Comments on: Looking back on #amazonfail

By: Patience

Patience — Sat, 09 May 2009 20:39:51 +0000

It’s just an example of the internet attention span. When an opinion or assumption can be transmitted worldwide in seconds, often the proper research isn’t done. The anonymity makes people more outspoken. Then the whole thing escalates beyond all reasonability. I’ve seen it douzens of times. It’s even bleeding into off-line communication now.

By: Mani

Mani — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:20:58 +0000

Not that anyone’s going to read this comment on an older non-screenwriting-related post, but I got a sense of deja vu here when I’d heard about the recent gaff with online Star Wars message boards: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/bioware-rethinks-policy-on-homosexuality

By: Luzid

Luzid — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 23:48:01 +0000

That "gay" is categorized as "adult" is the real injustice which, in fact, happened.

No amount of spin will change that. Being gay is not just about sex. Yet many people wrongly assume that, based on inherent anti-gay bias.

I'm glad there's at least a discussion of this very real problem.

By: eve

eve — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:35:11 +0000

Just for fun, you might want to type in the search term "homosexuality" at amazon and see what comes up it the top results:

1) "For The Bible Tells Me So"

2) "A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality"

3) "What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality"

Other fun titles include:

"You Don't Have to Be Gay: Hope and Freedom for Males Struggling With Homosexuality or for Those Who Know of Someone Who Is"
"101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality" Here are the answers to the most often asked questions about homosexuality, fielded by an expert on the subject...and a FORMER homosexual himself.

There also gay-friendly books, but Bible, Bible, Bible...

By: Craig

Craig — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 18:45:12 +0000

1) The glitch occured for several months. Intended or not, this was an issue that needed addressing.

2) Most civil rights battles are both symbolic and substantive. How people view gay people or censor matters to how entrenched other issues are.

3) Most civil rights battles involves humans who are going to make mistake in figuring out what is important and what's not. Hindsight is 20/20. Bias against gays is not a made up isue whether ot not it is wrong here.

4) How much energy did it cost anyone to bring the issue to light? I would bet relatively little.

5) Outrage serves a purpose. Just like reason does. Both are necessary to a civil rights effort. See the African American civil rights movement for reference. Nothing that gays are doing is new under the sun. It occured with other movements that came before it.

By: eve

eve — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:08:28 +0000

There's also something called "conservation of lack of outrage." Once you realize the original thing you weren't upset about is actually bad, there is great temptation to find explanations as to why the original thing really isn't that bad.

We've all done that as well.

By: Mani

Mani — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:39:35 +0000

@daveednyc: You're unfairly exaggerating things.

The "collective howl" of tweets on one weekend is definitely not any greater than the continuous uproar of several blogs and publications and artists about other issues you would find more important.

Hell, Amazon didn't even see it necessary to formally respond to the issue. Fittingly for this conversation, what you're complaining about isn't real.

Unless you think twitter is the ultimate barometer of social outrage across all social sectors, including those who don't use it?

By: GoldringI

GoldringI — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:33:29 +0000

Okay, so. I know it’s unwise to use my first post on the site to go against the general flow of the article, but I thought people might be interested in this item from AfterEllen.com:

http://www.afterellen.com/node/48877 (useless at tags, me)

Which does perhaps reveal that an injustice did actually occur, after all.

By: daveednyc

daveednyc — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:28:10 +0000

Mani, I see your point, but there was no dialogue, just a torrent of erroneous complaint. A collective howl of nothing. Meanwhile, the government continues to sell the entire country for a song to corporate interests, and nary a peep from the masses. It disgusts me. But God forbid someone can’t find a book!

By: John

John — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:10:29 +0000

@thorsmark:

Wrong kind of conservation.

cf. conservation of energy, the term used in science.

Shirky's analogy is that many in the mob refused to dissipate their outrage, but rather redirected it. People who were up in arms about Amazon's blatant and deliberate homophobia, upon being proved wrong, reshaped their arguments to claim that the system itself was inherently wrong.

By: thorsmark

thorsmark — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:29:28 +0000

Shirky! I meant Clay Shirky!