Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2020 17:49:44 GMT
Interesting. I was just reading posts on how Lulu is removing books if they determine the books do not adhere to human decency, and on my way to yahoo, I find that Amazon is in the middle of a controversy for doing just that.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronmiller on Jun 6, 2020 17:59:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Retread-Retired-Cameron on Jun 6, 2020 19:32:12 GMT
Want to see sales of a book go up? Let a group of people loudly protest the book's content. The louder the protest, the more other people will at least check to see what the book is about.
If memory serves it was only a few years ago that Lulu Press and Amazon were pulling books that had gone Public Domain which some enterprising people decided to republish as their own work without adding any value, i.e.: new cover art, analysis, annotations, and so on. I seem to recall a number of people howling about the unfairness.
I also noticed after the Public Domain issue had settled down, outlets that had once allowed a customer to order my books on their sites either quit listing my books or listed them as unavailable. The sense I got at the time was self-published works were considered of suspect quality.
Self-Publishing platforms are free to pull books all day long, but at the same time they should establish some clear guidelines and stick to same even if it cuts into the profit margin.
Perhaps at such time as humanity actually comes of age, if it manages to survive to that stage, hateful content will be a relic of the past. In the interim there will always be people willing to do whatever it takes to make a quick buck, regardless of negative effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronmiller on Jun 6, 2020 21:01:51 GMT
"Want to see sales of a book go up? Let a group of people loudly protest the book's content. The louder the protest, the more other people will at least check to see what the book is about."
I like to call that the "Comstock Effect." And it is pretty much infallible.
So far as being able to get something hateful in print: that is always possible. There are countless ways to do so, from finding a traditional job printer who will run off whatever quantity of books you want, no questions asked, to turning out the book yourself on a home printer or copier and doing your own binding. Look at those horrific Chick tracts you see in every bus station...the company prints those themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by JesusNinja on Jun 6, 2020 21:55:18 GMT
Interesting. I was just reading posts on how Lulu is removing books if they determine the books do not adhere to human decency, and on my way to yahoo, I find that Amazon is in the middle of a controversy for doing just that.
According to that Amazon said blocking the book was a mistake and is now back up for sale. It was about Covid 19, and I'm sure it was how many think it's being used as a weapon. Another touchy subject matter. Musk is trying to break up Amazon as they are both competing for the same thing. As far as I'm concerned no one can break up a company. It's a business someone built with hard work. They deserve to have it. That person that built it started out at the bottom somewhere. They had to work for it, it wasn't free. They also supply millions of jobs to people which wouldn't be there. Sorry getting off topic. Hope I read that article right. If not please correct me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2020 21:57:22 GMT
"Want to see sales of a book go up? Let a group of people loudly protest the book's content. The louder the protest, the more other people will at least check to see what the book is about." I like to call that the "Comstock Effect." And it is pretty much infallible. So far as being able to get something hateful in print: that is always possible. There are countless ways to do so, from finding a traditional job printer who will run off whatever quantity of books you want, no questions asked, to turning out the book yourself on a home printer or copier and doing your own binding. Look at those horrific Chick tracts you see in every bus station...the company prints those themselves. When I posted, in addition to the obvious freedom of speech, human decency, censorship themes, I was also thinking of something else; Elon Musk is calling for the dismantling of Amazon/KDP. Which means no POD is safe. Anything can happen to any one player. Does anyone remember myspace? I think they were gone overnight. The same can happen to Lulu or KDP. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2020 21:59:33 GMT
Interesting. I was just reading posts on how Lulu is removing books if they determine the books do not adhere to human decency, and on my way to yahoo, I find that Amazon is in the middle of a controversy for doing just that.
According to that Amazon said blocking the book was a mistake and is now back up for sale. It was about Covid 19, and I'm sure it was how many think it's being used as a weapon. Another touchy subject matter. Musk is trying to break up Amazon as they are both competing for the same thing. As far as I'm concerned no one can break up a company. It's a business someone built with hard work. They deserve to have it. That person that built it started out at the bottom somewhere. They had to work for it, it wasn't free. They also supply millions of jobs to people which wouldn't be there. Sorry getting off topic. Hope I read that article right. If not please correct me. I think.one wrong PR move and the company is gone. In today's world. |
|
|
|
Post by JesusNinja on Jun 6, 2020 22:00:29 GMT
True Maggie. Another attack on the ability for people to make their own way. It's sad things are getting this. It's not right. But again Musk doesn't have the authority to do anything. Amazon doesn't belong to him. It appears both billionaires are competing for the same thing. Space exploration. A little jealousy maybe ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Retread-Retired-Cameron on Jun 6, 2020 22:11:22 GMT
"Want to see sales of a book go up? Let a group of people loudly protest the book's content. The louder the protest, the more other people will at least check to see what the book is about." I like to call that the "Comstock Effect." And it is pretty much infallible. So far as being able to get something hateful in print: that is always possible. There are countless ways to do so, from finding a traditional job printer who will run off whatever quantity of books you want, no questions asked, to turning out the book yourself on a home printer or copier and doing your own binding. Look at those horrific Chick tracts you see in every bus station...the company prints those themselves. It's also somewhat akin to "Nasty Wreck Magnet", the situation where traffic is at a crawl due to a horrific accident law enforcement is trying to work and people know they don't want to look but they do any way and later regret it because the vision of carnage gets seared into their memory.
You can't legislate morality or censor thought to stop hate as there are too many ways to get around such efforts, all you can do is let people know there are other ways to live that are more inclusive. At the end of the day you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it do the backstroke.
I know the last book I wrote will make some people howl, but that's on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronmiller on Jun 7, 2020 12:42:26 GMT
"Want to see sales of a book go up? Let a group of people loudly protest the book's content. The louder the protest, the more other people will at least check to see what the book is about." I like to call that the "Comstock Effect." And it is pretty much infallible. So far as being able to get something hateful in print: that is always possible. There are countless ways to do so, from finding a traditional job printer who will run off whatever quantity of books you want, no questions asked, to turning out the book yourself on a home printer or copier and doing your own binding. Look at those horrific Chick tracts you see in every bus station...the company prints those themselves. When I posted, in addition to the obvious freedom of speech, human decency, censorship themes, I was also thinking of something else; Elon Musk is calling for the dismantling of Amazon/KDP. Which means no POD is safe. Anything can happen to any one player. Does anyone remember myspace? I think they were gone overnight. The same can happen to Lulu or KDP. Indeed! But Elon Musk also says a lot of things that I take with a pretty hefty grain of salt. One thing to keep in mind is that Amazon/KDP is scarcely the only game in town. Besides, self-publishing has been around a lot longer than POD or the Internet. There is always traditional printing...and once upon a time people even resorted to copying machines, ditto machines and mimeographs. If someone thinks their message is urgent enough, they can always offer their book as a direct download from a website. Or perhaps a group of like-minded people---a political group of some sort, say---would form a co-op, buy an Espresso book machine and go into business for themselves publishing books to further their own ends. Which leads me back to the original subject: Anyone is free to write a book about any subject they care to, however loathsome, hateful or distasteful it may be. By the same token, a publisher is equally free to decide what they will put into print. That is their right. They are under absolutely no obligation to print and distribute a book they find objectionable, whatever the reason. In fact, they don't have to give a reason. This in no way interferes with the author's right to freedom of speech: they only need to find some other outlet for their work. Getting that work into print (whether physically or virtually) is their responsibility, not someone else's. You might think of it this way: coercing a company to publish a book they find offensive is not really different than pressuring a writer to suppress a book they have written. Both actions are a violation of rights. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 14:55:18 GMT
When I posted, in addition to the obvious freedom of speech, human decency, censorship themes, I was also thinking of something else; Elon Musk is calling for the dismantling of Amazon/KDP. Which means no POD is safe. Anything can happen to any one player. Does anyone remember myspace? I think they were gone overnight. The same can happen to Lulu or KDP. Indeed! But Elon Musk also says a lot of things that I take with a pretty hefty grain of salt. One thing to keep in mind is that Amazon/KDP is scarcely the only game in town. Besides, self-publishing has been around a lot longer than POD or the Internet. There is always traditional printing...and once upon a time people even resorted to copying machines, ditto machines and mimeographs. If someone thinks their message is urgent enough, they can always offer their book as a direct download from a website. Or perhaps a group of like-minded people---a political group of some sort, say---would form a co-op, buy an Espresso book machine and go into business for themselves publishing books to further their own ends. Which leads me back to the original subject: Anyone is free to write a book about any subject they care to, however loathsome, hateful or distasteful it may be. By the same token, a publisher is equally free to decide what they will put into print. That is their right. They are under absolutely no obligation to print and distribute a book they find objectionable, whatever the reason. In fact, they don't have to give a reason. This in no way interferes with the author's right to freedom of speech: they only need to find some other outlet for their work. Getting that work into print (whether physically or virtually) is their responsibility, not someone else's. You might think of it this way: coercing a company to publish a book they find offensive is not really different than pressuring a writer to suppress a book they have written. Both actions are a violation of rights. I agree with you; I believe in free speech but I also believe one should not compromise their own set of beliefs while enabling others to express theirs. I'm on book 7 of Outlander and Jamie is on his way back to Scotland to get his printing press. He intends to publish what is considered at the time controversial and even illegal. I am glad for those before us who dared to publish. To print women should have the vote and a right to choose what they do with their own bodies would probably have been considered hateful 200 years ago.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 15:01:36 GMT
True Maggie. Another attack on the ability for people to make their own way. It's sad things are getting this. It's not right. But again Musk doesn't have the authority to do anything. Amazon doesn't belong to him. It appears both billionaires are competing for the same thing. Space exploration. A little jealousy maybe ? Definitely jealousy. But one wrong word or action from any billionaire or huge corporation and they would go down. Imagine we found out today that Amazon has a plant where it is selling hamburgers and it turns out to be humans, would anyone ever want to sell their items on Amazon again? Or imagine we found out they own slave ships, today, in 2020. JB would be gone overnight.
|
|
|
|
Post by benziger on Jun 7, 2020 19:12:41 GMT
That's all well and good if everyone can agree on what "hateful" means. You would think it would be a no-brainer but no, there's actually a lot of disagreement on that score, and some of the things said that are labeled "hate" are downright ridiculous.
Gurki Bär wrote on facebook:
- What does "hatful" mean exactly?
- And how do the employees of Lulu check this?
Lulu always offers to publish books in 155 languages. I don't know how many employees Lulu has and how many languages each of them speaks. Considering the fact that the site is now in one language less with the latest update, it doesn't reflect too much language feeling.
- What happens if a book is reported as "hatful" in Tadjik, Lingala, Southern Soto or something?
- Can Lulu even check whether this is a justified report
- or just a mis-click - or one that's out to hurt a competitor?
- Lulu distinguishes between books with their own ISBN under the responsibility of the publisher (Lulu is only a printer)
- and books with Lulu-ISBN (Lulu is considered a publisher)?
These are the questions I would like to have answered.
Okay, I'll finally speak in Lulu's defense. Writing what an author's vision dictates has always been a contentious exercise for freelance authors, as mainstream media publishing houses will always advise authors to write what they want to read and yet only publish what the market dictates. It has ALWAYS been that the power to reach your audience is in the publisher's hands, and suddenly Lulu came on the market to give freelance authors a place where we can publish what we actually want to read--and by extension, see other readers reading. It is the ONLY publishing house where to power to dictate what the market will get is what the author wants to write. (And we all know from Spiderman that with great power comes great responsibility.)
But alas, Lulu has found that for some authors that is not gonna fly, and Lulu realizes that permitting such caustic rhetoric with their name on the spine of the book will get them into more trouble than the authors speaking such hate. I can only hope that Lulu will populate its complaint resolution team with a large enough staff (and well-versed enough) to handle such complaints with evenhanded intelligence--at least better than the "apparently random bludgeoning" that most outsourced Conflict Resolution departments utilize.
Do you have any guidelines on what constitutes 'hateful content' or are we being put at the mercy of the easily offended, the over sensitive and the politically spiteful? Will the 'review' include consultation with the author, or will we fall at the first snowflake with no appeal or redress?
I ask because my yet-to-be-published portfolio is mostly be reprints of Second World War military documentation; documents that are 'of their time'.
Given how you're struggling with your core competency at the moment, I am a bit nervous about you taking on the additional role of moral arbiter. Most countries already have laws to deal with this sort of thing, is that not enough?
Perhaps the concern is that you will be considered liable as 'the publisher' for our content? That's understandable, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retread-Retired-Cameron on Jun 7, 2020 21:02:45 GMT
Herr Benziger,
As others have noted some clarity would be nice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 22:35:34 GMT
That's all well and good if everyone can agree on what "hateful" means. You would think it would be a no-brainer but no, there's actually a lot of disagreement on that score, and some of the things said that are labeled "hate" are downright ridiculous.
Gurki Bär wrote on facebook:
- What does "hatful" mean exactly?
- And how do the employees of Lulu check this?
Lulu always offers to publish books in 155 languages. I don't know how many employees Lulu has and how many languages each of them speaks. Considering the fact that the site is now in one language less with the latest update, it doesn't reflect too much language feeling.
- What happens if a book is reported as "hatful" in Tadjik, Lingala, Southern Soto or something?
- Can Lulu even check whether this is a justified report
- or just a mis-click - or one that's out to hurt a competitor?
- Lulu distinguishes between books with their own ISBN under the responsibility of the publisher (Lulu is only a printer)
- and books with Lulu-ISBN (Lulu is considered a publisher)?
These are the questions I would like to have answered.
Okay, I'll finally speak in Lulu's defense. Writing what an author's vision dictates has always been a contentious exercise for freelance authors, as mainstream media publishing houses will always advise authors to write what they want to read and yet only publish what the market dictates. It has ALWAYS been that the power to reach your audience is in the publisher's hands, and suddenly Lulu came on the market to give freelance authors a place where we can publish what we actually want to read--and by extension, see other readers reading. It is the ONLY publishing house where to power to dictate what the market will get is what the author wants to write. (And we all know from Spiderman that with great power comes great responsibility.)
But alas, Lulu has found that for some authors that is not gonna fly, and Lulu realizes that permitting such caustic rhetoric with their name on the spine of the book will get them into more trouble than the authors speaking such hate. I can only hope that Lulu will populate its complaint resolution team with a large enough staff (and well-versed enough) to handle such complaints with evenhanded intelligence--at least better than the "apparently random bludgeoning" that most outsourced Conflict Resolution departments utilize.
Do you have any guidelines on what constitutes 'hateful content' or are we being put at the mercy of the easily offended, the over sensitive and the politically spiteful? Will the 'review' include consultation with the author, or will we fall at the first snowflake with no appeal or redress?
I ask because my yet-to-be-published portfolio is mostly be reprints of Second World War military documentation; documents that are 'of their time'.
Given how you're struggling with your core competency at the moment, I am a bit nervous about you taking on the additional role of moral arbiter. Most countries already have laws to deal with this sort of thing, is that not enough?
Perhaps the concern is that you will be considered liable as 'the publisher' for our content? That's understandable, I suppose.
They raise some very good points. However, this kind of filtering would entail the reading of every single book in every single language. Perhaps the title and cover image are not hateful but the content is. |
|
