So basically, she doesn't think this book can compete with the other books on the bestseller list who do release e-books alongside their hardback books? Sounds like she doesn't have a lot of confidence in this book if she has to resort to stunts that have already been proven by the industry to alienate and annoy readers. Why not compete on a level playing field and keep the reader base happy at the same time?
Ironically, she said she wants to preserve her husband's legacy by trying to ensure another #1 bestseller. But withholding an ebook is not the way to do that - creating a quality product and making your fanbase and the general readership happy is the way. By pissing off a large portion of her audience, she likely has tarnished his legacy far more than not reaching #1 ever would. She should just stand behind the book and not worry so much about some ranking that the rest of the world could care less about.
I don't believe in using the review system to protest, but on the other hand, I understand that people don't feel their voice will be heard any other way. Reviews are supposed to be for other readers. But authors have manipulated them them to their own purposes by coaxing friends to review their books and buy buying reviews and doing review exchanges with other authors. Readers use reviews to communicate their frustration to publishers and authors in the only forum that anyone ever pays attention to. The reviews are no longer about helping other readers find the right book, they are tools of commerce on both ends, and thus, are rapidly becoming meaningless except to the players in the game.