After The Rainn- Life after the birth and death of Carys Rainn: November 2016

Okay, readers... I'm looking for input or someone who could give me some solid advice. This is not okay... I just don't know how to respond from here. In a nutshell, I tried to place an ad with Amazon and the reasons I was given for it being rejected were... well... rediculous and discriminatory. The reasons were NOT backed by Amazon policy, so I am assuming it was an individual who made the judgement call. Regardless - not okay. I initially posted this to my facebook page in hopes that someone would have some feedback and let me know if I was reading too much into it or being overdramatic about it. It seems the general response I have found so far has been that others share my thoughts.

On 9/26/2016, I received the following response regarding the amazon marketing ad campaign I was trying to run for my book leading up to Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day (October 15th).

Link to Amazon Ad Policies

I immediately emailed and asked for clarification, as I didn't understand what the problem with my ad actually was.

****

Keri no word yet.
So, my initial thoughts are that I fully understand that there are restrictions and rules surrounding the ads for books. I get that. I know that grief/loss can be a sensitive topic, so I understand why they may want to restrict the ads for a book about grief/loss and not put it on a main page. BUT... if I am putting in very targeted keywords that would be directed to people searching for similar topics (anencephaly, pregnancy and infant loss, etc.) ... I sincerely don't get the problem. UNLESS whoever reviewed it is saying that because it's pregnancy and infant loss, it's considered an unacceptable book because it's a "potentially embarrassing bodily function" or in that category... and if so, that's ridiculous.

I don't want to jump to conclusions, or assume anything. I posted thinking someone might be able to share some insight I hadn't considered yet about why this ad was rejected. Trying very hard to give them the benefit of the doubt...

LikeReplySeptember 27 at 1:37pm

L**** Yeah...I'm not sure that's very easy to do in this situation.

LikeReplySeptember 27 at 2:19pm

Keri I'm trying

My response will be determined by theirs, I'm sure!

LikeReplySeptember 27 at 3:49pm

Keri I have to say though, the responses I'm seeing here make me feel more validated in my initial "what the what??" reaction lol

LikeReplySeptember 27 at 3:53pm

October 2nd:

October 12th

The ad was approved when status was "ended"

Keri THREE weeks later, and their reason is because it might "affect the sentiments of parents who have lost a child or children and children who has lost their parents" and it's "related to bible"

I'm having trouble knowing how to respond right now. But no, my "problem" has not been solved.

LikeReplyOctober 17 at 9:11pm

Keri ***** ******.... thoughts?

LikeReplyOctober 17 at 9:12pm

K*** I feel their response denotes a lack of sensitivity or understanding of the culture and needs of families enduring pregnancy and infant loss. And, I believe their stance on sharing biblical principles is discriminatory. Unacceptable.

LikeReply1October 18 at 6:20am

K***** I am glad they took a second look and approved it, but their basis for the original rejection seems not to have been given adequate consideration and research. Kind of like..."Oh, this is about a sensitive topic (i.e. babies dying/parents grieving) and...*gasp*...the bible. Reject!"
That's not how things should be done.

UnlikeReply2October 18 at 6:25amEdited

L** - K*** nope. Not at all. 😔

LikeReply1October 18 at 6:25am

Keri You all share my thoughts. So. Now, the question is how do I respond in a way that is Christ-like, grace-filled, and effective.... I don't want to leave it like that... I'm not okay with it.... the outcome I would like to have would be to raise awareness regarding loss, but also that rejecting something just because it references scripture is also discrimination. It's insulting that Christians are accused of being discriminatory and somehow it's socially acceptable to silence Christians.... I think the only reason they approved it (after the scheduled ad time frame ended) was because I specifically asked them to tell me why it was rejected, and policy does not back their reasoning. I wonder how many get rejected and never approved because people don't ask.

LikeReplyOctober 18 at 8:16am

L**** You're nice. I'm (in my head) writing an article titled "Why Amazon hates Baby Loss Moms."

LikeReplyOctober 18 at 8:42am

Keri lol I COULD go all in and be absolutely nasty about it... and it may be somewhat satisfying considering how indignant I feel. BUT... considering the books I have published on amazon... it wouldn't mesh well. haha Sooo.... looking for a less emotional route. I wonder what a lawyer would say... ***** .... I know this isn't your area of law generally, but..... maybe you have some thoughts...

LikeReplyOctober 18 at 11:50am

Write a reply...

Keri So basically... because it's a sensitive grief topic... which, I understand is a sensitive thing, and that is why I chose very specific keywords so the marketing would be very targeted. and secondly ..... because it contains topics related to bible??? there is nothing in their policies that I saw that says biblical topics are not allowed in ads.

LikeReplyOctober 17 at 9:18pm

L**** Discriminatory for sure. And I'd definitely have a response for both the reason why it discriminates against those who've lost children as a resource and those who claim the Bible is as important to their faith as any other "spiritual" book they also allow ads for is to those religions/views and and I'd share some examples. This is so sad.

LikeReply1October 18 at 6:22am