Oh please. No-one is naive about 'the power structure'.
Amazon is a vast company with a PR department that is responsible for making sure that the image of the company accords with the aims of its management.
If that's the definition of 'control the narrative about itself', then yes, it is reasonable for a company to want to do that.
The insinuation that some ill-defined-but-terrifying future retribution against the publisher (Vice, a substantial owner of which is the Walt Disney Company; so not exactly a tiny defenseless organization) will occur as the result of ignoring a suggested correction from a PR flack is a bit ridiculous.
>The insinuation that some ill-defined-but-terrifying future retribution against the publisher (Vice, a substantial owner of which is the Walt Disney Company; so not exactly a tiny defenseless organization) will occur as the result of ignoring a suggested correction from a PR flack is a bit ridiculous.
You're right. It's ridiculous to insinuate such things. Almost as ridiculous as ebay executives harassing a small mom and pop news website with bloody pigs masks, roaches, and other psychological torture.
Amazon is a vast company with a PR department that is responsible for making sure that the image of the company accords with the aims of its management.
If that's the definition of 'control the narrative about itself', then yes, it is reasonable for a company to want to do that.
The insinuation that some ill-defined-but-terrifying future retribution against the publisher (Vice, a substantial owner of which is the Walt Disney Company; so not exactly a tiny defenseless organization) will occur as the result of ignoring a suggested correction from a PR flack is a bit ridiculous.