The Silver Screen Oasis

I have posted about ninety reviews of films and books on Amazon, last Friday ( or Saturday ) I posted a negative review of the Ronald Reagan Diaries, A book that I received on May 23. My review was the only negative review of the first eleven posted, after being posted since Friday/Saturday I find that it is now deleted. I recieved a few comments on my review that attacked, not the content of my review, but that I hadn't read the book, which I had. My review was not an attack on Reagan, but that the " Diaries " contained nothing much of interest, and I offered other books that might give a little balance to the image of " St. Ronnie", I really don't care that my review was deleted, but I do think it strange that all the pro - Ronnie Diaries reviews are still there, even those posted before me they had to plough through the 700+ also, and no one critized them for not reading the book.

Ken, the deletion of your review may not necessarily be politically motivated, but a marketing decision. I have in the past posted reviews on the Barnes & Noble site and noticed that some reviews that found faults in a book or film were removed, but the positive ones were never touched. It may be this particular book's publisher that is influencing Amazon's postings. And it may be the publisher itself that is making the protesting comments in the guise of reader postings.

(Or maybe it was Nancy -- who knows?)

jdb1 wrote:Ken, the deletion of your review may not necessarily be politically motivated, but a marketing decision. I have in the past posted reviews on the Barnes & Noble site and noticed that some reviews that found faults in a book or film were removed, but the positive ones were never touched. It may be this particular book's publisher that is influencing Amazon's postings. And it may be the publisher itself that is making the protesting comments in the guise of reader postings.

(Or maybe it was Nancy -- who knows?)

Judith,
Thanks for the clarification.

uh, oh, I've been outed!

knitwit45 wrote:uh, oh, I've been outed!

Not you, silly girl. I meant the mother of my Secret Embarrassing Crush, Ron Reagan. Now whose face is red!

(How do you get those little faces over into the window?)

Ken wrote: "I recieved a few comments on my review that attacked, not the content of my review, but that I hadn't read the book, which I had. My review was not an attack on Reagan, but that the " Diaries " contained nothing much of interest, and I offered other books that might give a little balance to the image of " St. Ronnie", I really don't care that my review was deleted, but I do think it strange that all the pro - Ronnie Diaries reviews are still there, even those posted before me they had to plough through the 700+ also, and no one critized them for not reading the book."

So many people are still operating under the misconception that Reagan was a "good" President, largely, I'm sure because of the bewildering glorification he received upon his passing. I'm sure that over time, history will (hopefully) provide a more balanced look at the Reagan presidency, eight years of honoring mass consumption, the accumulation of wealth and the callous indifference toward the have-nots.

Dewey:

I think you're pretty close to the reasoning behind the deletion. You gotta like the guy, or stay away!!!

I hope you don't mind a personal experience I had this a.m. I took my neighbor to the doctor's this morning - she, who usually chauffeurs me around, cut her arm badly, so off we went, the crip and the one armed bandit!!! Anyway, while waiting for her to be stitched up, I was sitting next to a lovely lady just a bit older than me and she was having a wonderful time explaining the problem between Rosie O'Donnell and Elizabeth on The View. We had previously discussed the 'senior' problems (financial and medical), as well as sometimes feeling like the 'forgotten people' to our government. We had also discussed kids today vs. how ours were raised (e.g. NOT sparing the rod), so we had already had various paths to which we may have disagreed yet never did, until . . . she commented Bush had lighter hair than the shot of him on TV just then. Miss Big Mouth, Insert Foot, of course explained that was a comedian, but we would probably be better off with him in the White House than the 'real' thing. OOOOpps. Suddenly she decided she should go outside and wait for the community bus to pick her up. (It was already 83 degrees and she had said she hated how muggy it was this morning).

So, you see, Dubya still has fans out there, poor souls, and Ronnie has also. You have to tread carefully when it comes to idolization.

Anne

Anne, therein lies one of the major pitfalls of having a glamorous former movie star ascend to the highest political office in the land: a total absence of rational objectivity in the face of historical assessment.
Thanks for sharing your somewhat disheartening anecdote!
-Dewey

Hi,

Could this have to do with "The Truth"??

Nobody likes to hear the truth and your review said that there wasn't much to this book to spend money on. So, bingo - therefore, you were pulled off the reviewing stand because you were, in essence, telling people not to waste their money. A big 'NO, NO' in America.

And, as Edith Ann would say, "And that's the truth!".....

Larry

I've been saying for years that I must have been asleep at the moment RR achieved Greatness, 'cause I sure can't find a single historical fact that points to it.

However . . . . in light of today's Administration, RR has been looking a lot better to me.