4 ms·

I'm not sure how this is advertising. The user still sees the same exact link which is the name of a book, they just go to a site that delivers better on the i

I'm not sure how this is advertising. The user still sees the same exact link which is the name of a book, they just go to a site that delivers better on the intent of the click which is to read reviews and purchase the book. Often times, clicking out to a publisher site yields a poor site experience, no user reviews, and a more expensive price than Amazon provides not to mention they rock customer service. I for one have no problem with what they're doing to the publishing industry, especially after the e-book pricing fiasco. Lower prices and better service for all.

kaolinite 15y ago
Well, first off - it's only advertising if the links are added in for this purpose - as mentioned in the article. If there are Amazon links already on Wikipedia, and I'm sure there are some, that's arguably alright to add affiliate links onto. However, the issue is that people may begin adding more and more Amazon links onto articles to try and get more money for Wikipedia - then it becomes advertising. Finally, your second point - I like better service and I like lower prices, but I dislike DRM and I dislike companies that obtain monopolies and exert control. It worries me that, in future, you will get kindle-only books or books that can only be bought with DRM. Books that in 50 years time may be lost forever. It really saddens me that we are giving away control of our media. Anyway - that's a rant for another article! Just for perspective: I really support DuckDuckGo using affiliate links with Amazon (and perhaps other retailers too) - I think that's a great way of generating money for the service without resorting to adverts. However, on Wikipedia, I don't think it should be used.