An insight into the heart of a publisher

[Harmon]

It looks to me like this is not a spellcheck mistake. Rather, it is probably either a mental glitch or a muscle memory mistake - or a combo. "Black people" is a common phrase & it seems likely that the transcriber just let his fingers do the walking.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by gastan

It seems that some people spend most of their life looking for something to be offended by. When you're only looking for the bad, it usually doesn't take much to find it.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Seriously, this is beyond a non-issue. The only thing sillier than getting offended by this is acting like a statement by a publisher is an indicator of the character or "true nature" of an entire company.

I can't figure out if you lot just don't get it or you are being deliberately obtuse. it's NOT the mistake, it's the callous attitude of the publisher.

[recluse]

Take it from someone who has made a career of banging his head against walls, some people simply refuse to see the obvious until it's sitting on their chests and beating their brains in with a brick. No common sense.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by abookreader

..."horrific mistake, we're sorry...

Mis-programming your cancer center's radiation therapy machine to cook the patients is a horrific mistake.

Making a typo in a recipe is a minor glitch.

The big problem here is a matter of perspective: First, on the part of the people who reacted to an inadvertent typo as if it was, well, "horrific" instead of just a freakin' typo. Second, on the part of the ones who think this somehow indicates that that person, that company, or the entire industry are a bunch of callous jerks.

Am I a callous jerk? Um, never mind, don't answer that. But is my entire industry (I'm a website designer) callous jerks because I agree that it's a silly typo?

I'm reminded of a person I knew in college who reacted to everything that could potentially be seen as a slight (at least, if you stretched reeeeeal hard) by claiming to be emotionally traumatized and demanding apologies from not only whoever said whatever she got bent out of shape about, but everyone who was in the room who hadn't leaped to her defense and done something about it (whether or not they were even aware of it). She thought she was exercising power by demanding all these apologies and holding massive grudges over things that nobody in their right mind would consider offensive. Everybody else thought she was a self-centered whiner with severe entitlement issues. (and no, she wasn't a member of any identified minority group)

She never learned that strength is toughness, fortitude, perseverance, endurance ... it's the ability to withstand real attacks, real adversity, without breaking ... it's not getting butthurt over every possible way that anything anyone said, even if not to her, could be turned into something she could take offense at. She got her apologies, just to shut her up, but she bought them at the price of respect.

And again, there is no historical precedent for white people eating black people. It's not an offensive reference because there's nothing for it to refer to. Cannibals generally eat their neighbors. They eat their traditional enemies, or sometimes their own relatives, or if the legends that gave rise to Sweeny Todd are to be believed, the occasional barbershop customer. If it referred to lynching, that would be offensive, because it's a reference to something that happened. Cookbooks aren't.

Besides, any Kanamit cook knows people are all the same color when you skin them.

[TGS]

Presumably all the contributors to this thread who "can't see why anyone would be offended" will be pointing out to the Mods that, when a post causes offence, it's the person offended who should be warned off rather than the poster.

Would it also have have all been a fuss about nothing if the "typo" had read "freshly peeled Jew", or "freshly sliced lesbian", or "freshly fried epileptic"?*

Do bear in mind when reading the above sentence that any offence that you feel - particularly if you are Jewish, a lesbian or suffer from epilepsy - is your fault. And anyway, everything offends someone, so just chill out.

*I am not dumb enough to claim that these sentences exist only because of a typo, a dodgy spellchecker or an incompetent proofreader.

[WT Sharpe]

The problem isn't the typo. Anyone can make a mistake, and under pressure to meet a deadline, it's easy to see where someone could type people when they meant to type pepper. What is really a remarkable display of cluelessness, however, is the statement by Bob Sessions, the head of publishing for Penguin Group Australia:

"[W]hy anyone would be offended, we don't know."

Really?

[m-reader]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I don't see why anyone would be offended!, said Bob Sessions of Penguin group Australia.
really???? you don't get why
"...salt and freshly ground black people..."

would be offensive? it was an honest mistake until you called it "silly". now it IS offensive.

and these are the folks that we expect to be reasonable over ebook prices!

It was a typo. All books withdrawn (where possible) and replaced at a "huge" cost of AUD 20,000. Whoever wants a replacement of the book can get one for free from the publisher. Apologies, etc. etc.
Please read the whole article, not just quote one sentence.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by m-reader

It was a typo.

Yes, an offensive one.

[PKFFW]

Firstly, I think anyone offended by the mistake must be pretty intent on being offended in the first place.

Having said that, perhaps the CEO would have been wise to apologise for allowing the mistake to slip through and be published.

However, either the mistake is offensive or it isn't. It doesn't suddently become offensive because the CEO thinks it is "silly".(as stated by the OP) Perhaps one could find the CEO's attitude offensive but if one didn't find the mistake offensive to begin with one shouldn't find it so after the CEO calls it silly.

Further, attempting to suggest this attitude is in any way a reflection on all the "folks that we expect to be reasonable over ebook prices!" is a bit of a stretch I think.

My 2 cents anyway.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[TGS]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Firstly, I think anyone offended by the mistake must be pretty intent on being offended in the first place.

But you may be wrong on that.

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Having said that, perhaps the CEO would have been wise to apologise for allowing the mistake to slip through and be published.

I agree.

Originally Posted by PKFFW

However, either the mistake is offensive or it isn't. It doesn't suddently become offensive because the CEO thinks it is "silly".(as stated by the OP) Perhaps one could find the CEO's attitude offensive but if one didn't find the mistake offensive to begin with one shouldn't find it so after the CEO calls it silly.

The mistake may have been both silly and offensive in itself - in that it offended some people. If it did offend someone then the CEO's response is also offensive since it seems to suggest that anyone who is offended by such a "silly" mistake is somehow wrong to be offended.

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Further, attempting to suggest this attitude is in any way a reflection on all the "folks that we expect to be reasonable over ebook prices!" is a bit of a stretch I think.

It may be a bit of a stretch but the way I understood kindlekitten's original point was that if the CEO cares so little about how what his company does affects people then how can we expect that company to take account of its customers when it comes to ebook pricing.

Originally Posted by PKFFW

My 2 cents anyway.

And, unlike many ebooks, worth every penny!

[Olympus]

View this picture with the ad from Burger King in the Netherlands

In Dutch "burger" also means Citizen so the translated text of this advertisement
"Only a grilled citizen is a good citizen"
so I really don't understand the issue with a spelling error

[gwynevans]

Originally Posted by TGS

If it did offend someone then the CEO's response is also offensive since it seems to suggest that anyone who is offended by such a "silly" mistake is somehow wrong to be offended.

Hmm, almost everything's going to be offensive to someone, so I don't think that the CEO should be castigated due to "someone" being offended...

For example, I'm offended by your suggestion that I should think that the CEO was being offensive as to me, it suggests you think I've got no sense of proportion...

[tompe]

Originally Posted by TGS

It may be a bit of a stretch but the way I understood kindlekitten's original point was that if the CEO cares so little about how what his company does affects people then how can we expect that company to take account of its customers when it comes to ebook pricing.

Or he cares a lot. He do not want to have a society were people get offended by everything. One way to influence this is to not cave in to everybody that says they are offended.

To me he has a sound view and I trust him more to behave good with respect to pricing.

[charleski]

It's irrelevant that it was a typo.

Anyone who thinks a recipe that calls for grinding up and eating black people isn't offensive obviously thinks that singing 'Shoot the Boer' isn't offensive either and couldn't possibly cause any harm. What could be offensive about shooting goats?

Some of the replies on this thread are mind-bogglingly naive. You lot seriously need to get out more and realise that taking offence to something isn't an act, it's a a reaction to the fact that words have consequences.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by charleski

It's irrelevant that it was a typo.

Abso-freaking-lutely!!