked without warning or explanation.

    “There's no way for an indie author to make a living without Amazon, so whatever nonsense they decide they're pulling this month is just one other thing we've got to put up with,” Trout said. “And that sucks, but they're a private business and they get to do what they want, so we can only really complain from a consumer standpoint. It's not censorship, it's just a big bullshit hassle, so there's really no recourse for us.”

    I'm not some anti-Amazon crusader by any means, but it's always a little worrisome for a single entity to become as dominant as they've become in so many areas, because when this sort of thing happens, there's literally no recourse for people, and no real way for market forces to make corrections.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  3. Re:Alternative Theory by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Funny

    My brain just automatically translates that to read "Amazon women sacrificing erotic authors... "

    Sounds delicious. Is this book illustrated, or...?

    Umm, asking for a friend.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  4. Loved reading these two /. headlines by gachunt · · Score: 3, Funny

    I read

    " Amazon is Burying Sexy Books, Sending Erotic Novel Authors to the 'No-Rank Dungeon' "

    ... then ...

    " President Trump Slams Amazon For 'Causing Tremendous Loss To the United States' "

  5. Re:Nothing to see here.... by BlazeMiskulin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People seem to forget that Amazon is a private business. They can do whatever they want. [...] Not shown in Amazon searches.... nothing to see here... move along.

    Nobody has said anything about the First Amendment--which you are jumping onto with a strawman.

    Just because they're a private business doesn't mean they're immune to criticism.

    People are complaining that this private business is behaving in a way which is detrimental to the livelihood of their suppliers, and convenience of their customers. This IS something worth discussing--so that suppliers and customers know what's happening and can make knowledgeable business and purchasing decisions.

  6. Re:Cat got my tongue? That should be banned erotic by iampiti · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the west fewer people may be religious nowadays but the mechanisms that undelie religions still operate on people and so we get this new wave of morality

  7. what was happening by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What was happening previously was that racy books were showing up for searches for normal books, often absurdly unrelated searches. They were gaming the searches like it was the early days of Google.

    I don't know if Amazon was weighting the sales numbers too highly in their algorithm or what, but even quite specific searches for normal topics might have the bizarre racy results showing higher than strongly selling normal books.

    So I say, good: it's about time.

    If this is a problem somehow, then fine, give us an easy, prominent account setting to say "no smut". Then go back to your old algorithms to your heart's content.

    But something was not right before, in any case.