> If it were obvious, this story and reaction would not exist. Yea, the press would never knowingly publish an inflammatory article without due cause. How muc

> If it were obvious, this story and reaction would not exist. Yea, the press would never knowingly publish an inflammatory article without due cause. How much more obvious can it get than "[Name of the Company] Ambassador"? Sure, "Amazon Shill" would have been more colloquial, but I think it is hard to make the argument that Amazon is hiding that they pay these people. As much as BI is trying to spin this as something they've "uncovered," I think the story is pretty straightforward. When BI asked Amazon about it, they immediately confirmed what was already obvious: that they pay these people.