08-15-2012, 11:20 PM | #76 |
Guru
Posts: 944
Karma: 1490348
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Norman, OK
Device: Sony PRS 350, 900, 950; Kindles (ALL of them!); Kobo Aura One
|
Enabling people to not view certain comments through categorization of filters - yes.
Censorship - no. It's a slippery slope. |
08-16-2012, 01:26 AM | #77 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 408
Karma: 1786912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Quote:
People have always been inclined to dehumanize or sexualize others, but I think literature (and other art as well) has the ability to influence folks towards a sexual mindset that sees other people not as objects but as people with intrinsic value--as valuable and worthy of consideration because they are people. It also has the ability to do the opposite. Sex is not dehumanizing at all. I love sex. It's awesome, and I think that it can be incredibly humanizing. And I agree--it is dehumanizing to kill or harm or persecute someone who holds a different sexual standard. It turns the person that is being killed into an object as well--reducing them to their sexual activities or proclivities and ignoring the rest of who they are as a person. But while a lot of sexual activity can be humanizing, a lot of sexual activity can also center on degrading another person, harming another person, using another person only for one's own ends, and that is dehumanizing. Dehumanizing sexual activity is about turning the sexual partner into an object. Rape and child abuse are dehumanizing sexual activities, in which the victim is only used for the gratification of the offender. Some people use positions of authority to pressure a person into an uncomfortable sexual relationship, and this can also be very dehumanizing. So, using rape as an example: If a book glorifies rape--it presents it as titillating, it eroticizes rape, it shows rape as ultimately satisfying for the offender, it presents no negative consequences, it even shows the victim coming to the conclusion that such an encounter was mutually pleasurable--then the reader has a choice. Do they respond with, "Rape=good" or "Rape=bad"? Some people, unfortunately, will respond with the former rather than the latter. This remains their fault, of course, but without the author presenting a case for rape as a good thing, they may have remained firmly opposed to it as a means for sexual gratification. They may not have picked up the book already fantasizing about raping their neighbor, but they may put down the book doing so. I'll add this and be done--I don't think any one book is going to cause a person to become a rapist (or any other kind of sexual offender). I do think a steady diet of pornography can incline a person towards a dehumanized/dehumanizing sexual mindset. This is, of course, an opinion. I'm happy to give you the last word in the discussion if you want it. Thank you for your civility! |
|
Advert | |
|
08-16-2012, 04:38 AM | #78 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,538
Karma: 264065402
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Taiwan
Device: HP Touchpad, Sony Duo 13, Lumia 920, Kobo Aura HD
|
You can't outsource parenting. The internet is no place to let small children roam unsupervised. I think children running into a few erotic books on Amazon should be the least of your worries.
|
08-16-2012, 08:20 AM | #79 |
Member Retired
Posts: 3,183
Karma: 11721895
Join Date: Nov 2010
Device: Nook STR (rooted) & Sony T2
|
Lolita by Nabakov. Where do you draw the line? Lolita didn't deserve all the press it got.
Me, I say no censorship for fiction, but categories should be clear with clear warnings attached, and lots of parental control. |
08-16-2012, 10:40 AM | #80 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
Quote:
Entertainment is exactly that, and nothing more. Your average intelligent human being knows the difference between entertainment and reality, and knows that regardless of how an act is depicted in a book or on a TV show, doing it in reality isn't necessarily the same and isn't necessarily right. Excitement and titillation doesn't automatically translate into action. Doesn't matter if you watch rape or bondage or snuff films every single day; it means you probably enjoy watching them, but it doesn't mean you're going to do them, or even seriously consider them. |
|
Advert | |
|
08-16-2012, 11:03 AM | #81 | |
Kafkaesque
Posts: 104
Karma: 1149770
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: California
Device: Kindle
|
Quote:
|
|
08-16-2012, 11:16 AM | #82 |
Wizard
Posts: 3,418
Karma: 35207650
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: iPad
|
Here is a thought for you... if TV an READING does NOT impact behavior, why do advertisers spend BILLIONS using them to do just that?
|
08-16-2012, 11:47 AM | #83 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 27,549
Karma: 193191846
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
|
The problem with a filterable "ratings" system is who's on the committee who makes the decision? Who ultimately pays for the lawsuit when an author whose work gets mistakenly (or over-zealously) rated/categorized loses sales because his/her work has been made less visible to otherwise potential customers? Who makes the decision that borderline material is going to get less exposure than it might otherwise deserve?
A rating system works for movies because there's not thousands of different movies coming out or playing in every single theater on any given day. The MPAA's job would be a cakewalk compared to the daunting task any sort of generic (or even proprietary) literary rating committee/system would face. A customer-based rating/tagging system might work better, but even then, the potential for perfectly innocent (or vendetta-tagged) content not showing up under an otherwise potential customer's search is not a situation that I think Amazon is ever going to want to deal with. The whole scifi/fantasy/romance/mystery/etc search criteria is already flaky enough—with complete misses and bleed-over happening. The more complicated the algorithm gets, the more titles that are going to start falling through the cracks. Finding an audience is hard enough without giving perfect strangers the ability to spot-judge your work and take it right out from under the nose of other customers that might have been perfectly willing to try it otherwise. There are no age-appropriate and/or morality-based content criteria that can be delineated cleanly enough to be assigned check-boxes that will work for everyone's searches. And to be completely honest, I don't think there's any inherent right that people should never have to experience "unintended content" showing up in an internet search. Between descriptions, customer reviews and free samples, I think it's fairly easy to determine if it's something little Johnny (or yourself) needs to be reading. Last edited by DiapDealer; 08-16-2012 at 11:58 AM. |
08-16-2012, 11:48 AM | #84 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
Quote:
Even those are suggestions only, and it is easy enough to decide not to buy their products: I don't care how sexy is the blonde in a beer commercial, I can easily resist buying that beer. But even if I do succumb, buying the beer isn't illegal, and won't hurt anyone (besides, possibly, my own taste buds). |
|
08-16-2012, 01:03 PM | #85 | |
Wizard
Posts: 3,418
Karma: 35207650
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: iPad
|
Quote:
The same argument can be played out with propaganda. Hence what you read and see does influence you. |
|
08-16-2012, 01:03 PM | #86 |
Philosopher
Posts: 2,034
Karma: 18736532
Join Date: Jan 2012
Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch
|
People are going to buy a car, beer or a toaster whether or not there is advertising. What commercials attempt to do is nudge you over to get you to buy their product instead of the competitor's. If people see a car commercial, they don't assume that people are going to start running down people on the sidewalk.
|
08-16-2012, 02:08 PM | #87 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 408
Karma: 1786912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Quote:
And we have laws against false advertising for a reason--so people aren't led to believe things that are wrong. If advertising didn't affect people's beliefs, it wouldn't matter. People would see the false ad and say, "That ain't true," and go about their day remaining blissfully unaffected by everything they read and watched. |
|
08-16-2012, 05:04 PM | #88 |
Philosopher
Posts: 2,034
Karma: 18736532
Join Date: Jan 2012
Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch
|
I'm not saying there is no effect. But when an effect is asserted, there needs to be evidence for that effect. Advertisers don't operate on assumptions, they place their ads based on evidence. They advertise, and they see increased sales. They tailor their messages to certain groups based on the evidence. I'm open to evidence on the claimed negative effects.
We can sue for false advertising, because an ad is a promise. If an ad says that hot dogs are $1.00 each, and I show up and they are $5.00 each, I've been lied to. Fiction is different. A book of fiction can feature people living on Venus, and the fact that Venus is too hot for life doesn't matter, it's fiction. |
08-16-2012, 06:22 PM | #89 |
Wizard
Posts: 3,418
Karma: 35207650
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: iPad
|
The gist of this thread as been that print/tv does not influence people. The advertising industry is proof that they do influence people. Whether it is negative (i.e. girls going anorexic, see the studies out of Japan that force them to change advertising laws) or positive (saving money on car insurance), they do influence the population in general.
If advertisements effect the general population, why would nothing else influence the general population. I am against censorship, because it is a dangerous and slippery slope, but I do believe that books and tv influences people and their behavior. |
08-16-2012, 07:41 PM | #90 |
Guru
Posts: 891
Karma: 8893661
Join Date: Feb 2012
Device: Kindle
|
I wish that Amazon would add a filter to the account settings. Each person would be able to block specific categories from showing up. This would apply to searches, browsing, and recommendations.
I have largely stopped browsing for books on Amazon. The massive influx of romance into other genres makes browsing a hassle. I have a similar problem with historical-fiction intruding into the history section. It became a huge waste of time. If Amazon would allow me to filter those out, then I would browse more. If I browsed more, then I would probably buy more. Instead, Amazon wastes resources showing me books that I will never buy. Amazon may not care about my sensibilities or my time, but Amazon should care about making it easier for me to buy stuff. I pointed this out to Amazon's customer service. They didn't seem to grasp the concept. |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Seriously thoughtful Opinion Please! | kindlekitten | Lounge | 34 | 06-12-2011 02:04 PM |
Opinion of *** | Tom SKP | Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links) | 13 | 10-14-2010 06:38 AM |