4 ms·

Sounds okay to me. She was not forced to, she listens to other people and her deal is still on the table. Haven't read the book to be able to evaluate the issu

• gus_massa 8y ago
  Don't worry. Now you will probably never be able to read the book to evaluate it. There are (at least) three types of censorship: 1) gubernamental censorship 2) mob censorship 3) self censorship For some reason, many people care only about #1. This looks like a #3, but it's very close to a #2, because if this book were published there may be a tweeter outrage asking the major bookstores to "spontaneously" decide to remove the book and also any past or future books of the author.
  • frenchy 8y ago
    Probably because #2 and (even moreso #3) are difficult to evaluate without a great deal more nuance. There's not much of a use case for #1 except (arguably) national security. I assume what you mean by #2 & #3 is when people collectively or individually say that an idea is not worth the paper it's printed on. In that case, there's a good lot of things that should, ideally, never see the light of day; except as examples of human folly. The anti-vaccine movement and chemtrail theories are examples of this. I don't know the details of this case at all, but I suspect it falls under the category of the author trying to communicate one thing, but most people understanding the book in a very different way, and the author not wanting to be mis-read.