Amazon controversy

[Violet Crown]

Amazon has a right to sell that author's book.

 

Sure they do. And we have a right not to buy books from a business that exercises that right, and to tell that business why we're not doing business with them. I.e., a boycott.

[pdalley]

No, it isn't. Freedom of speech was never an issue here. The man can say anything he wants -- and he did -- in his self-published book. There ends any freedom of speech issue. He said it. He published it.

 

No one is obligated, however to listen to or read a single word he has to say. No store is obligated to sell his book. Bookstores refuse to carry all kinds of books all the time, for all kinds of reasons. One of the biggest reasons a book store chooses not to carry a book is because they believe it doesn't fit their customer base.

 

If every bookstore were required to carry every book published, then every bookstore would have to be the size of the New York Public Library. Even libraries are not obligated to carry every book that is published. Even libraries pick and choose books to fit what they have determined is their customer base. It is not blocking his freedom of speech to choose to carry other books and not his book. It is a reasonable and perfectly legal business decision.

 

Apparently, Amazon has made the business decision to court the pedophile customer base. :glare:

 

:iagree: Freedom of speech means freedom from government prosecution but even that goes only so far. Yelling Fire! in a crowded theater (where there was no fire) was ruled not to be protected under freedom of speech for example.

 

Freedom of speech does not guarantee an audience.

[justamouse]

Sure they do. And we have a right not to buy books from a business that exercises that right, and to tell that business why we're not doing business with them. I.e., a boycott.

 

You can buy many, many questionable books/mags at Barns and Noble. How about your cable company? Boycott them? Boycott clothes companies for using child labor in third world countries that have no labor laws? Boycott your computer? It could bring you porn. Boycott your computer for eventually making it's way to China to be dumped in a huge toxic pit that will kill the people in the town?

 

I mean, just so it's all even as long as we're on a righteous boycott mission.

[pdalley]

You can buy many, many questionable books/mags at Barns and Noble. How about your cable company? Boycott them? Boycott clothes companies for using child labor in third world countries that have no labor laws? Boycott your computer? It could bring you porn. Boycott your computer for eventually making it's way to China to be dumped in a huge toxic pit that will kill the people in the town?

 

I mean, just so it's all even as long as we're on a righteous boycott mission.

 

This is beyond porn. This is beyond a book that I don't agree with politically or religiously or intellectually. This is a book that - as per the author's summary - promotes an illegal activity that is among the lowest of the low.

 

My blood boils over this. Why? I watched the face of this little girl (just google Shaniya Davis) as she was carried into a motel room that she didn't come out of alive. Her druggie mother allegedly sold her to this.... thing... who raped her, murdered her and threw her on the side of the road like trash.

 

 

And if protecting the most innocent from scum that prey on them isn't a 'righteous' boycott then I don't know what is. No one is forced to join it.

[SBMama]

And if protecting the most innocent from scum that prey on them isn't a 'righteous' boycott then I don't know what is. No one is forced to join it.

 

This.

[Kirch]

I wonder if Amazon (and the author, obviously) could be sued/prosecuted someday if it were proven that a pedophile used this book as an instruction manual. Something along the lines of enabling illegal activity, similar to a bartender or waiter being sued for continuing to serve alcohol to an obviously drunk patron who later dies or kills someone else as a result.

 

I'm guessing Amazon's legal gurus have looked into that, though.

[justamouse]

 

And if protecting the most innocent from scum that prey on them isn't a 'righteous' boycott then I don't know what is. No one is forced to join it.

 

 

So then boycott all of the good, upright, faithful authors, too, because that's who you boycott when you boycott amazon. Authors who derive their livelihood through Amazon (unless they're sold at Walmart, bastion of the largest book choices).

 

Boycott the book, protest the book, and you hurt the author. Boycott Amazon and you hurt all authors.

[Veritaserum]

This is beyond porn. This is beyond a book that I don't agree with politically or religiously or intellectually. This is a book that - as per the author's summary - promotes an illegal activity that is among the lowest of the low.

 

My blood boils over this. Why? I watched the face of this little girl (just google Shaniya Davis) as she was carried into a motel room that she didn't come out of alive. Her druggie mother allegedly sold her to this.... thing... who raped her, murdered her and threw her on the side of the road like trash.

 

 

And if protecting the most innocent from scum that prey on them isn't a 'righteous' boycott then I don't know what is. No one is forced to join it.

 

:iagree: I am shocked that amazon would sell a book that is an aid to heinous crimes against children.

[pdalley]

So then boycott all of the good, upright, faithful authors, too, because that's who you boycott when you boycott amazon. Authors who derive their livelihood through Amazon (unless they're sold at Walmart, bastion of the largest book choices).

 

Boycott the book, protest the book, and you hurt the author. Boycott Amazon and you hurt all authors.

 

There are plenty of other places where I can purchase books. Amazon is not the only outlet. There is Alibris, Ebay, Barnes and Noble, Books a Million, and so on and so forth. And anything on Kindle I can get via Nook or Ibooks. Again, this hurts Kindle and Amazon. The Kindle isn't the only e-reader on the market.

 

My boycott of Amazon will hurt Amazon. I'll get what I want elsewhere. I don't buy STOW from Amazon because I like to give my money directly to Peace Hill Press. So therefore I'm not hurting the author by boycotting Amazon. I simply am choosing where I will NOT buy it from. I'm still buying the materials I need. The author still gets my money.

 

I'd be curious to know what authors can only be found through Amazon and how large a percentage that is. Is it usually cheaper through Amazon? Yes. But I can usually find several places to get a book I'm looking for besides Amazon.

Edited November 11, 2010 by pdalley
Amazon is not spelled with a b on the end

[Miss Peregrine]

There are plenty of other places where I can purchase books. Amazon is not the only outlet. There is Alibris, Ebay, Barnes and Noble, Books a Million, and so on and so forth. And anything on Kindle I can get via Nook or Ibooks. Again, this hurts Kindle and Amazon. The Kindle isn't the only e-reader on the market.

 

My boycott of Amazon will hurt Amazon. I'll get what I want elsewhere. I don't buy STOW from Amazon because I like to give my money directly to Peace Hill Press. So therefore I'm not hurting the author by boycotting Amazon. I simply am choosing where I will NOT buy it from. I'm still buying the materials I need. The author still gets my money.

 

I'd be curious to know what authors can only be found through Amazon and how large a percentage that is. Is it usually cheaper through Amazon? Yes. But I can usually find several places to get a book I'm looking for besides Amazon.

:iagree:

[MariannNOVA]

There are plenty of other places where I can purchase books. Amazon is not the only outlet. There is Alibris, Ebay, Barnes and Noble, Books a Million, and so on and so forth. And anything on Kindle I can get via Nook or Ibooks. Again, this hurts Kindle and Amazon. The Kindle isn't the only e-reader on the market.

 

My boycott of Amazon will hurt Amazon. I'll get what I want elsewhere. I don't buy STOW from Amazon because I like to give my money directly to Peace Hill Press. So therefore I'm not hurting the author by boycotting Amazon. I simply am choosing where I will NOT buy it from. I'm still buying the materials I need. The author still gets my money.

 

I'd be curious to know what authors can only be found through Amazon and how large a percentage that is. Is it usually cheaper through Amazon? Yes. But I can usually find several places to get a book I'm looking for besides Amazon.

 

:iagree::iagree:

[Abigail4476]

There are plenty of other places where I can purchase books. Amazon is not the only outlet. There is Alibris, Ebay, Barnes and Noble, Books a Million, and so on and so forth. And anything on Kindle I can get via Nook or Ibooks. Again, this hurts Kindle and Amazon. The Kindle isn't the only e-reader on the market.

 

My boycott of Amazon will hurt Amazon. I'll get what I want elsewhere. I don't buy STOW from Amazon because I like to give my money directly to Peace Hill Press. So therefore I'm not hurting the author by boycotting Amazon. I simply am choosing where I will NOT buy it from. I'm still buying the materials I need. The author still gets my money.

 

I'd be curious to know what authors can only be found through Amazon and how large a percentage that is. Is it usually cheaper through Amazon? Yes. But I can usually find several places to get a book I'm looking for besides Amazon.

 

:iagree:

[Abigail4476]

This apparently isn't Amazon's first rodeo:

 

"This isn't the first time Amazon has sold material that promotes illegal activity. It is currently accepting pre-orders for the hardcover version of "I Am the Market: How to Smuggle Cocaine by the Ton, in Five Easy Lessons" by Luca Rastello.

 

Nor is it the first time Amazon has come under attack for selling objectionable content in its store. In 2002, the United States Justice Foundation, a conservative group, threatened to sue Amazon for selling "Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers." That title is still available through Amazon.

In 2009, Amazon stopped selling "RapeLay," a first-person video game in which the protagonist stalks and then rapes a mother and her daughters, after it was widely condemned in the media and by various interest groups." --Source

 

Who on earth is in charge of approving material at Amazon, that stuff like this would fly in under the radar and only be removed when enough people protest? :glare:

[Abigail4476]

Amazon has a right to sell that author's book. Just like the author had a right to write it.

 

And consumers have the right to dictate to the seller what is satisfactory and what isn't. It doesn't even matter if boycotts are universally and fairly applied. When consumers are upset about something, businesses are right to answer carefully and wisely.

 

In this case, I think Amazon overstepped its bounds enough to discover that perhaps the more "prudish" consumers are more than just a blip on its screen.

 

I can understand allowing adult and even shocking material to stand uncensored; I cannot understand allowing material to stand that promotes the abuse of children. Whether you think boycotts work or not, my conscience doesn't allow me to support companies who behave in such an egregious fashion.

 

I do choose the places I shop carefully, and if I were aware of some heinous offense on the part of one of my favorite clothing stores, for instance, I would boycott them in the same way. No hesitation.

[RanchGirl]

How revolting. I am so peeved, I love shopping at Amazon and now I have to stop, and right before Christmas?!? <My penny pinching husband will be thrilled>.

[Imprimis]

.

 

In this case, I think Amazon overstepped its bounds enough to discover that perhaps the more "prudish" consumers are more than just a blip on its screen.

 

 

I do agree with your sentiment, but, this is not about being prudish; we're talking about a "book" that is nothing more than a manual that encourages ILLEGAL, vile, unthinkable acts against children, while it rallies for lighter sentences for those who engage in such monstrous activity.

 

Also, I completely disagree with the opinion that boycotting Amazon hurts authors. For instance, like pdalley, I chose to buy my SOTW (and other SWB titles) from Peacehill Press and NOT Amazon. It's my understanding that this helped, rather than hurt the author.

[Abigail4476]

I do agree with your sentiment, but, this is not about being prudish; we're talking about a "book" that is nothing more than a manual that encourages ILLEGAL, vile, unthinkable acts against children, while it rallies for lighter sentences for those who engage in such monstrous activity.

 

The prudish reference was meant to be TIC. I certainly don't consider it to be prudery to object to illegal and vile acts, or any support of the same.

 

My husband does some selling on Amazon, so I realize that a boycott of Amazon could hurt people who don't have any control over what is sold. Most entrepreneurs will simply adapt and move their product elsewhere should profits take a dip for some reason.

 

In this case, it appears that consumer opinion worked its charms, at least in regard to this one title.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Abigail4476

[CLHCO]

Amazon can choose to sell or not sell anything they darn well please. Retailers make choices every day on what to offer. They have simply decided that money is their bottom line, not integrity. Fine. I have no problem decided integrity is what I look for in a store and taking my money elsewhere. :glare:

 

Of course, our mp3 download is sold on Amazon, which puts me in a pickle trying to figure out if I can even get it off of there, since it was set up by a 3rd party. Not that I'm a money maker for them and that they'll even care, but that is another aspect to consider, in my opinion, those authors/artists offered along side such filth. Is it a compromise of values to have your product sold by a company whose business decisions you do not respect?

 

ETA: Just read the update from CNN, and I'm pleased it's gone, but it still seems to me an act of simply caving, than a realization that they were wrong.

Edited November 11, 2010 by CLHCO

[Tohru]

hmmmm....

Does Amazon have a privacy statement? I wonder if it would be legal under one of our many lost liberties and freedoms for them to give out buyers information. Perhaps they may send the information on who buys this book to the authorities?

 

And about boycotting, if you boycott Amazon, you should also boycott Walmart. A lot of the cheapo stuff they sell is made by children who are slaves, forced to work 16-18 hours a day, 7 days a week.

[Tohru]

You can buy many, many questionable books/mags at Barns and Noble. How about your cable company? Boycott them? Boycott clothes companies for using child labor in third world countries that have no labor laws? Boycott your computer? It could bring you porn. Boycott your computer for eventually making it's way to China to be dumped in a huge toxic pit that will kill the people in the town?

 

I mean, just so it's all even as long as we're on a righteous boycott mission.

 

:D Yeah! I know, huh? I boycott lots of companies, but Amazon isn't one of them because they also have lots of independent sellers - some of which are WAHMs.

 

If any one wants to boycott, they should start with boycotting Walmart. Sheesh...if that isn't the one company that has torn apart the American small businesses, strategizing to monopolize our consumerism, insures their elderly employees for life insurance payouts, treats their employees like crap, plus they support child-labor countries.

[CLHCO]

You can buy many, many questionable books/mags at Barns and Noble. How about your cable company? Boycott them? Boycott clothes companies for using child labor in third world countries that have no labor laws? Boycott your computer? It could bring you porn. Boycott your computer for eventually making it's way to China to be dumped in a huge toxic pit that will kill the people in the town?

 

I mean, just so it's all even as long as we're on a righteous boycott mission.

 

:001_huh:

 

Seriously, many people do consider such things every day, and as much as we'd love to save the world from all evil by every step we make, it's just not going to happen. However, there is the story of the starfish to consider:

 

 

 

Once upon a time, there was a wise man who used to go to the ocean to do his writing. He had a habit of walking on the beach before he began his work.

 

 

 

One day, as he was walking along the shore, he looked down the beach and saw a human figure moving like a dancer. He smiled to himself at the thought of someone who would dance to the day, and so, he walked faster to catch up.

 

 

 

As he got closer, he noticed that the figure was that of a young man, and that what he was doing was not dancing at all. The young man was reaching down to the shore, picking up small objects, and throwing them into the ocean.

 

 

 

He came closer still and called out "Good morning! May I ask what it is that you are doing?"

 

 

 

The young man paused, looked up, and replied "Throwing starfish into the ocean."

 

 

 

"I must ask, then, why are you throwing starfish into the ocean?" asked the somewhat startled wise man.

 

 

 

To this, the young man replied, "The sun is up and the tide is going out. If I don't throw them in, they'll die."

 

 

 

Upon hearing this, the wise man commented, "But, young man, do you not realize that there are miles and miles of beach and there are starfish all along every mile? You can't possibly make a difference!"

 

 

 

At this, the young man bent down, picked up yet another starfish, and threw it into the ocean. As it met the water, he said, "It made a difference for that one."

 

 

For some of us, a book promoting such a disgusting act is a worthy cause. This doesn't mean there are not many other worthy causes in the world, simply because we choose to fight one. I do not understand why this fact is so foreign to many of you and worthy of mockery. Feel free to purchase away, but I'll draw my lines in the sand where I see fit, and toss back the starfish as I see them, knowing I can't save them all.

[LaissezFaire]

The book was in fact removed from Amazon.

[Debbie in OR]

:D Yeah! I know, huh? I boycott lots of companies, but Amazon isn't one of them because they also have lots of independent sellers - some of which are WAHMs.

 

If any one wants to boycott, they should start with boycotting Walmart. Sheesh...if that isn't the one company that has torn apart the American small businesses, strategizing to monopolize our consumerism, insures their elderly employees for life insurance payouts, treats their employees like crap, plus they support child-labor countries.

 

You can not compare what that book is promoting and these things you have listed here.

 

And did I mention it's illegal?

[Shawneinfl]

I had sent an email to Amazon last night questioning their decision to promote this book. I do lots of shopping online and said that I would probably move my business elsewhere.

 

This morning I received an email from them simply stating that they were no longer selling the book.

 

I guess there was enough customer outcry.

[keptwoman]

But people want corporations to sell whatever they can to make a buck! :tongue_smilie:

 

I don't disagree with you, but I still shop at Amazon. Why? Because they have the niche books I'm looking for. The out of print books that I need for history. And, Amazon has a very Long Tail. Now, when I know that my mom and pop will carry something, I go buy it from them, but for the majority, I buy homeschooling stuff that mom and pop won't have.

I stopped buying books from Amazon some time ago, not because of this (although I will now close my account, regardless of them pulling this book, clearly they are a company without morals and I do not choose to support them) but because their shipping rates outside of the US suck. Between Better World Books, Book Depository and Abe Books, I've yet to find a book that I am unable to purchase, excepting titles published in Australia which Amazon wouldn't carry anyway.

 

:001_huh:

 

Seriously, many people do consider such things every day, and as much as we'd love to save the world from all evil by every step we make, it's just not going to happen. However, there is the story of the starfish to consider: <snip>

For some of us, a book promoting such a disgusting act is a worthy cause. This doesn't mean there are not many other worthy causes in the world, simply because we choose to fight one. I do not understand why this fact is so foreign to many of you and worthy of mockery. Feel free to purchase away, but I'll draw my lines in the sand where I see fit, and toss back the starfish as I see them, knowing I can't save them all.

Absolutely agree! And I also choose not to buy things from companies which use child labour, and make many other buying choices based on my personal moral convictions.

[Alison in KY]

Wrote to them with my complaint and asked that they close my account. Since they've had the other book on their site since 2002, I don't see them removing either of them.

 

Can you give me an address? I was at their site and couldn't find contact info.

 

Thanks,

 

Alison

[Danestress]

Amazon does not have the right to sell books with photos of children that would be considered p@rn. They don't have a right to possess that kind of material. The law prohibits possession of child p@rn.

 

They DO have a legal right to sell this book, which is apparently does not have that kind of visual aid. I am sure they have a team of very good lawyers who have told them so, and they are probably right. But no one is saying that we need a new law. I think what everyone is saying is that just because Amazon has a right to do so does not mean that they should do so morally or that it is a good business practice to do so. In fact, I think many posters on this thread are saying that they will vote with their dollars to show Amazon just how bad a business practice it is to sell this kind of garbage.

 

My sons are precious to me. I can't support a company that tells men how to have s@x with them. I don't care if they have a legal right.

[delaney]

Well I will continue to shop with Amazon simply because they will continue to offer what I need at great prices. My not buying...even the whole board won't affect it in the long run, especially with the toy buying season on the horizon. Will they pull the book? Probably. They most likely have their lawyers deep in dealing with it and put it out until they can be sure they are free of a discrimination lawsuit. ETA: I read that they did pull it after posting

Yes it is objectionable but it is also only available if you purchase it. If it were sitting on a book shelf I think I would be more bothered.

Before I get flamed please be aware that I was a victim of child molestation so I feel like I have a better grip on the ins and outs of the subject matter. Gross, gross, gross absolutely.

Edited November 11, 2010 by delaney

[FO4UR]

The book was in fact removed from Amazon.

 

...so $ really does talk...

 

I think Amazon is still going to feel a hit from this, especially as Christmas is right around the corner.

 

And, WHY is the author not being arrested right now??? I'm not going to read the book...but one would think that he'd have to have....experience:ack2:...if he wrote it.

[pdalley]

:001_huh:

 

For some of us, a book promoting such a disgusting act is a worthy cause. This doesn't mean there are not many other worthy causes in the world, simply because we choose to fight one. I do not understand why this fact is so foreign to many of you and worthy of mockery. Feel free to purchase away, but I'll draw my lines in the sand where I see fit, and toss back the starfish as I see them, knowing I can't save them all.

 

:iagree: And I feel they did pull it simply because of pressure and not because promoting illegal disgusting acts is wrong so I'm canceling my account. I won't do business with a company like that.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

:iagree: with Sharon.

 

I think it crosses a line. I'm pretty sure that subject matter is socially unacceptable in our culture. It's as if someone wrote a book on how to physically abuse your wife but not leave scars or something.

You can write whatever you want to.

You can read whatever you want to.

But you don't have to sell everything or make it easy to obtain such carp.

This country has already drawn the line at kiddie porn--I don't see how this is different, and I would expect the Amazon CEO to be aware of that.

 

I wouldn't call that censorship.

I call it discernment.

 

Yep. I'm totally against censorship. If this dude wants to write and publish his sicko book, he's at liberty to do so. Choosing not to sell a product because most people would find it objectionable is not censorship. It would seem good business practice to me.

[Violet Crown]

You can buy many, many questionable books/mags at Barns and Noble. How about your cable company? Boycott them? Boycott clothes companies for using child labor in third world countries that have no labor laws? Boycott your computer? It could bring you porn. Boycott your computer for eventually making it's way to China to be dumped in a huge toxic pit that will kill the people in the town?

 

You're going after a straw man. Nobody here is saying "You should boycott any business that provides content with which you disagree or which you find morally objectionable." You're quite right that that would be futile.

 

What people are, I think, saying is that Amazon is choosing to peddle material that crosses a certain line from "objectionable" and past "evil" into "extremely evil." You don't have to agree that it does. But I don't understand why it upsets you that people who see it as extremely evil would choose to protest and to withhold their custom from Amazon.

 

So to answer your questions directly (although I think you meant them rhetorically):

 

(1) While I would prefer that bookstores voluntarily refrained from selling "questionable" magazines (I'm interpreting "questionable" to mean "soft-core p0rn0graphic), I don't find that evil to rise to a level at which I believe I'm morally obliged to refrain from supporting that business with my custom. There are degrees of evil. What's so hard about that?

 

(2) I don't have cable. But again, degrees of evil.

 

(3) Yes, I have for over a decade boycotted sweatshop clothing.

 

(4) The suggestion to "boycott your computer" makes me wonder if you're thinking clearly about what we're objecting to. None of the money I've paid for my computer or for internet services goes to makers/distributors of child p0rn0graphy.

 

As you say, there are other evils in the world (e.g. industrial pollution from discarded computers). Again, a straw man; nobody here is saying you must not be involved in any activity associated with an evil. You're the only one insisting that boycotting a business for one evil action entails boycotting every business that could participate in any evil action.

 

 

I mean, just so it's all even as long as we're on a righteous boycott mission.

I honestly don't understand your position here. It seems to really bother you that people, among all the varied and widespread evils of our fallen world, find some actions so reprehensible as to prompt their refusal to support that action by financially supporting the actor.

 

And you seem to believe that protest and action against one extreme, particular evil (and one in which we have some hope of success) is a self-righteous crusade unless we act similarly against every other evil in the world.

 

I've answered all your questions. My single question for you: is there anything a corporation could sponsor that would be so evil that it would cause you to stop doing business with that corporation?

 

------------------------

 

ETA: And it looks like the boycott has actually succeeded. Good job everyone who protested!

[kwickimom]

WOW, I cannot believe some of the comments here.

 

My cancelling of my account may do nothing to Amazon, but it does a lot to my conscience!!!!

 

- If someone wants to boycott something because they feel it is morally right to do so, whats the big deal? We got the book pulled didnt we?

 

-just because I boycott something doesnt mean I need to boycott everything. Nobody can do it all. We all do what we can and what feels right.

 

-How can one compare this book to sweatshops? This is the r*ping and molesting of children and doing it to get away with it, and loving to do it. This is EVIL, not just questionable. This ILLEGAL not just immoral. This man LOVES what he does and thinks there is nothing wrong with it. We must protect our children by ALL MEANS possible. I will boycott any and everything I have to if it means maybe saving one single child from a disgusting pedophile.

[lisamarie]

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Business/Default.aspx?id=1229596

 

Well then, this article makes me even more unhappy with amazon despite their decision to pull the original offensive book. Just because it doesn't include pictures does not mean the content is morally right.:glare:

[delaney]

Honestly you could make a list a mile long of disgust. Here's a good one

http://www.slate.com/id/2213073/

It's not just Amazon that crosses lines. Song lyrics are available for all ages to hear and talk about the foul and disgusting. Sad state of our society isn't it? Yet my sister argued against homeschooling with me AGAIN today because she feels that my kids need to experience what the world really has to offer. :glare:

[mcconnellboys]

I've been trying to sort of think this thing through. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. If it can be withheld for one thing, it can be withheld for any thing. That said, is freedom of speech allowed - that is, does it override illegal issues? Is one free to write about how to do things that are against the public good? Can we write books about how to infect masses of people with disease? Can we write books about how to create anarchy through making and blowing up bombs?

 

I'm just thinking. I'm really not sure where the line is but I know that when I was in college, there was a book entitled The Anarchists' Cookbook that was supposed to be illegal to own. Now I saw a published copy of it, so someone published it. I know that the Golden Chemistry book was banned for a while because it was thought to be too dangerous for children, but there's a free copy of it online now. (It's still too dangerous, LOL....)

 

In doing an internet search, I see that Anarchists' Cookbook is free online now, too, as I suspected.

 

And we all know there are tons of horrible, gruesome, unwholesome things printed online. These things are all too often free and highly available for all to read/see.

 

Is this any different than printing a book? No, but I think we make the distinction that a business does not have to carry such an item. But are there laws that say they have to publish such an item if someone wishes it published?

[justamouse]

You're going after a straw man. Nobody here is saying "You should boycott any business that provides content with which you disagree or which you find morally objectionable." You're quite right that that would be futile.

 

 

 

ETA: And it looks like the boycott has actually succeeded. Good job everyone who protested!

 

But that's exactly what you did-and although it worked, protesting vociferously would have worked just as well. Amazon is very sensitive to those things.

 

A full boycott of Amazon not only includes the crappy authors you have something against, and those authors that write good things. THAT was my point.

[LaissezFaire]

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Business/Default.aspx?id=1229596

 

Well then, this article makes me even more unhappy with amazon despite their decision to pull the original offensive book. Just because it doesn't include pictures does not mean the content is morally right.:glare:

 

 

While I can see your point and I am in NO way defending the sale of the book, a lot of popular fiction contains scenes of pedophilia and child abuse in them. I know it's fiction but the imagery is still there.

[Elaine]

 

A full boycott of Amazon not only includes the crappy authors you have something against, and those authors that write good things. THAT was my point.

 

No, it doesn't. If I am going to buy someone's book, I am going to still buy it, just not from Amazon. The authors that people choose to support will still be supported. The only thing not being supported is Amazon.

 

I just bought Relaxed cooking with Curtis Stone from Overstock instead of Amazon. He was not boycotted, because hello? Curtis Stone! :D Amazon was. That is the difference.

[justamouse]

No, it doesn't. If I am going to buy someone's book, I am going to still buy it, just not from Amazon. The authors that people choose to support will still be supported. The only thing not being supported is Amazon.

 

I just bought Relaxed cooking with Curtis Stone from Overstock instead of Amazon. He was not boycotted, because hello? Curtis Stone! :D Amazon was. That is the difference.

 

 

Amazon has one of the largest selections. How many old books can you get at the local mom and pop? How many books would you not see if not for their bundle techniques? You can't buy all the books at overstock, mom and pop and other stores. Those authors MAKE THEIR LIVING through amazon. Are you going to pick up TWTM at Overstock? Amazon doesn't just sell pop fiction and cookbooks. Kindle authors rely on Amazon for all their sales. You can't buy them on overstock.

[pdalley]

Amazon has one of the largest selections. How many old books can you get at the local mom and pop? How many books would you not see if not for their bundle techniques? You can't buy all the books at overstock, mom and pop and other stores. Those authors MAKE THEIR LIVING through amazon. Are you going to pick up TWTM at Overstock? Amazon doesn't just sell pop fiction and cookbooks. Kindle authors rely on Amazon for all their sales. You can't buy them on overstock.

 

 

No, I'll buy TWTM at Peace Hill Press. Alibris has nice prices on old books.

 

And Nook carries plenty of books in e format. Lulu also.

[clementine]

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-amazon-pedophile-explanation.html

 

Looks like Amazon caved to the people.....personally I'm glad, but I still have a bad taste in my mouth for them having it there in the first place.

[kwickimom]

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-amazon-pedophile-explanation.html

 

Looks like Amazon caved to the people.....personally I'm glad, but I still have a bad taste in my mouth for them having it there in the first place.

 

"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable," it said.

"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," the company said.

 

Absolute c*ap!! SIMPLY because we or others believe it is objectionable!?! This statement makes SO angry. MOLESTATION of children is not SIMPLY OBJECTIONABLE. It is illegal, sick, evil, disgusting............

[Elaine]

Amazon has one of the largest selections. How many old books can you get at the local mom and pop? How many books would you not see if not for their bundle techniques? You can't buy all the books at overstock, mom and pop and other stores. Those authors MAKE THEIR LIVING through amazon. Are you going to pick up TWTM at Overstock? Amazon doesn't just sell pop fiction and cookbooks. Kindle authors rely on Amazon for all their sales. You can't buy them on overstock.

 

I buy from as many local companies as possible. I don't support Peace Hill Press through Amazon. I don't own a kindle and never will. And, I use the library for the majority of my book usage. Cookbooks I buy because I like to have them on hand.

 

I really think you are grasping here. If someone puts all of their eggs in the Amazon basket for their livelihood, that is their problem, not mine. I truly cannot see people not selling books simply because others boycott Amazon.

[pdalley]

"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable," it said.

"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," the company said.

 

Absolute c*ap!! SIMPLY because we or others believe it is objectionable!?! This statement makes SO angry. MOLESTATION of children is not SIMPLY OBJECTIONABLE. It is illegal, sick, evil, disgusting............

 

And, as Anderson Cooper pointed out on CNN last night - they don't follow that policy across the board. They don't sell legal p___. If they don't censor what they sell they should carry those magazines at the very least, right? So they aren't strictly following their own policy.

 

And as you said, this is beyond objectionable - this is ILLEGAL!

 

And also, I find a HUGE amount of old books at my local Mom and Pop bookstores and even more at Goodwill. We also have a wonderful library. Which, I might add has an ebook format for check out that Nook supports but Kindle doesn't.

 

I actually should thank Amazon for keeping me from buying a Kindle cause after a comparison I much prefer the Nook for what I need it for.

[Mom-ninja.]

What about the book from 2002? Off to look.

 

Still there.

 

 

Oh my! Guess what just happened? I was looking at the sample pages of this book, and my toddler was pulling on my arm. I hit the 'one click purchase' button on accident! I have never canceled an order so quickly. Ugh.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Kleine Hexe

[Aubrey]

Can you give me an address? I was at their site and couldn't find contact info.

 

Thanks,

 

Alison

 

If you scroll to the very bottom of their home page, there's a small "help" button. Click it, & on the right side of the screen that comes up, there's a "Contact us" button--it's yellow, like the buy button. Once you click that, you get a choice of contacting them via email, phone, & something else--I can't remember. Snail mail, probably.

 

I also sent them a note, asking for a public apology. I"m not sure what else they could do at this point, as they've pulled the book, but acknowledging that they were...wow. I don't even know the word to express how wrong... would go a long way, imo, to fix this.

[Greta]

In 2009, Amazon stopped selling "RapeLay," a first-person video game in which the protagonist stalks and then rapes a mother and her daughters, after it was widely condemned in the media and by various interest groups." --Source

 

Who on earth is in charge of approving material at Amazon, that stuff like this would fly in under the radar and only be removed when enough people protest? :glare:

 

I think I'm going to be sick. So many of my dearest friends and family members have suffered the horror of rape and molestation. Things like this make me feel physically ill. This world is a very scary place to raise a daughter.

 

Thanks for posting this. I was thinking that I could shop at Amazon since they pulled the book. But clearly this is a pattern of not caring one whit about how their products impact the world -- they only "care" when their bottom line is affected. I'm not saying that I expect any large business to be a do-good, selfless, cuddly bunny. But this is far beyond "questionable" and well into the realm of evil. I can't stomach it.

[Violet Crown]

But that's exactly what you did-and although it worked, protesting vociferously would have worked just as well. Amazon is very sensitive to those things.

 

A full boycott of Amazon not only includes the crappy authors you have something against, and those authors that write good things. THAT was my point.

 

No, I didn't; I did not "boycott any business that provides content with which you disagree or which you find morally objectionable" (the words of mine which you highlighted). I boycotted a particular business (briefly...) that provided content which I found extremely evil. Do you see the italicized words? They are the distinction between what you are claiming people are doing, and what people are actually doing.

 

I don't know that protesting vociferously would have worked just as well. You don't either. Money generally talks louder in life.

 

You didn't answer my question. I answered yours. Is there anything a business could do--let's make it Amazon in this case--that you would find so unacceptable that it would cause you to boycott them? If not, I find that morally monstrous. If so, then you are willing to accept that the writers you like might be hurt by a boycott.

[Greta]

How many old books can you get at the local mom and pop?

 

I have a good used book store, and a really good used book store, in my general area of town. And I've also purchased old books from ebay and alibris.

 

 

How many books would you not see if not for their bundle techniques?

 

Amazon's website is not the only one that uses this technique. Barnes & Noble, Borders, and Book Depository all use this same technique on their websites.

 

Kindle authors rely on Amazon for all their sales. You can't buy them on overstock.

 

I don't own a Kindle. I just plain don't care.

 

I'm not sure why you keep insisting that Amazon is the be all and end all of book stores. It just ain't so.