4 ms·

"What's the problem banning a few controversial books? We still publish thousands of books we deem acceptable!" > He hasn't been cancelled, it's just that a f

"What's the problem banning a few controversial books? We still publish thousands of books we deem acceptable!" > He hasn't been cancelled, it's just that a few of the more egregious books are being discontinued. Horton Hears a Who? Still a great message. The Grinch? Still great You are clearly in favor of banning ideas you disagree with. Nice to see you are fine with the publication of books when you approve of their "message".

delecti 6y ago
You keep saying "banned", but they aren't. I agree banning ideas is bad, but that's not happening here.
- NeverFade 6y ago
  If an idea can't be communicated, for example because books carrying it are systematically cancelled, then that idea is being banned. This is what happens when Amazon, for example, bans books that express views of transgenderism with which Amazon employees disagree.
citizenkeen 6y ago
Who is doing the banning? ebay can't can books, and hasn't. The publisher can't ban books, and hasn't. The rights holder can't ban books, and hasn't. Who is doing the banning?
- NeverFade 6y ago
  eBay can ban sales of books on its platform, and has done so. The copyright holder / publisher can prevent any publication of books it holds copyright to, and has done so. Distributors of books, like Amazon, can stop selling books they disagree with, and have now starting doing that too. So the answer to your question is: all the above.
ericb 6y ago
Free speech is not the right to force others to repeat your speech. It is also not the right to a loudspeaker or megaphone. Free speech gets you the right to say it, but makes no promises about others being forced to listen, forced to spread it for you or forced to repeat it for you. Don't impinge their freedom in the name of your own.
- mancerayder 6y ago
  How is the existence of a book, "... the right to force others to repeat your speech"? People want the book removed because it exists, someplace - not because someone has a metaphorical megaphone. Let's stop with the metaphors, by the way. This isn't literary critique, or English Literature 301. It's a discussion of censorship. Stopping someone-who-isn't-you from reading a work that has nothing to do with you, is censorship.
  - ericb 6y ago
    > existence of a book Wait, sorry, is someone confiscating the book? Burning it? Requiring it be burned? Arresting people who have it? Arresting the people who wrote it? Legally compelling the publisher to edit it? Legally compelling distributors not to distribute it? As far as I can tell, everyone complaining is upset that distributors don't want to tarnish their brand with certain content, and authors and stakeholders have decided that certain content doesn't match their modern brands. None of these are censorship! As an author, you are free to write dumb things. As a bookstore, I am free to not sell the the dumb things you wrote. That's not censorship. As a publisher, I am free not to publish the dumb stuff you wrote for you. That's the metaphorical megaphone, in case that is unclear, and no one can force a publisher to give you one.
    - mancerayder 6y ago
      Again, everything you're saying is legitimate, but it completely ignores the elephant in the room, the big elephant, the monopoly power, the concentrated distribution and unprecedented centralization over the flow of information and broadcast media. Whether it's YouTube, Google search results and playstore access, Facebook, and many more, we are all concerned when a new one is added, such as Ebay. Yes, we won't be sending people with the naughty Dr. Seuss books to the gulag. No one is saying that. We're concerned about monopoly power combined with wokist ideology.

delecti 6y ago

You keep saying "banned", but they aren't. I agree banning ideas is bad, but that's not happening here.

NeverFade 6y ago
If an idea can't be communicated, for example because books carrying it are systematically cancelled, then that idea is being banned. This is what happens when Amazon, for example, bans books that express views of transgenderism with which Amazon employees disagree.

citizenkeen 6y ago

Who is doing the banning? ebay can't can books, and hasn't. The publisher can't ban books, and hasn't. The rights holder can't ban books, and hasn't. Who is doing the banning?

NeverFade 6y ago
eBay can ban sales of books on its platform, and has done so. The copyright holder / publisher can prevent any publication of books it holds copyright to, and has done so. Distributors of books, like Amazon, can stop selling books they disagree with, and have now starting doing that too. So the answer to your question is: all the above.

ericb 6y ago

Free speech is not the right to force others to repeat your speech. It is also not the right to a loudspeaker or megaphone. Free speech gets you the right to say it, but makes no promises about others being forced to listen, forced to spread it for you or forced to repeat it for you. Don't impinge their freedom in the name of your own.

mancerayder 6y ago
How is the existence of a book, "... the right to force others to repeat your speech"? People want the book removed because it exists, someplace - not because someone has a metaphorical megaphone. Let's stop with the metaphors, by the way. This isn't literary critique, or English Literature 301. It's a discussion of censorship. Stopping someone-who-isn't-you from reading a work that has nothing to do with you, is censorship.
- ericb 6y ago
  > existence of a book Wait, sorry, is someone confiscating the book? Burning it? Requiring it be burned? Arresting people who have it? Arresting the people who wrote it? Legally compelling the publisher to edit it? Legally compelling distributors not to distribute it? As far as I can tell, everyone complaining is upset that distributors don't want to tarnish their brand with certain content, and authors and stakeholders have decided that certain content doesn't match their modern brands. None of these are censorship! As an author, you are free to write dumb things. As a bookstore, I am free to not sell the the dumb things you wrote. That's not censorship. As a publisher, I am free not to publish the dumb stuff you wrote for you. That's the metaphorical megaphone, in case that is unclear, and no one can force a publisher to give you one.
  - mancerayder 6y ago
    Again, everything you're saying is legitimate, but it completely ignores the elephant in the room, the big elephant, the monopoly power, the concentrated distribution and unprecedented centralization over the flow of information and broadcast media. Whether it's YouTube, Google search results and playstore access, Facebook, and many more, we are all concerned when a new one is added, such as Ebay. Yes, we won't be sending people with the naughty Dr. Seuss books to the gulag. No one is saying that. We're concerned about monopoly power combined with wokist ideology.