Recent Comment
Spotlight
- Reader Michael Megalli writes: It is difficult to engage in genuine conversations with the marketplace when you can't change the reality of how a company does business, what it sells, how it works with partners, etc. [go]
Recent Comments
- JG: " The other question (whether it is mor ..." [go]
- Tom Nocera: " First, my hat is off to whomever at Fede ..." [go]
- Ciaran: " A few years back Google started giving o ..." [go]
- prefabrik yapı: " çok teşekkürler john cok güzel bi yaklas ..." [go]
- Steve Rhodes: " Google did underwrite Nova in 2005/6. ..." [go]
- Joel Fugazzotto: " What a nice post! It's a reminder to us ..." [go]
- nmw: " OMG -- not YET another post! :O (the pr ..." [go]
- SorenG: " Works for me. Curious how often the Zapr ..." [go]
- nmw: " Yes, I have to admit -- we still ..." [go]
- John Battelle: " @michael - I think there is a difference ..." [go]
- Michael Cohn: " Don't you think there's a difference bet ..." [go]
- JG: " This is one point, JG, where I think ..." [go]
- pz: " Glad ya'll are out there to inform us of ..." [go]
- David Mullings: " I know that if someone created a fan pag ..." [go]
- nmw: " This is one point, JG, where I think< ..." [go]
- JG: " google lets you play with the machine ..." [go]
PERFECT FOR THAT PERSON WITH EVERYTHING
Order 'The Search'
Yup, it makes the perfect gift for that officemate or colleague who you thought had everything....including you! If you order here, I promise to sign it, assuming we can figure out the shipping...
You can also buy the audio version here.
Check my book page for more info.
Blogger's Rights
Top Posts
- The Database of Intentions (or how this all got started)
- From Pull to Point(or the first post where I riff on the "Point-To Economy")
- Google As Builder (or the point at which Google stopped being simply a search engine)
- On Google v. Yahoo
- TV and Search Merge
- On Sell Side Advertising
- Battelle Gets Searchstreams
- Search and Immortality
- Toward the Endemic (on endemic advertising)
More coming soon...
Active Topics
- 35 comments: WTF??!!! (04.17)
- 26 comments: Twitter. Oh God. (04.30)
- 16 comments: The Future of Search Series (05.08)
- 16 comments: The Music In Magazines (05.07)
- 13 comments: Google. Does. Not Market. Except When It Does. (05.15)
Monthly Archives
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
About John Battelle
Searchblog Newsletter
Enter email to subscribe to Searchblog's newsletter:
Calendar
| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Syndicate
Powered by
March 21, 2006 2:39 PM
Abortion, Adoption, Amazon
This NYT story is getting some pickup across the mainstream mediasphere, it demonstrates how search and clickstream habits can create sticky political wickets. From the piece:
Amazon.com last week modified its search engine after an abortion rights organization complained that search results appeared skewed toward anti-abortion books.
Until a few days ago, a search of Amazon's catalog of books using the word "abortion" turned up pages with the question, "Did you mean adoption?" at the top, followed by a list of books related to abortion.
Amazon removed that question from the search results page after it received a complaint from a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, a national organization based in Washington.
In short, it seemed to the pro-choice group that Amazon had an editorial opinion. I am quite sure this is not true (Amazon denies it), but it's yet another example of how we see ourselves reflected - at least how we wish to see ourselves reflected - in the cultural mirror that is search. Amazon decided to disable the search suggestion, which, to be honest, *is* an editorial decision.
- Posted by John Battelle on March 21, 2006 2:39 PM
TrackBack
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Abortion, Adoption, Amazon:
» Automatisk redaktransvar? from Tversover
Amazon har fått klager fra folk som er for fri abort, (NYT, registrering nødvendig) etter at noen har funnet at man stort sett får bøker som er imot abort opp. I tillegg slår søkemotoren deres inn og spør o... [Read More]
- Tracked on March 22, 2006 6:23 AM
» Morals of Cyberspace from Mchel Foghl's Weblog
Here's an interesting reference to a Ney York Times article from John Battelle's blog John Battelle's Searchblog: Abortion, Adoption, Amazon. The full article is here Extract: Amazon Says Technology, Not Ideology, Skewed Results By LAURIE J. FLYNN Publ... [Read More]
- Tracked on March 23, 2006 4:14 AM
Comments
but customer is always right; isn't it?
Talking about editorial opinions...it seems that google has one too since they alter their organic search engine results based on your search history. The proof here: http://personomies.com/google-altering-organic-search-results/
Doh. I had not realized but the comment above is erroneous...as someone pointed out: personalized search is well...personalized search...
Honestly, I think this is thing with Amazon was just the software they were running; it did not know the word "abortion" and found the closest related word in it's vocabulary list "adoption". No one deliberately put that there - it just happened.
Reminds me of the stories about how inappropiate contextual advertising would occasionally appear next to news stories (I'm thinking of the case about a year ago in the New York Times when there was a grusome murder and some one was discovered packed in a suitcase - meanwhile a contextual ad for "sports luggage" appeared next to the story. It was quickly noticed and corrected - but no one deliberately set that up....it just happened.
Like you say, it's an editorial decision how it's handled - since some people want to be offended by this kind of thing - it makes sense to accomodate them up to a point. As long as they leave out that part with Amazon being Anti Choice or Pro Choice - Amazon probably had no position .
Here is an interesting perspective on Windows Vista and how it will affect online video, music, and photos.
Why Windows Vista Delay is Bad News for Apple and Google
http://mrwavetheory.blogspot.com/2006/03/why-windows-vista-delay-is-bad-news.html
Amazon’s search engine stills appears (and appearance is everything) oddly partisan–
A recent search on “abortion” on the "new" Amazon.com shows books for and against abortion. That makes sense if their system is bringing up products that have “abortion” in their descriptive text.
BUT on this search Amazon also offers “PRO LIFE” bracelets, and the descriptive text for these bracelets don’t even mention the word “abortion”.
Does Amazon allow their advertisers to associate their products with search terms that may not appear in their descriptions?
check out: www.DeathRoe.com for what others think of abortion.
Leave a comment