Comments on: Yes, Indeed, That’s Censorship Making the Scene https://booksquare.com/yes-indeed-thats-censorship-making-the-scene/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&%23038;utm_campaign=yes-indeed-thats-censorship-making-the-scene Dissecting the publishing industry with love and skepticism Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:30:42 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Keith https://booksquare.com/yes-indeed-thats-censorship-making-the-scene/#comment-6068 Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:30:42 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2004/07/22/427/#comment-6068 Yet another piece confusing private action with public action. The difference is that, in the latter case, obedience is compelled by force. It is not “censorship” when a private buyer chooses–for whatever reason–to not sell a particular book.

If you like reductio-ad-absurdum, try this chain. It’s ok for Wal-Mart to choose not to sell a book for some reasons, but not for others? Does this mandate a government anti-censor to participate in all Wal-Mart board meetings to determine if the reason for a book’s refusal is politically correct or incorrect? Does it force Wal-Mart to carry all currently-published books, rather than a subset, because this way they are not “censoring”?

If the government censors a book, it means that no one may sell a particular book. If Wal-Mart refuses to carry a book, it means the publisher is always free to seek other channels. If your argument is simply that Wal-Mart is the single largest channel, well, then does that transfer ownership of Wal-Mart to the public domain simply because of the size or value of the channel that they have built?

]]> By: Matt Smith https://booksquare.com/yes-indeed-thats-censorship-making-the-scene/#comment-64 Tue, 10 Aug 2004 04:04:27 +0000 http://www.booksquare.com/archives/2004/07/22/427/#comment-64 Wonderful commentary on my commentary. I’m flattered.

Kindly,

Matt

]]>