More Scientology Censoring: Amazon.com Review Guidelines Disallows Critiques Of Authors Or Their Intentions
I slept poorly last evening thinking about how a small, secretive, dangerous “religious” sect has hijacked this country’s values, beliefs and its rich history of free speech.
We are free to criticize our President, our Famous and Wealthy, CEO’s of powerful businesses, the Pope, World Leaders from around the globe, heck we (as a nation, not individuals) are even allowed to invade countries and dispose of their leaders, but the one thing apparently citizens of the U.S. are not allowed to do: express anything negative about a science fiction writer who created a religion for the sole purpose of generating money and controlling people.
I am genuinely concerned with the path the internet has taken, which by most people’s standards is the last bastion for the exercise of free speech.
A book reviewer and concerned citizen has been working on a story with me about Amazon.com’s policy of censoring negative reviews on all books by Scientology found L. Ron Hubbard.
We wrote about this is brief a few days ago, but now there have been more developments. And I must admit, I am shocked and disturbed by the heavy-handed manner in which those who run Amazon are willing to side with the Church of Scientology. Not only is it alarming, but it serves to eat away at the fabric of our most closely held doctrine for which this country was founded on: free speech.
This is long, but I saw no way to edit it without altering the whole picture of what has happened:
Greetings from Amazon.com.
originally had two different reviews of Dianetics on amazon.com’s website.
The first:
If You Are of African Descent
Dianetics makes laughable attempts to sound “scientific” by using obscure words to express mundane ideas while at the same time completely ignoring the basics of scientific method. The book also contains several frightening examples of cultural bias. Potential readers should be aware of them.
Perhaps the most disturbing example is on page 195, wherein Mr. Hubbard discusses the Zulu tribe of Africa. According to Mr. Hubbard, the Zulu would escape his “reactive data” if he were moved out of his “restimulative” area and taught English. But left in his native habitat, a “Zulu is only outside the bars of a madhouse because there are no madhouses provided by his tribe.”
The book is ludicrous scientifically, and a nightmare as a piece of social commentary. Avoid.
The other:
Presented in the package of a simple self-help book, “Dianetics— the Modern Science of Mental Health†is actually a frightening political diatribe. You may want to familiarize yourself with a couple of quotes:
“Once the child is conceived, no matter how “shameful†the circumstances, no matter the mores, no matter the income, that man or woman who would attempt an abortion on an unborn child is attempting a murder which will seldom succeed and is laying the foundation of a childhood illness and heartache. Anyone attempting an abortion is committing an act against the whole society and the future; any judge or doctor recommending an abortion should be instantly deprived of position and practice, whatever his ‘reason’â€.
(page 190, 1992 edition)And perhaps even more frightening:
“The sexual pervert (and by this term, Dianetics, to be brief, includes any and all forms of deviation in dynamic two such as homosexuality, lesbianism, sexual sadism, etc., and all down the catalog of Ellis and Kraft-Ebbing) is actually quite ill physically. Perversion, as an illness, has so many manifestations that it must be spread over the entire gamut of classes from 1 to 5 above. Overdevelopment of the sexual organs, underdevelopment, seminal inhibition or magnification, etc., are found some in one pervert, some in another.â€
(pages 149-150 1992 edition)(Anyone familiar with genetic cleansing theories from the 1930’s, in which various political and social minorities were purported to display tell-tale exterior characteristics useful to the ruling class for singling them out, will find this second passage particularly disturbing.)
“Dianetics†is chock full of this kind of ignorant psuedo-science. It would be funny if so many people weren’t taking it seriously.
Both reviews were on the amazon.com website for a number of months. Then they suddenly disappeared.
I emailed amazon.com to ask why. I was told that I could only have one review on the site, and that reviews could ONLY speak to the specific book. I revised the review to read:
“Dianetics†is full of scientific assertions and frequent allusions to research, but where is that research? The book tells us nothing about the scientific methods used. What were the sample sizes? What were the experimental controls? Was this research ever published by anyone other than the author? Perhaps in a reputable journal? We’re left to take Mr. Hubbard’s conclusions at face value.
Besides failing to support its scientific claims, the book frequently veers into the political. Feminists may want to familiarize themselves with this quote:
“Once the child is conceived, no matter how “shameful†the circumstances, no matter the mores, no matter the income, that man or woman who would attempt an abortion on an unborn child is attempting a murder which will seldom succeed and is laying the foundation of a childhood illness and heartache. Anyone attempting an abortion is committing an act against the whole society and the future; any judge or doctor recommending an abortion should be instantly deprived of position and practice, whatever his ‘reason’â€. (page 190)
And those working to assure civil rights to gays, lesbians and the transgendered may want to familiarize themselves with this one:
“The sexual pervert (and by this term, Dianetics, to be brief, includes any and all forms of deviation in dynamic two such as homosexuality, lesbianism, sexual sadism, etc., and all down the catalog of Ellis and Kraft-Ebbing) is actually quite ill physically. Perversion, as an illness, has so many manifestations that it must be spread over the entire gamut of classes from 1 to 5 above. Overdevelopment of the sexual organs, underdevelopment, seminal inhibition or magnification, etc., are found some in one pervert, some in another.â€
(pages 149-150)While everyone is welcome to their political and/or social opinions in our great democracy, this book is presented not as opinion but as science. Presented with the trappings of scientific research but without any evidence that real scientific methods were employed.
Proceed with a healthy skepticism.
This review was also removed. I was told in an email that legally, quotes from a book could not contain more than 18 words.
I revised my review to address this issue. That review was posted and stayed on the site for a number of months.
Then it disappeared again.
I called amazon.com to ask why. (One can’t speak directly to the reps who decide which review get pulled down. They will only communicate with customers by email.)
I received an email saying I had violated the stated guidelines for reviews. I asked for specifics. I received an email saying I had not, in fact, violated the guidelines. The review was reposted. A few weeks later it disappeared again. I contacted them. I was told the review had been inadvertently removed during system maintenance. It went back up. A few months later it disappeared yet again.
Given my commitment to free speech and the vile nature of this book, I’m ashamed to say I was involved in other things by that point. I let it go.
I recently ran across an item online accusing amazon.com of removing 1-star reviews for the site, accusing all 1-star reviews of violating the guidelines, even when they clearly did not. I looked at the Dianetics page on amazon.com. There used to be 30 or 40 negative reviews of Dianetics. THERE WAS NOT ONE. NOT ONE. Hundreds of 5-star reviews. A book this controversial, and NOT A SINGLE ONE-STAR REVIEW.
I got angry again.
I dusted off my old review as well as my review of another L. Ron Hubbard book, Science of Survival, which had also been deleted. I sent both in to be posted. Here is the review of Science of Survival:
Science of Survival: While neither debating, nor even criticizing, the socio-political assertions L. Ron Hubbard makes in Science of Survival: Prediction of Human Behavior, a working knowledge of them may help you to decide if this is the book for you.
First, Mr. Hubbard asserts that there are only two ways of handling people who fall at 2.0 or below on Mr. Hubbard’s “tone scale” (this includes gays and lesbians, who are at level 1.1). The first is raising them on the tone scale by “unenturbulating some of their theta”. The second is to “dispose of them quietly and without sorrow.” (See page 157, section 1)
Later in the same paragraph, he tells a story about a Venezuelan dictator, who, wanting to eradicate leprosy in his country, notices that many of the lepers in his country were also beggars, and decides to round up all the beggars and destroy them. By this “simple expedient” he puts an end to leprosy in Venezuela. It’s not clear what Mr. Hubbard intends to teach by citing this act of genocide. (See page 157, section 1)
On page 119, Mr. Hubbard informs us that any society in which women are taught anything but (anything and but being italicized by the author) family management, the care of men, and the creation of the coming generations, “is a society which is on its way out.” (Page 119, section 1) Later in this paragraph, Mr. Hubbard asserts that historians can pinpoint when a society begins to degenerate by finding the exact point where women begin operating on an equal footing with men in the business and political realms.
Whatever its sociological and political themes, the book is also rambling and poorly thought-out.. Not recommended.
Neither review showed up online.
I called customer service. I told the rep that my reviews of Diantetics and Science of Survival had been removed multiple times, despite my (saved) emails from amazon.com acknowledging that neither review violated the terms of service.
I told the rep that there used to be 30 or 40 1-star reviews of Dianetics and now they were all gone. She admitted that it seemed odd.
I asked the rep if there might be an individual removing reviews Scientology doesn’t like. She said, no, that the people who would remove reviews had oversight and that they couldn’t just do that. I asked, then, was this a policy by amazon.com, to simply remove negative reviews of this book? She didn’t have a good answer.
She forwarded my concerns (including the fact that the review has been acknowledged multiple times to be within the guidelines) to the department that specifically handles reviews. She said I would have a response from them within 48 hours.
Here was the response:
April 12, 2008
Thank you for contacting us at Amazon.com.
This email is in response to your recent phone contact regarding the reviews submitted for ASINs: 1403144850 and 088404632X.
Your reviews for the above books were removed because your comments in large part focused on authors and their intentions, rather than reviewing the item itself.
Our guidelines do not allow discussions that criticize authors or their intentions. We encourage all voices to respond openly in our store, both positive and negative. However, we do exert some editorial control over our customer reviews.
As such, your review cannot be posted on Amazon.com in its current format. What I can suggest is that you resubmit your review, restricting your comments to critically analyzing the content of the
item.Best regards,
[redacted]
Amazon.com Customer ServiceI replied:
I have an email acknowledging that these reviews do not violate the guidelines. I insist that they be re-posted.
Go back and READ THE REVIEW. They say NOTHING about the author or his intentions. NOT ONE THING. I ONLY ANALYZE THE TEXT OF THE BOOK, EXACTLY AS THE GUIDELINES SAY.
I talk about the BOOK. I quote the BOOK. NOTHING ELSE.
I can forward you the emails from amazon.com acknowledging that the reviews do not violate the guidelines.
Please show me that Amazon.com’s sites are a place for the free exchange
of ideas when the guidelines are followed.Thank you for your quick reply.
On April 13th, they answered that I was correct. The review could be posted:
Thank you for contacting us at Amazon.com.
I understand your concern with regard to the reviews submitted for the asins 1403144850 and 088404632X.
We have gone through the revised text of the review for the asin 088404632X [the Dianetics review] and found that this can be submitted. Hence I have submitted this review and will appear on the website shortly.
However, I wish to inform you that we will not be able to post the other review for the asin 1403144850 in its current format.
I understand that you are upset, and I regret that we have not been able to address your concerns to your satisfaction. Unfortunately, we will not be able to offer any additional insight or action on these matters.
Best regards,
[redacted]
Amazon.com Customer ServiceThe review went up.
Two days later, it disappeared again.
I called, insisting that the review be reposted, since I had their word in writing that it followed the guidelines. The customer service rep again said she would have the representatives who handled reviews email me.
I received this answer on April 16th:
Thank you for writing back to us at Amazon.com.
First, please allow me to extend my most sincere apologies for any frustration this matter has caused. It is certainly not our intention for our customer to have anything but a pleasant experience at Amazon.com.
After researching, I found that you have submitted 3 reviews for this title “Dianetics.†At this time, I am not sure which review you are referring to and would like to get posted.
Best regards,
Rox
Amazon.com Customer ServiceI clarified for her.
In the meantime, there is a discussion board for every book on Amazon.com. There were 7 or 8 active discussions about he censorship of 1-star reviews. I made a post about the issue. I said I suspected that “a certain organization†was likely sending massive amounts of protest email until any and all 1-star reviews are removed. I received a reply there saying I was violating the terms of use of the discussion board and that my theory was “nuts.†I told the poster that I had read the guidelines and was not violating them, and that, anyway, he wasn’t in charge. I asked him, if my theory was “nuts,†for his theory on why with a book this controversial, there was not one single 1-star review.
A few hours later, the entire discussion board was erased.
When I saw that, I started a new discussion:
Not only have ALL the 1-star reviews of Dianetics been removed, now amazon.com has erased all the discussion boards ABOUT that fact.
The people at this company need to take a hard look at who they are. And what it means to host a public forum where people express honest opinions about a product.
What you’re doing is cowardly and unethical.
Another person posted this:
I have to agree. I was somewhat startled to see that a book as controversial as “Dianetics” had only one 2-star rating, but over 240 positive ratings.
Widening my search, I found that *all* L. Ron Hubbard books seem to have 5-star ratings.
Given the obsession with image Scientology has displayed, and their known and widely documented aggressive tactics (including ordering Sea Org members to take low-level jobs in any company, governmental office or organization they want information on,) I fear I’m going to sound as if I’m donning my tinfoil hat, but really…what’s going on?
Amazon hasn’t caved to other pressures, keeping a firm stance on the Freedom of Speech issue so far. Please don’t disappoint now.
The next morning, I received the first truly human reply from a customer service representative, rather than the same run around, and signed with a first and last name (I have removed them here, but can provide them if necessary). I almost started crying:
Dear Mr. Bradley,
Hello, and thanks for contacting us back at Amazon.com. I deeply appreciate the time you’ve devoted to this issue.
Please know that your opinion is important. Our site isn’t of much help unless potential buyers get a chance to see a balanced range of opinions, especially where something as subjective as one’s taste in reading is concerned.
As I was just as uncertain why the three reviews you’ve submitted for “Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health” by L. Ron Hubbard were removed, I’ve contacted our Review Board for specifics. I was informed that the reviews were pulled because they either came across as somewhat spiteful, seemed to be an attack on the author’s methodology (which goes toward an author’s intentions, which we can’t know,) or seemed an attempt to cover the author’s political leanings.
Having read all three of your reviews, I must admit to being equally in the dark, as every one of the submissions seem to provide your opinion of a book you’ve obviously read–and this is all we can ask of our customers. Therefore, I’m seeking further clarification before going further. I hope to have specific examples, more helpful information, or to get your most recent review submission reinstated, within the next 7-10 business days.
My name is ————– ————-, and I’ll be personally monitoring your account until we can obtain more satisfactory information. I’m here Tuesday through Saturday from 5:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M. Eastern time. While I will see any correspondence you send, it’s possible that my colleagues may respond to you before I get a chance to do so. In such a case, please rest assured that you’ll be hearing from me anyway regarding any issues you’ve brought forth. While I don’t have a direct phone line, I’ll be happy to call you, should you wish it.
Mr. Bradley, I’d like to thank you again for bringing this to our attention in the first place, and for your patience and perseverance. Determined, loyal customers like yourself are the sole reason we’re still here today.
Thanks again for contacting us. You’ll be hearing from me within the next few business days.
Best regards,
————– —————
Amazon.com Customer ServiceI replied:
Dear Ms. ———–
First, thank you. Amazon.com is incredibly lucky to have you.
I’ve looked at the guidelines carefully. There is nothing there that says a reviewer can’t criticize a scientist’s scientific method, nor is there anything about not criticizing the political aspects of a book. It’s just not there. These are the reasons given for removing my reviews. The people removing the reviews are making up new rules as the go along.
I also looked up a word mentioned in the guidelines: “spiteful.” The definition is, “Petty ill will or hatred with the disposition to irritate, annoy, or thwart.
My concerns are not petty. This book contains assertions that gay men and lesbians can be identified by their exaggerated or shrunken genitalia. A concern about this issue is warranted.
My interest in reviewing this book has nothing to do with hating or thwarting anyone. I celebrate the fact that this book exists. I strongly support this author’s right to say whatever he wants about gays, lesbians or anyone else. But MY right to be heard, and the rights of others who find this book disturbing to be heard, need to be respected, too.
I have a theory as to what’s happening. The reps working in reviews are likely being inundated with complaint emails and have decided it’s easier just to delete the reviews in question. While I sympathize, this is completely unethical and allows unethical people the unfettered ability to stifle free speech.
Thank you for staying on this. I will look for your email regarding this issue.
Truly, I leave you the reader to your own conclusions. I spoke at length with another associate about this, and he felt that Amazon may very well be applying a strict guideline policy across the board and are in fact NOT singling Scientology books. I am not sure I agree, but I respect this person’s opinion. I think now the test would be to find similarly controversial books and compare Amazon’s editorial policy on those authors/books.
I don’t wish to pick on anyone, even YouTube. They have procedures in place to protect the public. I am not sure WHY Mark Bunker’s account has continued to stay suspended, despite the high profile pressure being applied around the globe to have it back up. PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR FROM JASON BEGHE. What he has to say is relevant and significant to the discussion of Scientology, and its practices and alleged abuses. I would think YouTube, as a business, not an agenda-setting entity, would want that traffic. This is the issue. Perhaps this requires a new post. I encourage discussion on this Amazon issue. We want to be fair and not hurl canards and invectives falsely.
Pink Stripe WordPress Theme Designed by Joni Mueller &
Oh, dear. Oh, dearie dear.
It seems that Scientology has a deeper understanding of spamming culture than two mega-giants of the internet.
I have to wonder: Did the first Jason Beghe video get 2+ million hits because people were interested or did it get about 200,000 hits and 1.8 million sea org members toiling all day watching and flagging the video?
This would make sense to me.
Comment by Satan with a lisp — April 18, 2008 @ 10:49 am
Wow. That is amazing. Having read Dianetics, I wrote a review as well, and it was removed, despite also addressing the content of the book only, and commenting on the complete absence of scientific rigor.
However, given that I have work, family, and other obligations competing for my time, I did not pursue the matter like the person whose story you posted.
I am aghast at the continual abuse Amazon is perpetrating on its customers by removing negative reviews that might give them perspective on the book prior to purchase. At best, Amazon is censoring reviews in order to sell more books (even really bad ones), at worst, it’s in league with the “church” of Scientology.
Having read this account of the repeated deletions, repeated nitpicky and invalid defenses of those deletions, and Amazon’s general intractibility on the subject, I find the company’s actions egregious and harmful. I will not be purchasing ANYTHING by means of Amazon going forward. Having one decent employee (and how thankful I am that there is ONE) doesn’t make Amazon an honest broker. There is clearly a policy of some sort that violates standards of ethical conduct.
Hey Amazon — you just lost a customer, forever, and more are heading for the door. You disgust me.
Thanks, Dawn, for the heads up.
Comment by Resolute Anon — April 18, 2008 @ 10:52 am
I’ve been watching the Amazon reviews for Dianetics for a few years now. I remember all of those negative reviews (and have voted them as useful time and time again). I, too, have been alarmed at how all of the negative reviews (most of which were very well written) have disappeared. I hope the OP gets this resolved.
I am hopeful that at least the tags for the books are still negative (avoid at all costs, waste of time and money, fraud, how to be a loon like tom cruise, how to never see your loved ones again, etc.).
Comment by lronymous — April 18, 2008 @ 10:53 am
I see no editing of reviews of inflammatory works such as The Da Vinci Code
http://www.amazon.com/review/product/1400079179/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
Or even of other controversial religious texts such as the Qur’an
http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Quran-English-Translation-Commentary/dp/091332101X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208530161&sr=1-3
Or even the Book of Mormon
http://www.amazon.com/Book-Mormon-Another-Testament-Official/dp/0967686563/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208530044&sr=1-1
Amazon is talking out of both sides of it’s mouth.
Comment by MisterTastee — April 18, 2008 @ 10:56 am
[...] there’s an entire wing for Scientologists in it. And another one for corrupt corporate flaks. GlossLip More Scientology Censoring: Amazon.com Review Guidelines Disallows Critiques Of Authors Or … __________________ “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” ~ Albert [...]
Pingback by Evidence that Amazon IS deliberately censoring - Enturbulation.org Activism Forums — April 18, 2008 @ 10:56 am
Tinfoil hat; But I am starting to wonder if Operation Snow White was ever discontinued. If looked from that context, the drive to recruit actors was a just a move to control Hollywood and the media. I am now wondering if C0$ was doing the same for other less than glamorous fields. Getting their people into positions of importance in various large companies and national governmental bodies.
Comment by Anon-10432 — April 18, 2008 @ 10:57 am
After reading this article I am quite disturbed at the actions of Amazon. It seems to me that they are trying to remove anything regarding the controversial nature of LRH and his cult. It is by tryin to eliminate the controversy that they are themselves creating a much larger one. Rest assured, should this practice of baning balanced reviews continue, I will promptly remove my account from Amazon.com.
I will be following this story with great intrest. Dawn, please keep us informed with any and all updates as they become available. Free speech CAN NOT and WILL NOT be denied. It is with people like you, Mark, Tory, and Mr. Bradley that we can stand up to those trying to silence both our individual and collective voices.
Sincerely,
AnonyMAX
Comment by AnonyMAX — April 18, 2008 @ 11:01 am
copyright@amazon.com
ecr@amazon.com (Executive Customer Relations)
A small mail might do the trick.
Anyone else got some addresses?
Comment by EastAnon — April 18, 2008 @ 11:03 am
resolution@amazon.com
Comment by EastAnon — April 18, 2008 @ 11:05 am
Did you notice that almost noone finds those 5-Star-reviews helpful?
28 of 1,017 people
24 of 932 people
21 of 911 people…
The review that gets the most thumbs up is… the only (!) 2 star review out of those 247 (!). I rest my case…
Comment by Jolly — April 18, 2008 @ 11:07 am
Is Jeff Bezos a Scientologist????? Hmmmmm.
Comment by Capcom — April 18, 2008 @ 11:09 am
I just emailed Amazon.com and demanded that they delete my account and all personal information because they have tailored their review deletion policy to censor critics of the CoS.
I informed them that if they did not do so immediately, I would consider all my options including bringing a civil action against them. Noted that I write appellate briefs for a living and that I would love for them to “make my day.”
I’ve made large purchases from Amazon in the past, including the watch I wear today….
Comment by AnonymousNow — April 18, 2008 @ 11:24 am
That seems to be more than merely the application of strict guidelines, given that the reviews were repeatedly recognized as within the rules. And deleting a whole board? That’s downright crazy.
My personal tinfoil theory is infiltrators within Amazon. The sale of Dianetics has always been very important to $cientology. It wouldn’t surprise me if they sent some agents in when they realized Amazon was a book-selling giant.
Comment by anonymous — April 18, 2008 @ 11:28 am
Dear Sir/Madam,
I’ve been watching how Amazon censors critics of the Church of Scientology, particularly with regard to Dianetics reviews. In fact, you have recently altered your written policy for the benefit of the church of scientology, because your prior acts of censorship– deleting unfavorable reviews of Dianetics– was contrary to your written policy.
That Amazon would attempt to shape reality in favor of this destructive cult that destroys lives and families is absolutely beyond the pale.
I no longer desire to conduct business with your firm, and I do not feel safe that my personal information is in your possession. I’ve already halted all your emails, but that is not nearly enough.
I demand that Amazon cancel my account and delete all personal information immediately.
User name: xxxxxxxx
password: XXXXXXX
I write appellate briefs for a living. I’m very very good at what I do. If you do not immediately delete all my person information, I will consider my options.
SDFSDF SDSDF, J.D.
NYC
Comment by AnonymousNow — April 18, 2008 @ 11:38 am
Hmmm… barnesandnoble.com is also seemingly bereft of any bad reviews of Dianetics.
E-mail I just sent to Amazon:
I am writing to request that my Amazon account be closed immediately. I am incredibly disturbed by a post at Glosslip.com (http://glosslip.com/2008/04/18/more-scientology-censoring-amazoncom-review-guidelines-disallow-critics-of-authors-or-their-intentions/#more-3306) regarding the unfathomable and ongoing censorship of reviews unfavorable to L. Ron Hubbard’s books.
In light of the fairly conclusive evidence that something very odd is afoot at Amazon, I can no longer trust your organization with my business, especially considering that there are so many other outlets that can easily fulfill my book-buying needs.
Thank you for your consideration.
Comment by beecher — April 18, 2008 @ 11:42 am
Guys, slow down. I don’t think closing down your accounts is such a good thing. It might be better keeping them so that you can complain about the censoring going on. For god’s sake, don’t cut off your nose to spite your face! We’ve already had one plant/stupid person suggest this kind of response to the takedown of Magoo and WBM’s channels. It’s not such a good idea, imho.
Also, wtf, sending your password to Amazon employees?
Comment by anonymous — April 18, 2008 @ 11:52 am
Here is an excerpt from a one-star rating about my book, The Origin of Species:
Each creature brings forth after its own kind. That’s no theory; that’s a fact. Why then should we believe that man comes from another species? If evolution is true, then it is proof that the Bible is false. However, the whole of creation stands in contradiction to the theory of evolution.
Comment by Charles Darwin — April 18, 2008 @ 11:55 am
I just canceled my account as well and informed them that their complicity in aiding COS has cost them money and invited salvos from all who are fighting to defend free speech.
Comment by jeannie36832 — April 18, 2008 @ 11:56 am
Meh, I haven’t ordered anything from there in a while anyway. Hell, my CC data was seriously outdated, so I don’t have anything to lose. And this really IS disturbing to me… I wasn’t lying, I really don’t trust them with my info anymore.
Comment by beecher — April 18, 2008 @ 11:58 am
Also, money talks, this isn’t like YouTube, which we need for getting the word out. This is about where we spend our money and closing accounts sends a BIG message to Amazon.
Comment by jeannie36832 — April 18, 2008 @ 11:59 am
[...] Evidence that Amazon IS deliberately censoring My email: I recently read this article: GlossLip More Scientology Censoring: Amazon.com Review Guidelines Disallows Critiques Of Authors Or … To sum it up, basically the theme is that Amazon.com, or persons inside the business, is involved [...]
Pingback by Evidence that Amazon IS deliberately censoring - Enturbulation.org Activism Forums — April 18, 2008 @ 11:59 am
I just sent ecr@amazon.com an email letting them know, politely and professionally, that I will not be making any more purchases until Dawn is satisfied that they’re not taking orders from Scientologists. Considering that I normally spend a thousand dollars or more a year at Amazon, hopefully seeing that hitting them in their pocketbooks will help.
Comment by Zanon — April 18, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
“Guys, slow down. I don’t think closing down your accounts is such a good thing. It might be better keeping them so that you can complain about the censoring going on. For god’s sake, don’t cut off your nose to spite your face! We’ve already had one plant/stupid person suggest this kind of response to the takedown of Magoo and WBM’s channels. It’s not such a good idea, imho.”
Dude, this has been going on quite a long time, and now they have gone for broke by actually altering their policy for the benefit of the CoS.
You seem to be infering that this will somehow backfire, without any sort of logic analysis in that regard. Nope, I think the most important thing to Amazon is the bottom line, and that they have already shown that they will not listen otherwise.
You also seem to infer that it is self destructive to cancel an Amazon account, as if Amazon is not one in a million retailors, don’t know what is behind that position either.
Comment by AnonymousNow — April 18, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Just canceled amazon acct. -
question:If I click on the ads for “Scientology”, Scientology has to pay google more money and then they pay glosslip or enturb? or whomever??
Comment by Angelfood — April 18, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
Has anyone forwarded this to the EFF? They love this sort of thing.
Well, not love really. More like Hate. Hate with a burning passion that they love.
Comment by Anonymous — April 18, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
My e-mail to amazon:
It is discouraging to find that you are editing out negative reviews of books, specifically DIANETICS by Hubbard. I have been a customer for a number of years, but this causes me to worry that other aspects of your operation have been corrupted.
See http://glosslip.com/2008/04/18/more-scientology-censoring-amazoncom-review-guidelines-disallow-critics-of-authors-or-their-intentions/
Hopefully you will find a way to allow all serious reviews of books, products, services, etc. to remain on the site and act as a guide for all. It is good business. Honesty is appreciated by most of your customer base.
Sincerely,
Chip Gallo
Comment by Chip Gallo — April 18, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
And also, I’m quite certain that the Amazon website wherein i lodged my complaint has my password…..
Comment by AnonymousNow — April 18, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
this is a very controversial book I’m sure you all remember. Check out the reviews, nearly every review (most of which are one star) definitely fall into Amazon’s definition of “spiteful”. A few of these even attack the author directly without mentioning the content of the book, yet these reviews remain uncensored.
Comment by lloyd — April 18, 2008 @ 12:33 pm
if i had an amazon account, it would no longer exist.
never been one for shopping online, myself…
deleting a youtube account would essentially be silencing oneself, as only registered users are allowed to post comments. deleting an amazon account, however, when comments are being wantonly censored, will certainly send a message. that’s lost $$$. serious business.
Comment by doublethink — April 18, 2008 @ 12:36 pm
“if i had an amazon account, it would no longer exist.
never been one for shopping online, myself…
deleting a youtube account would essentially be silencing oneself, as only registered users are allowed to post comments. deleting an amazon account, however, when comments are being wantonly censored, will certainly send a message. that’s lost $$$. serious business.”
This is exactly the distinction the above poster missess– Amazon and YouTube provide completely different services. I also would not delete my youtube account, apples and oranges.
Comment by AnonymousNow — April 18, 2008 @ 12:52 pm
As I stated in my previous post, should this issue not be resolved, I will cancel my account as well. In the interim, I will be sending out a strongly worded letter to their corporate office to express my extreme displeasure with their recent actions.
Comment by AnonyMAX — April 18, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
ALL of his CoS related books have 4.5-5 stars! One version of Dyanetics has about 250 reviews and is 5-stars! Even his sci-fi hover around 4 stars! LOL!!!
NO author has ratings like this. And most real-life people think L-Ron’s books are crap, at best.
There’s GOT to be a brain-washed plant working there. No one buys these books except Scios… heck, before the web, they used to go to bookstores, buy up all the copies of his books (all types), go back to an Org, rebox them, re-wholesale them back to the bookstores, and start it all up again! These clowns just want the ratings/sales ranks, but most people know it’s BS.
Pity those that don’t…
Comment by DeadFace — April 18, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
It’s worth noting that there is another controversial book on Amazon, written by a huckster who has been accused of (allegedly) peddling dangerous medical information to bilk the public and line his pockets: Kevin Trudeau’s “Natural Cures They Don’t Want You To Know About.” The Amazon.com listing for this book shows over 1,200 five-star reviews for the book — and over 800 one-star reviews: http://tinyurl.com/4qp89o
It’s interesting that Amazon has allowed these one-star reviews to remain, yet they are removing negative reviews of “Dianetics.” Someone (three guesses who) must be exerting a *lot* of pressure to have those negative reviews of Hubbard removed.
Comment by Modemac — April 18, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
Interesting too that in one of his books Kevin Trudeau MENTIONS doing the Purification Rundown by L. Ron Hubbard. I wouldn’t doubt for a minute that Trudeau is a Scieno.
As for the reviews, I am an EX-MEMBER (15 years in).
I can tell you without pause that they most CERTAINLY DO go on book selling and book reviewing campaigns. They used to call all of us and/or email every so often and get us all buying books like crazy. The wealthy members would buy copies by the thousands. They try to make it look like L. Ron Hubbard’s work is selling like hotcakes and has 5 star ratings and is NY Times Best Seller list material. They also DO send people in to infiltrate newspaper, magazines and other publications (and probably Amazon too!)…they have “plants” all over the place to censor bad PR and to write good PR and articles where ever possible. Don’t be surprised if there IS a person working at Amazon and all the letters back and forth are just “noise” being created (according to church policies) to get you to shut up, give up and go away.
Nuff said. I could go on and on and on ad nauseum but I won’t. Suffice it to say that the Church works very hard to make sure there is nothing but good PR and will go to ANY (and I do mean ANY) lengths to silence their critics and critics of the writings of their founder.
Comment by Cindy — April 18, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
I agree with #22 - I just canceled my amazon account as well. Seems they are a hell of a lot more interested in shilling for HubTard than free speech. Maybe one account won’t matter, but I bet if there as many people out there as outraged as I am about this as I think there are then…maybe, just maybe, they will take notice. That’s all one man can do…
Comment by Tom — April 18, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
Book of Mormon: 330 Reviews (5 Star - 195; 1 Star - 98)
Koran (Penguin): 75 Reviews (5 Star - 16; 1 Star - 25)
Boldtext Pew Bible KJV: 232 Reviews (5 Star - 118; 1 Star - 71)
Dianetics: 247 Reviews (5 Star - 221; 1 Star - 0) … I don’t think so.
Comment by Calypygian — April 18, 2008 @ 7:14 pm
I can’t believe that Youtube suspended Mark Bunker’s account again. Eeeeerrrrgggg! We’ll help get it reinstates, this will only create more backlash against the Co$. This is my we protest against that corrupt organization.
Comment by sk8mike — April 18, 2008 @ 7:22 pm
The amazon.com thing is indeed unsettling. How could one shop for anything, especially books, if the reviews are censored. That defeats the entire purpose of the site. I’m afraid I will be purchasing my books elsewhere as well, at least until I can somehow be reassured that the reviews are in fact balanced and unfavored. I will not be duped into buying garbage from COS or anyone else.
Comment by observer — April 18, 2008 @ 8:55 pm
[...] and it is IMPOSSIBLE to get to anyone who will actually take an interest in something like this. GlossLip More Scientology Censoring: Amazon.com Review Guidelines Disallows Critiques Of Authors Or … Any ideas? __________________ Crazy Scientology lady says: "We’re legally a fuckin’ [...]
Pingback by What to do about AMAZON - Enturbulation.org Activism Forums — April 18, 2008 @ 10:55 pm
Amazon has a longstanding policy of removing anything “controversial” in their reviews. It’s definitely not limited to Scientology material, although it’s not surprising that the CoS drones have figured out exactly how to work the Amazon system to make sure nothing negative stays up for long.
Comment by Kati — April 19, 2008 @ 1:20 am
Not surprising to hear this. The CO$ has had thousands of anti-CO$ comments deleted from the message boards at IMDb (which is owned by Amazon.) Sometimes the comments will disappear within minutes of posting - no doubt in my mind that there are Scieno admins working for IMDb.
Comment by Shazbot — April 19, 2008 @ 8:26 am
[...] review of Scientology was removed multiple times. I really think you guys should read it. GlossLip » More Scientology Censoring: Amazon.com Review Guidelines Disallows Critiques Of Authors O… As a published author with a book on Amazon, it would be unthinkable that I would expect Amazon to [...]
Pingback by Amazon <3 Scientology ... AGAIN - SLUniverse Forums — April 19, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
It’s not just L RON, but there is a general problem of author’s gaming the Amazon system. The authors have a bias to wanting positive reviews, comments, etc. And the site has a bit of a bias to wanting positive reviews as well. You can actually read good articles on this whole issue. Admittedly CoS is gaming the system like mofos…but this is just clear sign of a broader problem.
Comment by TCO — April 19, 2008 @ 2:14 pm
I had been a customer of Amazon since 1998. Here is my disconnect e-mail, sent today:
Please close my account. I will not do business with a company that participates in censorship like Amazon has been doing and provides misleading answers when called out on it. The books reviews of Scientology books are clearly being manipulated. It is a serious enough matter that a 10 year customer is throwing in the towel and going with your competitors.
Comment by Chip Gallo — April 19, 2008 @ 2:17 pm
[...] can work to prevent that. I’m particularly upset at recent actions of Amazon and Ebay, overtly supporting scientology. I’m not planning to use either of their services anytime soon now, if ever. Also [...]
Pingback by Alternatives - SLUniverse Forums — April 19, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
I saw some comments on Amazon accusing people of setting up “shill” accounts for no other purpose than to post a glowing report about the book “Dianetics.” I wanted to check this out myself, so, I selected one of the 5-star glowing reports and went to the author’s profile. Sure enough, the profile was nearly empty and listed only one book review. He listed his city as Portland, Oregon, and his profile name was listed as a “real name” but he also listed his nickname as: “dianeticsauditor.” So, there you are. It appears while Amazon is allowing positive reviews of this book from people who have set up shill accounts for no other purpose than to push this book, it deletes negative reviews from it’s long-time established customers. Shameful.
Comment by Dennis — April 19, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
In response to my disconnect notice, Amazon sent me an e-mail with a long list of all their related services that I would no longer be able to access. It reminded me of the conversations an ethics officer at the cult would have about loss of friends, family, employment, etc. if one became free from Scientology’s tentacles.
I’m choosing freedom of speech and ideas over Amazon’s kind of one-button/one-idea world. They have forgotten how the United States is supposed to work.
Comment by Chip Gallo — April 20, 2008 @ 11:40 am
Chip any chance you can post some of that response here? Will be interesting if their response to others who have cancelled their account matches.
Comment by Mitsu Too — April 20, 2008 @ 5:18 pm
Wow, 47 of the most paranoid comments I’ve ever read. Scn is out to get you and is controlling Amazon. Yeah, right. I’ve told Amazon what a great job they’re doing in keeping the reviews clean — I’m going to call up a hundred people to do the same thing (joke).
Comment by abe lincoln — April 20, 2008 @ 11:12 pm
abe lincoln, no one’s claiming this is some huge important conspiracy. It’s just one more stupid little way Scientology tries to silence criticism. Nothing paranoid about recognizing the plain facts.
I mean, do you honestly think nothing suspicious is going on? Honestly? Come on.
Comment by Dave2 — April 21, 2008 @ 2:45 am
“Perversion, as an illness, has so many manifestations that it must be spread over the entire gamut of classes from 1 to 5 above. Overdevelopment of the sexual organs, underdevelopment, seminal inhibition or magnification, etc., are found some in one pervert, some in another.”
Ha ha L. Ron Hubbard was a fat man with a tiny dick.
Comment by illegal — April 21, 2008 @ 2:56 pm
the answer is fairly obvious. oversight or not, someone is removing the reviews by hand. amazon is a large company, there is a population of scilon workers inside. last time i checked, amazon’s intranet was accessible to all workers with the password. my guess is its an inside job.
Comment by Hypatea — April 21, 2008 @ 8:00 pm
I had the same experience:
http://koavf.blogspot.com/2008/02/dianetics-diaries.html
I have since called and been assured that I would receive an e-mail from the Reviews Department at Amazon; this never occurred. Boo to Amazon.
Comment by Justin Anthony Knapp — April 22, 2008 @ 3:13 pm
And the reviews are back!
And back-dated!
http://www.amazon.com/review/product/0884042693/ref=cm_cr_dp_hist_1?%5Fencoding=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar
Comment by Justin Anthony Knapp — April 24, 2008 @ 1:02 am
They’re deleting them again…mine vanished yeasterday afternoon, even with several hundred “helpful” votes.
Comment by Jennifer — April 29, 2008 @ 6:50 pm
[...] in doing this because it seems that Amazon has a track record of altering these records. GlossLip More Scientology Censoring: Amazon.com Review Guidelines Disallows Critiques Of Authors Or … There was a thread on this: Evidence that Amazon IS deliberately censoring __________________ [...]
Pingback by Operation: Amazon.Com - Enturbulation.org Activism Forums — May 11, 2008 @ 8:45 am
[...] the past, Glosslip had exposed other anti-Scientology censorship within the Amazon organization, stemming form negative reviews disappearing about books written by Scientology found, [...]
Pingback by GlossLip » Tom Cruise Meets With Amazon, Now Amazon UK Pulling Scientology Expose From Site - Coincidence? — November 12, 2008 @ 3:02 pm
(not for publication)
Correction: In the opening item here, “this is brief a few days ago” should be “this briefly a few days ago”
This excellent discussion should be seen by everyone who is concerned over the scientology invasion of our civil rights…!
Comment by James Randi — November 14, 2008 @ 9:51 am
wow, thanks for the information. I came across your article on Metafilter. It appears that Amazon is OWNED, not surprising though, the Church of Scientology has ALOT of money and everyone has a price-including those who run Amazon. Thanks for taking the time to stand up for GLBT and everyone else that Hubbard condemns.
Comment by noyfb — November 15, 2008 @ 10:32 am