![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
On topics of controversial works
Nov. 12th, 2010 08:43 amWork is not the best place to be writing this, but I'm pissed and I need to vent it out before I let it drip into work and go postal on some unsuspecting, but probably deserving cow-worker. :-)
I'm a huge fan of the story and movie Fahrenheit 451. The irony and imagery are not lost on me for its time, and it's scary how written as a futuristic piece makes it that much more plausible to me.
The latest kerfuffle I'm seeing on the news and tossed around the Social Brain is about a certain book written by a certain author carried by a certain online retailer.
I'm a little incensed by the fact that people truly want to have a big tizzy over this. Not because the book itself doesn't merit it. I get that. Only having read carefully selected and undoubtedly biased excerpts, I can assume by topic alone and with those snippets that this is one of those books where you think about that outdoor fire pit, and consider it for a moment.. Or much more than a moment. And I'm talking for the author, much less the book. I get it. I do.
However, this America.. the one people have died defending (belated thanks to our Veteran's btw).. the one people claim for which it is our duty to be patriotic and uphold all that it stands for... has decided, by virtue of our First Amendment, that this book is protected as free speech in its current form and function. This doesn't change what it is. It simply says that our government considers it legal to write and sell this publication in this context.
Now.. as to the fact that Amazon decided to carry it.. Amazon, as they said in their rebuttal don't make a habit of restricting works on content alone as long as the book meets with their publishing policies. "Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."
So of course, as with any controversy, there is a lot of talk of boycott. And while I respect people's desire to make a choice, it's the reasoning behind the choice that bothers me.
I think, given Amazon's stated policies, it is safe to say that if a person took the time to delve into Amazon's full catalog, there would be several books beyond this one that might offend them or otherwise prompt them to perhaps boycott the retailer. But.. nobody knows about those yet. Nobody has pointed them out. Nobody has yelled loud enough. But just because that hasn't happened doesn't make the books not exist. And I think Amazon isn't alone in that. If we dug deep enough into any retailer out there, we could find reasons to consider boycotting or otherwise not availing their services. Between content and products, we have business practices and treatment of employees and any number of other red flags and controversial issues. Depending how you define your reasons to be offended and how conservative you are, it is reasonable to say that any company you do business with could give you pause. Some certainly more than others, but I dare say almost nobody is exempt. Ignorance just keeps us from knowing. So I find it ironic and hypocritical that people would talk of boycotting this one company.
The flip side of part of this is that.. ok.. so we agree this book is bad, and Amazon shouldn't carry it even though it is legally protected. So.. what else shouldn't Amazon carry? Books about polygamy? Books about Sodomy? Books about making and distilling alcohol? Books about how to hack into a computer? There are laws all over the place that consider any of these topics in practice illegal in various states. I could go on, but I think you get the point. So who gets to decide? The government isn't involved since it already decided all these books are legally protected. But who at Amazon gets to decide? How do they decide? What if Borders decides to take a more unbiased approach and carry those titles? Should be boycott them too? How far are you willing to go to stand by your morals before the impending piles of research and conflict cause you to cave in a fit of frustration or more likely laziness?
Is this really about a book or is it more about people who have nothing better to do than sit on their butt and obliviously persecute a retailer because somebody brought it to their attention on their Facebook page?
If you'll pardon me, I'm going to hit up my Netflix queue now. I hear the first season of "Ow, My Balls" is available on streaming.
I'm a huge fan of the story and movie Fahrenheit 451. The irony and imagery are not lost on me for its time, and it's scary how written as a futuristic piece makes it that much more plausible to me.
The latest kerfuffle I'm seeing on the news and tossed around the Social Brain is about a certain book written by a certain author carried by a certain online retailer.
I'm a little incensed by the fact that people truly want to have a big tizzy over this. Not because the book itself doesn't merit it. I get that. Only having read carefully selected and undoubtedly biased excerpts, I can assume by topic alone and with those snippets that this is one of those books where you think about that outdoor fire pit, and consider it for a moment.. Or much more than a moment. And I'm talking for the author, much less the book. I get it. I do.
However, this America.. the one people have died defending (belated thanks to our Veteran's btw).. the one people claim for which it is our duty to be patriotic and uphold all that it stands for... has decided, by virtue of our First Amendment, that this book is protected as free speech in its current form and function. This doesn't change what it is. It simply says that our government considers it legal to write and sell this publication in this context.
Now.. as to the fact that Amazon decided to carry it.. Amazon, as they said in their rebuttal don't make a habit of restricting works on content alone as long as the book meets with their publishing policies. "Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."
So of course, as with any controversy, there is a lot of talk of boycott. And while I respect people's desire to make a choice, it's the reasoning behind the choice that bothers me.
I think, given Amazon's stated policies, it is safe to say that if a person took the time to delve into Amazon's full catalog, there would be several books beyond this one that might offend them or otherwise prompt them to perhaps boycott the retailer. But.. nobody knows about those yet. Nobody has pointed them out. Nobody has yelled loud enough. But just because that hasn't happened doesn't make the books not exist. And I think Amazon isn't alone in that. If we dug deep enough into any retailer out there, we could find reasons to consider boycotting or otherwise not availing their services. Between content and products, we have business practices and treatment of employees and any number of other red flags and controversial issues. Depending how you define your reasons to be offended and how conservative you are, it is reasonable to say that any company you do business with could give you pause. Some certainly more than others, but I dare say almost nobody is exempt. Ignorance just keeps us from knowing. So I find it ironic and hypocritical that people would talk of boycotting this one company.
The flip side of part of this is that.. ok.. so we agree this book is bad, and Amazon shouldn't carry it even though it is legally protected. So.. what else shouldn't Amazon carry? Books about polygamy? Books about Sodomy? Books about making and distilling alcohol? Books about how to hack into a computer? There are laws all over the place that consider any of these topics in practice illegal in various states. I could go on, but I think you get the point. So who gets to decide? The government isn't involved since it already decided all these books are legally protected. But who at Amazon gets to decide? How do they decide? What if Borders decides to take a more unbiased approach and carry those titles? Should be boycott them too? How far are you willing to go to stand by your morals before the impending piles of research and conflict cause you to cave in a fit of frustration or more likely laziness?
Is this really about a book or is it more about people who have nothing better to do than sit on their butt and obliviously persecute a retailer because somebody brought it to their attention on their Facebook page?
If you'll pardon me, I'm going to hit up my Netflix queue now. I hear the first season of "Ow, My Balls" is available on streaming.