[komali2]

I don't understand this kind of callous judgement of writers trying to make money. We don't see judgement here for the Amazon engineers that wrote the ref system, or Amazon for, well, selling product. I find it frustrating - somehow the writer has no integrity because they want money for their work?

What, to you, would have been an acceptable way for this writer to present their research? Raw data handed to the internet on a silver platter as they bow out of the room and fund a server to allow us to access it?

I disagree that the article is clickBAIT. I agree that the writer picked a title that would garner clicks, and then they gave us some interesting (to me) research. It wasn't holistic, it doesn't tell us EVERYTHING about Amazon, no, but it gave me enough to Google if I'm more interested.

And if they're gonna link to Amazon products anyway, why wouldn't they use referral links? Are we going to lambast someone for seeing a harmless way to make some change and taking advantage of it?

[DanBC]

> I don't understand this kind of callous judgement of writers trying to make money. We don't see judgement here for the Amazon engineers that wrote the ref system, or Amazon for, well, selling product. I find it frustrating - somehow the writer has no integrity because they want money for their work?

I don't care that they use affiliate links.

Those links need to be clearly marked as affiliate links and the article needs to disclose the use of affiliate links.

[joshdance]

I disagree. I think all links to Amazon should be affiliate links. So if someone doesn't put them, I am disappointed in them. :)

[komali2]

Why?

[specialist]

I, for one, am keenly interested in all things Amazon.

I've been following L2 Inc for a few years now. Their analysis suggests switch to voice is enabling Amazon to diminish brand value.

"How Amazon is Dismantling Retail"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MOwRTTq1bY

Any independent analysis that confirms, refutes, or adds nuance piques my interest.

[Frondo]

"somehow the writer has no integrity because they want money for their work?"

Heck yeah, on this point, I'd much rather the writer get a few cents from anyone who chooses to buy the thing--crowd-source that revenue--than just a lump sum from a manufacturer.

[justicezyx]

> somehow the writer has no integrity because they want money for their work?

Writers job is writing article, spread news and knowledge, and make money.

If you write ads and claims it an article or news, you loss your integrity?

Does this sound reasonable to you?

[komali2]

Before you ask whether that sounds reasonable, I'd need to be convinced this is an ad. To me it is an article, one that apparently someone had to thumb through a couple hundred patent applications to write, among other research.

[justicezyx]

I used ads as an example.

The article can be described as an article embedded with Amazon afflicted links.

Put that in the disclaimer.

[throw2016]

The article is not pro amazon. It reveals new information. The writer has done research, tracked goods to their origin warehouses, even bought some products and reached out to multiple amazon executives for comment.

Clumping it together with the typical amazon affiliate click bait that offer the minimum bare basic content and exist solely for affiliate link income is misleading and uncharitable.

Google, Facebook, Snapchat all exist on ad income so in many ways writers, journalists and software engineers are on the same boat.