I’ve been monitoring the hyperactive #amazonfail tag on Twitter since yesterday evening. So much has been written about the actual issue (e.g. broken here and talked about here, here, here and everywhere) that there’s no point in me rehashing it. If it’s not all over the press by now, it will be soon, and it will become one of those long talked about corporate-mess-up-case-studies.
What makes the Amazon “glitch” so significant is not so much that it happened but that Amazon and its public created a situation in which it could happen. Amazon has become an Internet-retail-monopoly-of-sorts. It has earned its status by very strategic and effective business decisions and a consumer community that endorsed its approach. Let’s be honest, shopping on Amazon is more convenient and easier than going to the nearest box store or shopping mall, you don’t have to deal with bad customer service, there’s a wider selection and it arrives at your door. Who wouldn’t want to take advantage of that?
Many people question why the public is so worked up about the glitch and Amazon’s response. To me, the answer is obvious; Amazon has a responsibility to its merchandise, the people it represents and the people it serves. Even if there was a glitch in their computer system (and I don’t know anyone who has given this suggestion even passing endorsement), Amazon amplified a huge mistake into a public relations nightmare by dismissing it as a technological problem. Did they learn nothing from Tylenol???
Amazon made no fans except, perhaps those that are assumed to have lobbied Amazon against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender literature — adult and children’s books.
If this was indeed a glitch, Amazon needed to very quickly:
- admit that they made a mistake (it doesn’t matter that it was technological)
- admit that this mistake goes back to as early as February
- admit that there is a lot of evidence that supports the claim that a conscious decision was made
- assert that the mistake looks very bad for them
- admit that the public will be able draw many damning conclusions about the mistake
- assure the public that they have no biases against LGBT literature and art
- assure the public that they are working to identify and correct the mistake
- apologize to everyone whose work had been discriminated against by “glitch”
- apologize to the public for not being more careful
- apologize for not taking their responsibility more seriously
This is a classic case of a company dismissing the first rule of PR: “mess up; fess up”.
Instead, Amazon has provided ample evidence to support the common belief that it consciously made a significant and discriminatory change in their policy regarding books about alternative lifestyles, regardless of content. They’ve also opened the door to scrutiny about their more open policy for books that incite racial and religious hate.
This should serve as a wake up call for everyone that makes online purchases — share the wealth, spread the risk and buy from companies that take their responsibility seriously.

There’s a perception within the business community that promotional media needs to be carefully crafted and presented with a high shine. The focus is typically on senior executives that are positioned as the face of their companies while reading scripts that are refined to add a poetic wax to the talking head visuals. We’ve seen a lot of this over the last twenty years as high-quality production services have become increasingly affordable. The result is that corporate communications have become increasingly Hollywoodized.