Slashdot Mirror


Amazon is Stuffing Its Search Results Pages With Ads (recode.net)

If it feels like Amazon's site is increasingly stuffed with ads, that's because it is. And it looks like that's working -- at least for brands that are willing to fork over ad dollars as part of their strategy to sell on Amazon. From a report: Amazon-sponsored product ads have been around since 2012. But lately, as the company has invested in growing its advertising business, they've become more aggressive. See, for example, our search below for "cereal." The first three results, which take up the whole screen above the fold -- everything visible before you scroll -- are sponsored placements that appear as search results: Ads for Kellogg's Special K, Quaker Life and Cap'n Crunch. (It's similarly dramatic on mobile, where it takes up the entire first screen.) This is followed by a section featuring Amazon's own brand, 365 Everyday Value, which was part of its Whole Foods acquisition. Not until scrolling down halfway on the next browser "page" do organic search results -- non-paid, non-Amazon brands -- come up: Post's Honey Bunches of Oats and Kellogg's Frosted Mini-Wheats and Frosted Flakes.

62 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Not news by DarkRookie · · Score: 2

    This has been going quite a while now.
    But it getting to the point where ublock is having troubles with the page.

    --
    The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
    1. Re:Not news by Moof123 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Amazon search has been increasingly ignoring the input and just barfing out SPAM. Even very specific searches mix in both sponsored and otherwise promoted items to the point where exact matches often are excluded. I went looking for a bicycle chain ring I have previously bought. Multiple exact name searches and variants turned up nothing but SPAM and semi-related bicycle garbage. I figured it was no longer carriered, wrong. Google found it on Amazon and it was still quite actively sold, just not discoverable through Amazon's search. Screw Bezos.

    2. Re:Not news by Gilgaron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It has been bizarre searching for specific items and seeing the first results have nothing to do with the query, until you realize they're ads. It will be disappointing if we end up depending on Google's index of Amazon's pages to find items...

    3. Re:Not news by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2, Funny

      Amazon search has been increasingly ignoring the input and just barfing out SPAM.

      So, just like Google for the last 10+ years.

    4. Re:Not news by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      It has been bizarre searching for specific items and seeing the first results have nothing to do with the query, until you realize they're ads. It will be disappointing if we end up depending on Google's index of Amazon's pages to find items...

      I already do that ... or increasingly DuckDuckGo.

    5. Re:Not news by Moof123 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Product name from previous order: "SHIMANO FC-CX70 Chainring"
      Link to still sold product: https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod...
      Link costs $39. Search result finds only a $60 option. Why am I paying for Prime, yet I get Reamed instead?

    6. Re:Not news by fermion · · Score: 2
      It is because Amazon is seen to risk alienating customers by not only promoting products the are only ancillary interesting to the person looking for a product, but by cross promoting it's own products.

      I can tell you it is now not all that easy for me just to browse search results. I have to remember that may results are not going to be what I need, but what advertiser want me to see. For instance, if I am looking for toner, there are going to be results that do not work with my printer, and those results are no longer clearly separated.

      Beyond this Amazon is making generally usability more difficult in the name of cross marketing. The amazon home page usually has some moving intrusive ad that has to be scrolled past to buy product. On IMDB, an Amazon property, content is often obscured by an ad. As a Amazon customer who uses these other services, it does not fill me a sense of loyalty.

      Amazon is opening itself up for competition. I know that everyone is saying who is going to compete, but that is what Toys R US said, and I can tell you that by that 40 years after it was formed it was already going downhill, I knew no one that shopped there, because it was skanky and expensive. Amazon has a decade or so to middle age, and if it is not careful, it will looking at a downhill slide to oblivion. There is very little friction in people going to another web site to buy stuff, and I see a future where retail is as decentralized as Uber.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    7. Re:Not news by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      If they think you can afford to pay more, they will charge more. And you can afford Prime... This is already very much the case with airlines but probably the future of online retailing as well. If you can come up with an algorithm that makes a reasonable guess at what a person would be willing to pay for an item, based on all the information they raped from them previously, Amazon and friends will be beating a path to your door.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    8. Re:Not news by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      This has been going on even before online shopping existed. Walmart and other retailers charge manufacturers for premium shelf space. The products at the end of the aisle where you are more likely to see them are only there because the manufacturers pay for it. The stuff you see in the weekly flyer is also paid for by the manufacturer. The retailers have a lot of power. The way they present products to the conumsers has a huge impact on how well they sell.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    9. Re:Not news by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      The shared panopticon of everything you have bought or searched for or viewed generates not just things you like or may be interested in, but estimates of how much you may be willing to (over)pay for because you are too lazy to comparison shop.

      Quelle surprise they take advantage of it.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    10. Re:Not news by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      Amazon search has been increasingly ignoring the input and just barfing out SPAM.

      SpAmazon

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    11. Re:Not news by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      I really like that point, I'm a prime member also. Shouldn't I have the option to disable ads? I'm already paying extra for the service.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    12. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You know what the trick is for finding good prices on Amazon? Search for the product you want to find in Google with "site:amazon.com shimano fc-cx70 chainring"

    13. Re: Not news by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Amazon is the wrong place for bike parts. The prices are way too high. Bike part shops are cheaper, even with the added shipping cost.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    14. Re:Not news by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Amazon search has been increasingly ignoring the input and just barfing out SPAM

      Precisely. In the article they search for "Justin's peanut butter" because they want that specific item, but instead Amazon returns results for a bunch of Other peanut butters irrelevant to want the customer wants.

      Just now I searched for "Bounty Basic towels" and instead I was hit with a bunch of brands I care nothing about. When I want cheap Basic Bounty, that's EXACTLY what I want.... not other junk,.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    15. Re:Not news by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I was recently shopping for a new desk chair. Because I'm a fat ass I specifically entered a minimum weight limit into google. Google pointed me to an Amazon search for essentially the same thing but with slightly different wording, although still with the same weight capacity as a minimum. The first several chairs listed specified max weights 50 lbs lower than I required. To add insult the top result actually had an even lower capacity if you read the technical details as opposed to the item summary at the top. And that was an Amazon branded chair.

      I don't think I'd mind the adds so much if they were actually labeled as advertisements, like they are on Googles search results.

    16. Re:Not news by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I have never shopped for a bicycle parts. The link he shows simply does not show up in the search results for anyone. My guess is sellers need to pay amazon to show up in search results now.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    17. Re:Not news by srmalloy · · Score: 1

      And I've given up trying to make sense out of the items that appear in the 'Recommneded for you' categories. Rubbermaid storage container sets in the 'Office' category, Tamiya model masking tape in the 'Home Improvement Hardware' category, joysticks, mice, trackballs, and mouse pads in the 'Cell Phones & Accessories' category, or the fact that you will almost never see an actual physical book or DVD in 'New Releases', any 'xxxxx Books' category, or any 'xxxxx Video' category -- they're 99.99% Kindle e-books or Amazon Video streams. For e-books, it's usually possible to click on the link to the digital product and then use the 'alternate formats' choices to get a physical product, but even though I understand that Amazon wants to push its digital products to maximize its profit margin (no inventory, packaging, shipping, etc.), but you would think that with all of the datamining they do to detect your purchasing patterns so they can push things in front of you that you might like that they would recognize when someone has a strong preference for physical media and stop trying to push digital versions to the exclusion of all else.

  2. Re:We have more important topics. by magarity · · Score: 1

    There's no hurricane coming where I am.

  3. Re:We have more important topics. by reboot246 · · Score: 1

    Lighten up, Francis. It's just a hurricane and the people affected know what to do. The east coast of the United States has been hit by hurricanes for thousands of years and this one is no different; in fact, it's not even the largest to hit in living memory.

  4. Once upon a time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you walked into a physical store and bought products off the shelf but now amazon is stuffing ads in your face, literally stuffing ads in your face, and stuffing ads in your shoes and stuffing ads in your turkeys and stuffing ads in your pillows

    stuffing ads, stuffing ads, stuffing ads, stuffing ads, stuffing ads

    1. Re:Once upon a time by drstevep · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When you go into the store, you see a lot of items on endcaps of the aisles. They are highly visible. You see items on shelves at eye level and other items that are shelved high up or at the floor.

      Why do you think some items are on endcaps, and some are shelved at eye-level as opposed to floor-level? That's right. Companies PAY to have their products placed at more desirable locations.

      As you were saying, ads, ads, ads, ads, ads.

  5. Re:We have more important topics. by technothrasher · · Score: 1

    There is a fucking HURRICANE coming, why are we wasting time with this?

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/...

  6. Does this stuff affect what alexa picks? by magarity · · Score: 2

    I know better than to take it's suggestion to "next time, just ask Alexa to order x" since whatever I've searched for is frequently topped by some cheap knockoff that's "sponsored". Does anyone who actually uses alexa to order stuff get that or what?

  7. Re:We have more important topics. by gnick · · Score: 2

    Landfall isn't until Thursday. As long as you ship overnight, you should be fine. I'm ordering plywood for my windows and a couple of board games. Shame on people who didn't prepare for the hurricane by signing up for Prime.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  8. I use google to search amazon by ljw1004 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've found the quality/ranking of amazon results to be TERRIBLE. I always do a google search when I want to find products on amazon.

    1. Re:I use google to search amazon by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      I do too. I gave up on amazon search results and having an relatively independent index of amazon's content made sense to me to find what I want. Word needs to get out I guess.

  9. Wet Dream Ads by Drethon · · Score: 1

    I pretty much only click ads for products I only wish I could buy, maybe if I win the lottery. Makes me a little curious what that does to their add algorithms...

  10. All in a days work by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    Amazon receives 40% of online purchases and Bezos is supposed to be worth $159 billion and earns $275MM per day.
    All of that has to come from somewhere, right?

  11. Re:Dork Cocky here is a fucking moron by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    You can't evacuate 30 million people

    Nor do you need to. Only the outer islands need to be evacuated.

    People living inland, but too close to rivers or creeks need to move to higher ground, but they can still stay local.

    Everyone else can shelter in place.

    This is being compared to Harvey, which for flooding was a worst case scenario. It stalled over a major city on a plain. The death toll was 82. That is equivalent to a weekend of traffic deaths.

  12. Re:We have more important topics. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is a fucking HURRICANE coming, why are we wasting time with this? This storm will be a Cat 5 blasting into the Carolinas with the force of thousands of nuclear bombs

    "We" don't all live in the Carolinas, "We" don't all have skin in the game, "We" aren't all affected by it, and "We" don't all give a damn.

    It may surprise you to learn this, but the world doesn't stop because there's a storm somewhere.

    I've been to the Carolinas, nice place, nice people ... but my life is in no way impacted by this, and I'd rather every news source not be overtaken with breathless drama about things which don't impact me.

    Did you run around shrieking like this when Japan was getting hit with a typhoon last week?

  13. Re:We have more important topics. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Insightful

    there are hardware stores out of plywood and generators and grocery stores out of bottled water and many food items and runs on gas stations, etc.

    Obvious solution: Raise prices.

    The higher prices will:
    1. Ensure the products go to those that need them the most.
    2. Penalize hoarding.
    3. Eliminate queuing, so people can focus their time on other priorities.
    4. Incentivize sellers to expedite new supplies so they can cash in.
    5. Incentivize residents to prepare better next time.

  14. OMG! Web sales site wants to sell stuff! by mspohr · · Score: 1

    Really?
    Why is this even news that Amazon wants to sell you stuff?
    It's not some secret plot. It's their whole raison d'etre.
    If you don't want to buy stuff, don't go there.
    Is that hard to understand?

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:OMG! Web sales site wants to sell stuff! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Totally agree! The next thing you know, people will be upset that walking into a Safeway store, you'll see prices and boxes of dozens of different cereals when all I really wanted was Raisin Bran! How dare a store advertise and push other products to consumers!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    2. Re:OMG! Web sales site wants to sell stuff! by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Crass commercialization sours my Amazon browsing experience. We live in a fallen world.

    3. Re:OMG! Web sales site wants to sell stuff! by mspohr · · Score: 1

      I think it's naive to believe that Amazon has ever been about anything other than crass commercialization.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:OMG! Web sales site wants to sell stuff! by oogoliegoogolie · · Score: 1

      It's not just about advertising, but this story describes an issue that is a subset of a much larger and growing issue: generally lousy search engines on retail sites that return either not enough or way too many results. It's not just amazon, but many of the big retailers have searches that if they do return items results specific to my search, and pad my results with dozens or hundreds results from departments and categories that have no relation to my search terms.

      One one site I search for WASHERS and I did get washers in the results, plus WASHing machines, items related to WASHing clothes, babies, pets, or cars, and best of all, items for fans of the WASHington Capitals hockey team. Pretty much everything that has WASH as it's root word. What the hell?

      Another large retail site I searched for drip pan and the results contain mostly anything to fix leaks from DRIPping roofs, faucets, eaves-troughs, plumbing, plus a wide assortment of fryPANs, a few lovely PANties, and drip plans were waaay down in the results.

      Too many sites today are designed around business decisions with less regard to technical or usability decisions.

  15. Not everyone is as rich as you by sjbe · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Obvious solution: Raise prices.

    The term for that is price gouging when it happens around the time of a natural disaster. Some price fluctuation is to be expected but there is a limit to what is appropriate.

    The higher prices will: 1. Ensure the products go to those that need them the most.

    Ummm... no. It goes to those who can afford them. Not everyone has an equal ability to pay and price gouging during a natural disaster is a dick move.

    1. Re:Not everyone is as rich as you by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      The term for that is price gouging when it happens around the time of a natural disaster.

      It is only called "gouging" by people that don't understand markets. The likely storm track has been known for days. So why didn't the suppliers run extra overtime shifts to bring in more supplies? Answer: Because they knew they would not be allowed to recoup the extra costs, since NC has price control laws.

      So anti-market laws were the reason for the shortage. "Price gouging" is the solution. Sure, prices would be higher, but not by as much as you think, since extra supplies would limit the rise. But there would have been far fewer shortages.

    2. Re:Not everyone is as rich as you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The term for that is price gouging when it happens around the time of a natural disaster. Some price fluctuation is to be expected but there is a limit to what is appropriate.

      Why? If you keep the price artificially low you stop the market's natural forces from preventing hording. The reason for price spikes in times of extreme scarcity is precisely to prevent hording.

      Ummm... no. It goes to those who can afford them. Not everyone has an equal ability to pay and price gouging during a natural disaster is a dick move.

      I have news for you: keeping prices artificially low doesn't help your hypothetical poor person, in fact it makes their plight even worse. Now rich people can afford to horde scarce supplies by purchasing 20 of them instead of 5. Now the poor person who might have been able to scrape up the money for the high prices doesn't even have that option. They have nothing.

      You cannot legislate away human nature any more than you could make cars more efficient by outlawing friction. The only hope of placing some kind of constraints on human nature are to create checks and balances that tend to work in opposition to each other. In the market, that's supply and demand, which is moderated by pricing.

    3. Re:Not everyone is as rich as you by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Ummm... no. It goes to those who can afford them. Not everyone has an equal ability to pay and price gouging during a natural disaster is a dick move.

      The term for that is price gouging when it happens around the time of a natural disaster. Some price fluctuation is to be expected but there is a limit to what is appropriate.

      Back to this, are we? Same loads of bullshit over and over again. There have been studies that show that when prices are raised, during a disaster, people don't binge buy items..

      Why does all logic escape you lefties? There is a shortage of items... They have become more valuable... Said items may not be replaced until the disaster is over... So your solution is that the first person to get to them can buy them all?

      Or.... we could let the shop owners raise the prices so it becomes economically feasible to only buy "some" items. Thus leaving some for others.

      Let's take batteries, just as an example.. Every time there is some storm, or earthquake, or whatever, the first thing people try to hoard are batteries.. (well, that and bottled water). So, if the prices of the batteries aren't allowed to change, then the first person to get to the store can make a huge dent in the inventory. By the time the 10th person comes along, the batteries are probably wiped out.. (I'm using the amount of inventory I see at my local grocery store as my reference).

      Now let's jump over to a system that doesn't micromange, and allows stores to charge whatever the fuck they want..

      How much is the store going to raise the prices? Probably not to insane levels, but let's say they do, for a moment.. They're gonna have to deal with that negative publicity after the disaster.. Not good in the long run. They'll be punished by the public.. I've seen this happen with my own eyes..

      So let's say the store triples the prices on batteries... Now the first guy to the store can only buy 1/3 of what he was planning.. Assuming everyone has his amount of money, the batteries are going to last 3x longer.. 3x more people will be able to purchase batteries.. Those batteries are also going to be conserved.. They were expensive and they may not be replaceable for a long time.

      Under your stupid ass system, we ignore supply and demand, and instead let the first few people buy up all the inventory.. AND if it's a rich person (whom you seem to hate) it's even easier for them to buy ALL the batteries, under your system.. We're keeping the prices low..

      Water and batteries... Not expensive items, but very important during an emergency.. I could buy every goddamn battery at my local supermarket (which is a big one) for less than a grand.. Under your price control system, this is fine. I alone should have batteries during an emergency.. Every poor person, behind me, can fuck off if they want batteries.. yeah?

      Or... the store could adjust prices, and I can't buy all the batteries.. They aren't gonna price them so high that nobody can buy them.. They'll be shooting for a reasonable target.. High enough to make a nice profit, but not so high that the public turns on them. This will have a nice side-effect of minimizing hoarding and binge buying.

      Neither system prevents the "rich" from buying whatever they want, but at least under the system I favor the middle class loses the ability to binge buy and hoard. More people will be able to buy those items they need in an emergency.

      The poor are always going to be in a bad position. They're poor.. It sucks, but it's reality. I've been poor. I also knew I was poor and planned accordingly.. The last thing I wanted to do was try to buy disaster supplies during a disaster..

    4. Re:Not everyone is as rich as you by N1AK · · Score: 1

      The likely storm track has been known for days. So why didn't the suppliers run extra overtime shifts to bring in more supplies? Answer: Because they knew they would not be allowed to recoup the extra costs, since NC has price control laws

      Where's the evidence to backup the hypothesis you state as though it is fact. The UK doesn't have any anti-gouging laws, but negative publicity when petrol stations or similar increase prices in a way that would be termed "gouging" by some means that companies don't do it. Thus at a minimum you laws aren't always the reason for a shortage.

      Personally I'm not a big fan of price controls, and agree that they can lead to non-optimal behaviour but when you start arguments with things like claiming that higher prices ensure things go to those that need them most then it undermines your other more valid points. The person who needs it most doesn't always have the ability to pay inflated prices. There's people starving in the world, do you think if we increased prices enough they'd be able to get food because they "need" it most?

    5. Re:Not everyone is as rich as you by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      they would not be allowed to recoup the extra costs, since NC has price control laws

      So anti-market laws were the reason for the shortage.

      Hey, we're the government. Anything we can do, just ask -- we're here to help (Ourselves if possible.)

      Unintended consequences? No worries, we'll just pass another law. That way you don't have to worry, you'll always be guilty of something. And what more can your government do than provide you with that nice, warm feeling of being wanted?

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    6. Re:Not everyone is as rich as you by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      There's people starving in the world, do you think if we increased prices enough they'd be able to get food ...?

      Yes. Most starving people in the world are farmers, who grow food. But because of price controls on food in many 3rd world countries, they don't earn much, have little incentive to plant more than they need to survive, and are unable to accumulate any savings. Then when weather or war disrupt this lives, they have nothing to fall back on.

      Do artificially low food prices cause starvation? They certainly do.

  16. Re:We have more important topics. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Funny

    I tried to buy plywood and supplies on Amazon but I couldnt find any because of all the damn ads!

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  17. Newsflash! by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Newsflash! Guy who owns website likes making money selling parts of it. News at 11!

  18. uBlock Origin FTW by rpresser · · Score: 2

    uBlock Origin hides the sponsored listings for me, and now that I've told it, will hide the Amazon brands too.

    1. Re:uBlock Origin FTW by xeoron · · Score: 1

      Same here... Also, Safescript blocks and lists javascript sources that want to run on a page, I have noticed more and more sites using amazon ads that I keep blocking banning the javascript running.

  19. Re:Registered /.ers review of the Win64 model by rpresser · · Score: 1

    Just great. Fucking ads on a story about ads.

  20. Don't search for something so general by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    When you search for something so general like cereal then there are going to be a lot of sponsored items to go along with it. All of my searches are for something specific that I know I want and so the sponsored content goes down dramatically. Usually I see the top row of sponsored items and then search results start.

  21. Re:We have more important topics. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    There is a fucking HURRICANE coming, why are we wasting time with this? This storm will be a Cat 5 blasting into the Carolinas with the force of thousands of nuclear bombs. Are there nuclear power plants that need to be secured? Chemical facilities? Low lying areas where people live, barrier islands, etc? Can we get started early on recovery planning, such as food, water, body bags, sanitation, etc? We shouldn't forget about the animals - we have a good amount of warning that we could be using to evacuate animals as well as people. We should take this as a call to action to accelerate global climate change amelioration efforts and a rapid transition to renewable and carbon-neutral energy as it is obvious to everyone that this monster storm is a direct result of global warming and is only the first of several pointed right at the US like bullets in the barrel of a gun. Up until now, much of the damage due to global climate change has been in faraway places like low-lying islands in the Pacific - this is climate change writ large, come home to roost. We all know that the greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere probably cannot be removed, but the least we can do is make a serious attempt to cut back on new emissions and we can and do have the technology to do it, we simply need to find the willpower. What we do NOT need is imbeciles like the current occupants of the White House doing things like this to actively make the problem worse but put a few extra pennies in the pockets of their big oil campaign contributors. This hurricane, which promises to be ultra-destructive as it barrels towards landfall and then stalls out over the coast due to changed weather and climate patterns needs to serve as a clarion call to arms for all climate warriors to remove by any and all means necessary, even force, people who are trying to destroy our world and our children's world. The time for action has come, and the time for discussion is over. We have tried reason and it has not worked because they will not listen. Nobody can say we didn't try.

    I'm gonna study this paragraph and break out all your points into actionable line items and prepare for its arrival and shit the hurricane's up by Idaho already.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  22. Re:We have more important topics. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And then FEMA comes in and blunders around doing random shit trying to look like they're helping while trying to make sure they get as much press coverage as possible.

    FEMA is not there to manage the entire recovery process. FEMAs job is to obtain resources (food/water, rescue workers, repair crews, etc), and get those resources to those who need them the most. It is the the job of the local government to know the community and let FEMA know what and where these resources are needed. The governor didn't even know how to contact each mayor, what hospital were open, where shelters were, or even what the heck he was doing; and it showed!

    Go back and review the news, the people trying to get news coverage wasn't FEMA, it was the San Juan mayor who cried a swan song all the while in front of one of the few buildings with power/water/food. FEMA had supplies on the docks within a few days, the local government couldn't find trucks or drivers to deliver the goods; not until local truck drivers pounded down the governors door begging for routes. FEMA had rescue workers within hours of the storm passing, the local government didn't even know where to look and where to take people who needed aid. FEMA just finally found 6 trailers they gave to the government full of supplies, still loaded on the private property of a friend of a local official.

    You want to know why PR is still in need, look at the government officials that were/are just looking after friends and neighbors instead of the entire community they represent. And yes, this is still going on which is why its still an issue.

  23. I thought that all the tracking that occurs... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    ... was supposed to have the result of me being presented with ads for items I am interested in. Here it looks as if Amazon is instead trying to trick its customers into buying something that may not represent what the customer is really interested in.

  24. So what? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Oh noes, you're being shown ads to buy stuff!

    But wait, stupid, you're on a website that sells stuff. Unless you didn't already know what you wanted to buy, how could ads for other probably similar products be a problem?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  25. no different than brick and mortar by renegade600 · · Score: 1

    brick and mortar stores does the exact same thing. they also have paid product placement and will place their own brands above others on the shelves. Quite a few displays at the front of the stores, at the register, end caps, or in the middle of the aisles are paid product placements whether it is through special discounts or payments. I really see nothing wrong with Amazon doing it other than it can be frustrating at times when looking for something specific and cheaper.

  26. Re:Californian here and I'm prepared by magarity · · Score: 1

    ...and vegetarian, non-dairy, gluten-free emergency food.

    If it's not vegetarian, non-dairy, gluten-free, pesticide-free, organic, free-range, cruelty-free, carbon-neutral emergency food, you're not a real Californian; you have to get all the feel-good buzzwords in there to get the proper nose-in-the-air sense of moral superiority.

    You forgot non-GMO. But I can't figure out how "vegetarian" can possibly be combined with "free-range, cruelty free".

  27. Web ads LOL by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    I white list a few places (like here) but, everything else gets run though a VPN, uBlock and Adblock pro. WHAT ads?

  28. Re:Californian here and I'm prepared by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2

    You forgot non-GMO. But I can't figure out how "vegetarian" can possibly be combined with "free-range, cruelty free".

    Listen up brothers and sisters, come hear my desperate tale.
    I speak of our friends of nature trapped in the dirt like a jail.
    Vegetables live in oppression, served on our tables each night.
    This killing of veggies is madness—I say we take up the fight!
    Salads are only for murderers; coleslaw's a facist regime.
    Don't think that they don't have feelings, just cause a radish can't scream.

    I've heard the screams of the vegetables (scream, scream, scream),
    watching their skins being peeled (having their insides revealed),
    grated and steamed with no mercy (burning off calories),
    how do you think that feels? (Bet it hurts really bad.)
    Carrot juice constitutes murder. (And that's a real crime.)
    Greenhouses prisons for slaves. (Let my vegetables go!)
    It's time to stop all this gardening. (It's dirty as hell.)
    Let's call a spade a spade (is a spade is a spade is a spade).

    —Arrogant Worms

  29. +1 for adblockers by zukakog · · Score: 1

    I never noticed the first page of ads because my blocker eliminates them. I do see the house brand first still, but that doesn't really bother me.

  30. Brick-and-mortar stores do it too by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    It's called paid product placement. If Pillsbury wants their products at eye level at your local Kroger, they have to pay Kroger "slotting fees" for that prime placement. If they don't pay, their product goes to the very bottom or very top shelf, where it's hard to see and find.

    So if you're looking for better prices, look high and low on the grocery store shelves.

    Amazon is doing the exact same thing, but with virtual shelf space.

  31. Re:Dear hypocrite: Nobody touches my hurricane by rpresser · · Score: 1

    YOU ARE ADVERTISING, MANY MANY TIMES ON SLASHDOT OVER AND OVER, and you don't even have the guts to use your name.

    You're an asshole and you should be ashamed.

  32. Re: Californian here and I'm prepared by brokie · · Score: 1

    Let the celery grow where it wants, and don't toture it. Cut it down humanely, with naked singing farmers, and extremely sharp sheers.