Amazon Pulls Book
- Started
- Last post
- 62 Responses
- whereRI0
YOU CAN JUST KILL THEM
- ukit0
I don't think there's any argument that pedophilia is bad, shocking and everything else. But I agree more with what jetskii is saying. If you are going to start banning stuff IMO you can't just do it completely arbitrarily, you need rules about what gets banned and what doesn't.
Otherwise it's like mob rule - the only time something will be banned is when people kick up a shit storm about it, as in this case. Is that really the way it should work?
Now obviously every company has a different approach to stuff like this and a place like Wal-Mart or Barnes and Noble would never in a million years consider carrying this title. The difference with web companies is that they tend to come from a more liberal mindset, and to their credit it seems like Amazon tried to stay true to the principle of total press freedom, until the media pressure on them just became too costly.
- ukit0
You know if you think about what happened here really ISN'T a case of a private business making their own decisions about what to carry. After all what Amazon wanted to do was keep selling the book. It was pressure from the public and tons of really bad press that led them to drop it.
People in America talk a lot about the idea that business should be able to make its own decisions separate from the government, but what about the idea that the public can actually force business' hand if they care enough about something?
That's really more of a socialistic idea. Note that people didn't say I'm going to take my money elsewhere, they insisted that this company has to reflect the views of society. Granted, Amazon wasn't legally coerced or anything, but with the wrath of the press and public bearing down on them, they didn't really have a choice. If people really believed in the first idea, they could have just noted their disapproval and moved on. I'm not saying its good or bad...just interesting.
- scarabin0
you guys are acting like it's your right for amazon to carry everything and that they should consult you before taking something off their shelves.
they're a private company and don't have to answer to anyone when it comes to what they want to sell or don't sell.
they didn't remove it because it was distasteful, they removed it because consumers were making a scene and they had to protect their brand image.
- drgz0
#96 on Amazon's Top 100 titles
- ukit0
You're right they don't, but one of the interesting aspects in this is that Amazon carried the book to begin with and resisted efforts to delist it. Now to be fair, I don't think Amazon supports pedophiles, I just think they are more strongly committed philosophically to actually being a neutral platform for people to sell books. Which as a general principle is a good thing.
- that or they know removing products = less income so generally avoid the practicescarabin
- You could say the same about any company, but most of them are not so liberal. I really do think it has to do with the tech community mindset, you see a similar thing with a lot of what Google does.ukit
- community mindset, you see a similar thing with a lot of what Google does.ukit
- yeahscarabin
- orrinward0
I wish I'd managed to get a copy. It would really have helped me last week when I got spunk in a kids eye. Getting him to tell his parents that he fell over while drinking tea and got tea in it took like £10 worth of candy and a promise that I would wear a condom next time. Perhaps this book could have guided me to either avoiding the situation, or at least teach me how better to negotiate with a child. I fucking hate using a condom. I can't just kill him, can I?
- georgesIII0
@ all of you,
-
- honestly0
Amazon defends, then pulls listing of book for pedophiles
Amazon became the target of Internet criticism after initially ignoring pleas to remove a book it listed in its Kindle store on the subject of pedophilia, only to quietly change position and remove the book on Thursday without much notice.
The book, "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conduct" by Phillip Graves, was sold by Amazon for $4.79. It was intended to give those interested in such activity advice on the subject. However, child protection advocates saw the book as potentially dangerous, and threatened to boycott the online retailer.
Graves defends his book by saying that it is only a crime if the contact with the child is sexual in nature, and his book offers pedophiliacs methods to stay within the laws. To Amazon's defense, its own policies state that Amazon does not promise to remove or protect any type of book, and it will not guarantee that anyone will vet titles before they are listed.
Multiple requests for comment from Amazon from several news sources including Betanews have so far gone unanswered. Business Insider however got a statement from the company saying it "believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable."
In a statement to ABC News, Graves argued that critics were accusing him "of wanting to hurt children," saying he only wanted to establish guidelines for those that participate in such behavior. Ether way, the book was no longer available from the Kindle store as of Thursday afternoon, and Amazon had so far not spoken publicly about why it had decided to switch its position.
One possible explanation could be the sudden popularity of the book after the controversy erupted across the Internet: the title had rose to as high as #96 on Amazon's Top 100 titles, possibly embarrassing the retailer.
Opponents of the book are not amused, however. "The author of this book is a predator and should never have been allowed to write or promote this trash that is called a book of information. How many children will be assaulted because of this?" one commenter wrote on the book's listing.
- Thanks. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for freedom of speech, but this is not my idea of it.kgvs72
- monkeyshine0
I'm personally glad they pulled the book but isn't it still censorship? What makes it ok? Illegal vs. legal?
- honestly0
not glad, yes censorship
- ukit0
- lowimpakt0
@ukit " if you are going to start banning stuff IMO you can't just do it completely arbitrarily, you need rules about what gets banned and what doesn't."
yes and no. From my perspective, you can't predict the future and trends/perceptions will change so each decision should be taken in context of the time and attitudes.
I agree with the decision because it's not even pretending to be art..
- Trends/perceptions don't change that quick. It's not like this book will be acceptable to most people 10 years from now or something:)ukit
- rules are good but common sense should always come before whats written in black and whitemoIdero
- But there's not really much common sense involved, just one book that got focused on.ukit
- I'm sure if you delve through Amazon's catalog, you'd find hundreds that are just as offensive and outrageousukit
- ukit0
And yet you can get "Mein Kampf" wirelessly delivered to your Kindle.