Ebook on Amazon.com about pedophilia deleted

[Beauty hunter]

Pedophile publication on Amazon that promotes the molestation of children is slow to be pulled off the shelves until public outrage threatens to boycott. Money sl*ts.

Amazon.com title defending pedophilia sparks boycott call - CNN

 

[Kurt]

Yikes - unbelievable what some people try to get away with these days. Sounds like Amazon will need to screen titles before they get published on their site.

 

[Carol G]

Two theories floating around on the interwebs... that it was a publicity stunt for the author, who also listed two other newly published books on amazon, or that the FBI planted it as bait to catch real pedophiles. I really hope one of those explanations is true...

It does spark an interesting debate - I have worked at many bookstores over the years, starting when I was 16. I remember my first boss explaining to me that I could not let my personal feelings about a book affect my customer service - she used "The Anarchist Cookbook" as an example. She staged two different mock scenarios, one dealing with an irate customer who wanted the book immediately and we didn't have it in stock, and one with a customer who wanted the store shut down because we did have it in stock. It was a very interesting experience, and taught me a lot about perspective... and it was a lesson I needed several times over the years.

The most confrontational customer I ever dealt with was a woman who was irate that the store I worked in placed the "New Age" section right next to the "Christianity" section. She actually said "how dare you?!" and claimed that the new age books would poison the minds of the young Christians, and that she was offended that she had to pass by and look at them while she was searching for a bible. I am not making this up.

So that leads me to the question... even if we find a book morally reprehensible, and even if it promotes illegal activity, do we have the right to ban it? Does that impinge on our (collective) constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of the press? Is it a slippery slope? Is a publisher being brave or stupid to print it? What is the bookseller's role? I think it's a very interesting debate.

 

[sunspotbaby]

He has a right to write whatever he wants. Stores have the right to choose whether or not to carry it. The collective public has the right not to shop at stores that choose to carry it.

 

[Matt J]

I'm looking at it from the perspective that the author is on disability for manic depression. I'm going to guess a manic period after watching an episode of Law & Order SVU was the motive behind it.

 

[RayStar]

I found it so strange that he thought his knowledge would be valuable to someone.

 

[Carol G]

He has a right to write whatever he wants. Stores have the right to choose whether or not to carry it. The collective public has the right not to shop at stores that choose to carry it.

With the marketplace we have today, I agree. This particular manager (in the story I told) was very committed to the idea that booksellers should sell any & every book; it is not the bookseller's place to judge the information and the public has a right to be able to access it. This was before the internet, before self-publishing was so accessible, and there were really no other avenues available to people wanting to distribute information widely.

Please don't get me wrong, a guide to pedophilia crosses even my very tolerant line. I am glad Amazon removed it... but again, it's kind of a slippery slope... what about a legitimate child psychology/physiology textbook that studies sexuality in children? I am sure it would contain information that a pedophile could use to exploit a child. Do we need to limit access to those books? How can a consumer prove their intentions? What is our (society's) responsibility?

I have no answers or agenda here, I just think it is a really interesting discussion topic - keeping information free and flowing vs. aiding criminals in illegal/immoral activities.

 

[Kurt]

As a society we have created government as an entity to benefit our society as a whole. If we can't have a government that can regulate a few things that are harmful to our society then we should go back to living in tribes.

In other words, not only should the author not be allowed to publish it, but there should be some other repercussions for having written it. If we can't protect our children, what can we do? Do we not have any common sense and common decency left?

Let's also allow our government to protect our waters, air, land, and food - actions which also protect us and our children. Roads without potholes are nice also.

 

[Mango]

My feeling is that any book that violates any laws that are strictly enforced in every State that impact ones lives so dramatically, should be banned from printing. One is free to write what ever the hell they want, but as far as benefiting from it financially while aiding and abetting criminals, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, IMHO.
What kind of people would buy a book like that or one called for example, How to Ki ll Someone, or Knock off The Pre sident in 5 minutes? We, as a society must draw lines without allowing criminals to hide behind the First Amendment.

 

[scooterbug44]

I find it to be a fine line - once you start banning books it's hard to stop.......and quite frankly there are people who are offended by everything and anything.

One example - a local woman who told me she didn't have the Harry Potter books on her living room bookshelves because she was afraid of what people from her church would think.

If Amazon wants to carry this book, they can do it - and face the legal and economic consequences of it. And I hope the FBI goes after anyone who buys it or sells it.