Quote:
Originally Posted by caleb72
The pulling of a couple of books doesn't in itself bother me..... But I think it's a bit simplistic to claim that because Amazon is a business that sell what it likes, issues like this don't/can't have more profound effects on literature.
|
I don't think anyone is making this claim.
The point is that regardless of any level of influence, Amazon has the legal and ethical right to pull titles at any time and for almost any reason. Further, it is not "censorship" as the authors can sell their books through numerous other outlets.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by caleb72
I just wonder if actions like this can result in authors self-editing in an attempt to be 'acceptable' to Amazon's content guidelines.
|
It might, but this is a very different process than self-censorship by the media in China or Russia. If you write extreme material, you should be willing to risk getting the cold shoulder by a mainstream retailer. That's a completely different level of threat than risking a jail term or assassination attempt.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by caleb72
That may well satisfy a large body of readers who prefer sanitised content - but is it what we all want? And should we be slightly more concerned - even if just academically, in the possibilities?
|
It may not be what "everyone" wants, but that's why you have competition. (Nor is any retailer obligated to serve "everyone's" tastes.)
As to the "possibilities," we are discussing a truly minuscule number of books. If you're going to scrutinize every minute change as an indicator of future trends, then logically you can predict any possible outcome to suit your particular view. Did they feature a Leonard Zinn book on the main page? They're about to become a bunch of Communists. Did they create a Glenn Beck page with an interview? Obviously they're coddling to the Tea Party and will soon be a conservative lap-dog.
If Amazon struck 10,000 erotic titles from its site,
then you'd have a big indication that they are actively altering the parameters of what they want to sell. In contrast, divining massive editorial shifts based on a handful of titles is like reading tea-leaves. Except less efficacious.
