If content is filtered, those filtering the content can bias what's shown; influencing their audience. E.g. imagine if Amazon filtered out all the <4 star revi

If content is filtered, those filtering the content can bias what's shown; influencing their audience. E.g. imagine if Amazon filtered out all the <4 star reviews of their products, and filtered the 5 star reviews of their competitors'). If that's transparent it's not so bad; you can see that things are being influenced, and ideally can see justifiable reasons behind those decisions. Otherwise the site's worth is devalued as you cannot trust what you see. So whilst it's a privilege to have such a resource, it's also acceptable to complain about issues with that resource; especially when things are being manipulated for unclear reasons with no transparency. That said, the author wasn't complaining; just doing analysis and pointing out an oddity which was of interest given the context of their research.