A well thought out article, I felt.
The doom-mongers have been running wild on Twitter with the news that Amazon is to acquire Goodreads. Much of that nonsense is typical (hysterical) Amazon bashing, or reflexive defense of the status quo.
I’m not going to deal with the Chicken Little stuff. I have less and less patience with people who claim that Amazon has or is striving for some kind of evil monopoly that will subjugate authors and readers when all the evidence to date is that they will treat authors better than any publisher and provide readers with cheaper books, a bigger selection, and a better customer experience than any other retailer.
There are some more reasonable fears about what this purchase entails. I would like to deal with these in turn, then discuss how I think this acquisition will be beneficial to writers – particularly self-publishers. I respect the fact that this is a hot-button…
View original post 1,678 more words
It certainly addresses the main issues in a balanced manner.
So will probably be ignored or slated by the only people who were seriously concerned.
Well, it makes a nice counterpoint to all the “Amazon Is The Evil Empire And We’re All Doomed!” posts I’ve seen. Personally, I never found GoodReads all that useful, maybe Amazon will make it easier to actually do something with.
I borrow a lot from my local library and enjoy a wide range of books, so do not really use the recommendations. I could see Goodreads being more useful to people who (i) only enjoy a certain type (ii) need to purchase on a limited budget.
I too read David Gaughran’s piece and found it balanced and very thorough. As with most things the silent majority is muted by the vocal minority. I, as well as my literary friends, have Amazon accounts and buy books regularly. This is a non issue for me. Thanks for the post.