6 ms·

You have kind of a funny idea of censorship. Kickstarter can't stop the book from being made, and authors are certainly not owed assistance by Kickstarter or an

You have kind of a funny idea of censorship. Kickstarter can't stop the book from being made, and authors are certainly not owed assistance by Kickstarter or anyone else to get their work published. It's actually never been easier to get books published and there's certainly no actual censorship happening here. The only role Kickstarter plays is aggregating funds. The author is not limited from pursuing that goal through other means.

bmelton 13y ago
You're absolutely right. It was within Kickstarter's rights to defund the work, or to disallow the project, or to impose whatever burdens their whimsy could think up. Nor are they the government, from which the first amendment is intended to protect us. The author, meanwhile, is of course free to publish the book in whatever other means he chooses. That doesn't make it any more right in my book, and sets up a dangerous precedent that Kickstarter will now subject themselves to the whims of whichever populist group can be the most vocal.
- fusiongyro 13y ago
  It contradicts their brand identity to some extent. But they're a corporation like any other, so if their financial ends are served by subjecting themselves to populist whims, that's just life. One could try to compete with them on that angle. Indiegogo, for instance, seems to attract people who find Kickstarter restrictive (also Europeans).
- Apocryphon 13y ago
  They're a business. If a larger amount of their customer base doesn't want it, then they would presumably respond accordingly. Microsoft did it for the XBox One, after all.
  - bmelton 13y ago
    I don't disagree with that either. But, for me, and I can't say whether I'm in the majority or the minority, nor do I care, but I will now literally never use Kickstarter for anything lest my project be deemed to avant garde by the populace at large. I do sincerely hope, not for Kickstarter, but for us, that this doesn't discourage truly innovative art projects from being crowdfunded, as I think that sets art back, contrary to Kickstarter's stated goals. In short, they've made it all too easy for me to believe that a book series like Harry Potter could be shut down by the religious right, or that Huck Finn would never have been Kickstartable, nor Nine Inch Nails' "Pretty Hate Machine", etc.
    - fusiongyro 13y ago
      I think for your disaster scenario to be taken seriously there would need to be major cultural works--peers of Harry Potter, Huck Finn, and NIN--that were products of the Kickstarter process. Using examples that predate crowdfunding to discuss the negative repercussions of not having crowdfunding is a little ridiculous. The avenues that produced HP, HF and NIN still exist.
      - bmelton 13y ago
        The point was clearly hypothetical. I wasn't looking for a statement with 'impact', so much as a way to illustrate that there are works of art that can also be considered controversial. There are clearly books, movies and songs being funded by Kickstarter. I want the media I consume to challenge my beliefs, and to challenge my ways of thinking. And again, I don't dispute that this was perfectly within KickStarter's right to act the way they did, and while yeah, I don't like it, who am I? Nobody. That doesn't mean that it doesn't bother me, and that doesn't mean that it isn't somewhat ominous, at least in my opinion.

bmelton 13y ago

You're absolutely right. It was within Kickstarter's rights to defund the work, or to disallow the project, or to impose whatever burdens their whimsy could think up. Nor are they the government, from which the first amendment is intended to protect us. The author, meanwhile, is of course free to publish the book in whatever other means he chooses. That doesn't make it any more right in my book, and sets up a dangerous precedent that Kickstarter will now subject themselves to the whims of whichever populist group can be the most vocal.

fusiongyro 13y ago
It contradicts their brand identity to some extent. But they're a corporation like any other, so if their financial ends are served by subjecting themselves to populist whims, that's just life. One could try to compete with them on that angle. Indiegogo, for instance, seems to attract people who find Kickstarter restrictive (also Europeans).
Apocryphon 13y ago
They're a business. If a larger amount of their customer base doesn't want it, then they would presumably respond accordingly. Microsoft did it for the XBox One, after all.
- bmelton 13y ago
  I don't disagree with that either. But, for me, and I can't say whether I'm in the majority or the minority, nor do I care, but I will now literally never use Kickstarter for anything lest my project be deemed to avant garde by the populace at large. I do sincerely hope, not for Kickstarter, but for us, that this doesn't discourage truly innovative art projects from being crowdfunded, as I think that sets art back, contrary to Kickstarter's stated goals. In short, they've made it all too easy for me to believe that a book series like Harry Potter could be shut down by the religious right, or that Huck Finn would never have been Kickstartable, nor Nine Inch Nails' "Pretty Hate Machine", etc.
  - fusiongyro 13y ago
    I think for your disaster scenario to be taken seriously there would need to be major cultural works--peers of Harry Potter, Huck Finn, and NIN--that were products of the Kickstarter process. Using examples that predate crowdfunding to discuss the negative repercussions of not having crowdfunding is a little ridiculous. The avenues that produced HP, HF and NIN still exist.
    - bmelton 13y ago
      The point was clearly hypothetical. I wasn't looking for a statement with 'impact', so much as a way to illustrate that there are works of art that can also be considered controversial. There are clearly books, movies and songs being funded by Kickstarter. I want the media I consume to challenge my beliefs, and to challenge my ways of thinking. And again, I don't dispute that this was perfectly within KickStarter's right to act the way they did, and while yeah, I don't like it, who am I? Nobody. That doesn't mean that it doesn't bother me, and that doesn't mean that it isn't somewhat ominous, at least in my opinion.