This seems to be worth a new thread. David Boyd pointed out than when one searches for "John Bear" in Amazon, the first thing up is a listing for Peterson's Guide to Distance Learning, a direct competitor of Bears' Guide. Oxpecker posted a screenshot of this outrage. According to the Amazon liaison at Ten Speed Press, this is common practice. For a fee, Amazon will sell "search results," even when they are not (or contrary to) what the searcher is looking for. Since Peterson's themselves sell what looks like editorial copy in their guides, which is actually paid advertising, it seems to be of the same cloth. One wonders if the fake search has to be relevant? Can we buy a Bears' Guide 'hit' when someone searches for Harry Potter, The DaVinci Code or How to Fillet Trout?
I can understand, from a business perspective, how this service would be attractive (to those purchasing it), but from a consumer pov, it feels kind of dodgy. If I wanted to search for a specific author, I would expect only to pull up those items authored by that person. Searching for a subject would be different, of course -- then I would expect to see many different items, including those I necessarily hadn't considered. Hmm. Does Amazon make this info public on their website for consumers?
Interestingly, if you search for: "John Bear" you find him. It's only when you search for: John Bear that Peterson's pops up. Tom Nixon
Most peculiar. And if we do an Amazon search for Tom Nixon the first find is Tom's book on high school degrees. But if we search for "Tom Nixon" that book is not found at all, among the 22 hits, of which the first two are books by a different Tom Nixon on salesmanship, and on fly tying. Most baffling.
I'd say the practice is dishonest if not legally so. The other practice of listing books of "similar interest" is, IMO, a good one and should be sufficient to meeting the needs, wants, hopes and peccadillos of all.
The Peterson's book is listed as the "most popular" result for the search for John Bear. I think that a reasonable person would assume that the Peterson's book is the most popular purchase made by people who searched for John Bear. If this is untrue, then I think this is fraud. They could list the Peterson's book at the top, but with the heading "Sponsored results" or somesuch.
Yes, I like this feature, too, and it has led me to several finds that I did not previously know about. However, if I'm searching for John Bear, by golly, that's all I want to turn up in my main search results section.
My view is that it is similar issues that have apparently made Google the most popular search engine. Google was more careful about how they sold advertising services. It made the Google engine more useful. Hopefully Amazon will learn a lesson taught by the consumers as well.
However, you do find me if you do: "Thomas Nixon" It is rather odd. Clearly I should have bought some advertising. Tom Nixon
Oxpecker: "The Peterson's book is listed as the "most popular" result for the search for John Bear. I think that a reasonable person would assume that the Peterson's book is the most popular purchase made by people who searched for John Bear. If this is untrue, then I think this is fraud. They could list the Peterson's book at the top, but with the heading "Sponsored results" or somesuch." As of this Wednesday afternoon, Amazon rankings: Bears' Guide: 25,741 Peterson's Guide: 54,508 As Nero Wolfe says, "Pfui."
And as Archie says, "They're meatheads!" Or maybe that was some other Archie. Not for nothing but I think that 'Peterson's' just sounds more authoritative than does 'Bears''. Could 'Bear's Guide' (from here on) be changed to something sounding more...weighty?
Decimon: Not for nothing but I think that 'Peterson's' just sounds more authoritative than does 'Bears''. Could 'Bear's Guide' (from here on) be changed to something sounding more...weighty? John Bear: Dolly Dimple's Guide to . . . But seriously, I quite agree. If I had anything to do with Ten Speed Press (which I don't), I would very seriously consider a new name. For the books, not me, I hasten to add. Ten Speed seems to think they have a 'brand name' situation going, but sales, especially of the spin-offs (the books on MBAs, computer degrees and education degrees) don't reflect that. After Ten Speed acquired the rights (10th ed., as I recall), they changed the title to "How To Get the Degree You Want." Sales plunged. Just because they've sold more than a million copies of What Color is Your Parachute, How to Shit in the Woods, White Trash Cooking, The Moosewood Cookbook, and other fine books, doesn't mean they always win in the retitling game.
Cool. Then you could build your San Simeon next to Dr. Bear's. But ya know, whereas 'Bear' conjures the image of a full entity, either fierce or cuddly, 'Oxpecker' suggests what you can expect from a degree mill.
Yes this is disturbing. It also highlights the dangers of using the internet search engines and its portals for doing "objective" research. The dot coms will stoop to almost anything to generate revenue. This Amazon trick seems to be a kissing cousin of "Google bombing, " as when googling on "miserable failure" you are linked to the White House site (or at least used to be; I haven't checked it lately.) All of this just goes to show that when you do a search on the internet you are not performing an objective, random sampling. There's a lot going on behind the scenes - all or most of it designed to make money or give results that look innocuous but really are not. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3298443.stm
Actually, now when you google "miserable failure" you get the White House site at the top, then the "Biography of Jimmy Carter" page, then michaelmoore.com. There are a lot of people/groups with way too much time on their hands. Perhaps "miserable failure" should be reserved for Google as an objective research tool.
A basic law of technology is that you only get smart results from smart tools when they are used by smart people.
