|
There is a strong financial incentive for editors to exclude competitor sites and there is no process to prevent this from happening. The defense of the exclusion is further enabled by the misguided notion that a site that "adds nothing new" doesn't merit inclusion. So, as a hypothetical example, if walmart.com is included, there is no reason to include costco.com because it "adds nothing new."? Wouldn't shoppers be better served by being aware of both, even if the product selection is the same? Of course.
And please don't bother giving me the "produce the evidence" line. Instead please describe for me the process that prevents the type of abuse I cite.
|