Thursday, April 5, 2012

An unthoughtful response to a critique of

MetaFilter posted this summary of a series of negative articles about Amazon that appeared in the Seattle Times...
In Part 1, the newspaper questions how much Amazon is doing for the local community.  
Part 2 suggests that Amazon is damaging the publishing industry.  
Part 3 asks if Amazon's tax-free status gives it an unfair advantage. 
And Part 4 wonders whether Amazon is bad for its own workers.
Without clicking through to any of the articles, and thus protecting myself from being overly informed, here is my part-by-part response and analysis...

  • Amazon isn't doing enough for the local community... Unless they're harming it, who cares?
  • Amazon is damaging the publishing industry... Again, but with more gusto, who cares?
  • Amazon is getting an unfair advantage with its tax-free status... If that advantage is passed on to their customers, namely...everyone, it stops being unfair sort of by definition. Unless it means unfair to their competitors, in which case...who cares?
  • Amazon is bad to their employees... Well if that's true, that sucks. Might have to click through on that one.


  1. I was going to read your response, but then I thought, "Who cares?"

  2. Anonymous the secondApril 5, 2012 at 2:39 PM

    Yep, I suggest reading about how Amazon treats their employees.

  3. I read part 4. The ST even states that Amazon has fewer injuries than similar companies of that size. This whole thing kind of seems like a needless smear campaign against Amazon.

  4. Part 4 sounds like someone trying to sniff out a story that never materializes.

  5. Anonymous sounds like a swindling hooked nose kike.