After reading the latest updates in the Authors vs. Bezos/amazilla stand-off in this AM's NY Times article, it was interesting to search back to the start as to how the WaPo reports on the matter.
As to be expected, quislings like Alyssa Rosenberg -- who thinks Got is not degrading of women as characters or actresses -- in the WaPo, tells us right up front, right the start of the battle, that amazilla is doing good for writers by holding up authors' books, denying customer service fulfillment on their books, and taking a much larger chunk of writers' earning for itself to fund such things as purchasing the WaPo from where it can further shape public opinion in favor of amazilla -- while still providing no profits to stockholders and investors (other than Bezos, of course).
Some days back science fiction author, Walter Jon Williams, posted a well-thought out desciption of what is the actuality is of the relationship between amazilla and writers, and what amazilla is in reality doing to writers and creatives of all kinds, here.
The argument of Bezos that his exploitation of writers for the sake of his wealth is good for writers is eerily reminiscent of the argument of slaveowners that slavery is an excellent situation for the enslaved, and the only victims here are the slaveowners.
|Patrick Henry's Red Hill home|