A brief word on the Smashwords "censorship" issue, because it ties in a bit with the previous post about entitlement.
Smashwords recently changed their Terms of Service to prohibit the sale of any book that hits Paypal's "hot buttons" of "bestiality, rape-for-titillation, incest and underage erotica". According to Mark Coker, founder of Smashwords, they've got a handle on that underage erotica, so rest safe on that, they've never allowed it, okay? It's the rest that those squares at Paypal have a problem with, and poor old Mark's got to pass on the bad news. I know, right? Comes from letting The Man control your company.
Of course, you ask anyone nicely not to write books featuring bestiality, erotic rape, incest or paedo stuff, you better prepare yourself for the shrill cries of "First Amendment" and "censorship". Neither has any real relevance to the subject at hand, but outragers gotta outrage.
The change of ToS isn't really censorship, not unless Paypal became some new payment-processing wing of the US Government. It's a business decision. You may not agree with it, just as you may not agree with Amazon's ham-fisted treatment of gay and lesbian books, or Wal-Mart not stocking Green Day, or Blockbuster demanding a re-edit of Showgirls. You may also disagree with WH Smith's refusal to stock soft porn magazines in their shops, or that there's no music in a Wetherspoons. The only real difference here is that Smashwords and, by extension, Paypal are the only organisations open to prosecution if they don't make that decision. It also doesn't matter how unfair you think it was that a 56-year-old woman with mental problems was prosecuted under obscenity laws for posting stories involving child abuse. What matters was that it happened. Combine that with a government more than happy to prosecute third-party sites for hosting illegal activity (torrent sites, for example), and it's no wonder that Paypal would rather cover its arse and offend a few mucky authors than suffer through another in a long line of embarrassing news stories.
The chief problem, it seems to me, is again that of entitlement. As authors we feel entitled to be treated fairly, and yes, we absolutely should, but we should also take the time to read the fine print before we go mouthing off that our rights are under attack when they're really not. Nobody is stopping you writing your Pedobear or shape-shifting Twilight slash-fic. And it's hardly an abuse of your civil rights if they don't want to publish it. Let's try to pick our battles a little more effectively, shall we?
*Oh and this quote isn't Voltaire, it's a paraphrase of Voltaire by Evelyn Beatrice Hall.
Well said. It never ceases to amaze and annoy me the way people throw around the concepts of the "First Amendment" and "censorship" with no understanding of what they really mean.
ReplyDeleteAgreed.
ReplyDeleteI still feel unsure about this overall - and I'm not mourning the loss of the material - but I think you undermine your own argument a bit here.
ReplyDeleteIf Paypal said "we just hate this stuff and we don't want to be a party to it", that would be fine. It would be censorship (obviously in the trivial sense, but arguably, due to their ubiquity, in a larger sense also), but not a free speech issue. They can do what they want.
If the point is that they'd be opening themselves up to possible prosecution for obscenity, then that's a free speech issue. The reason for the decision matters.
The authors' argument is really with the law, not with Smashwords or Paypal, but if the ramifications of that law lie at the heart of the company's decision then it's about free speech. It's ultimately about what fictional material the government says is acceptable.
Agreed. Private entities such as publishers and corporations have the right to refuse service based on certain criteria, provided it is not sex, race, religion, etc. Content is another matter. Content has always been a determining factor when it comes to publication, so there should be no issue with Smashwords refusing to publish certain content.
ReplyDeletePaypal would seem like a gray area since all they do is move money. But, like a bank, they are subject to the laws of the territories in which they operate. They can't act as an intermediary for parties that engage in unlawful activity. Whether the law is just or not doesn't matter. It's all about liability.
But the negative reaction is very human in nature. When I was a child and I discovered a new curse word, my parents telling me not to say it only made me say it more.
Smashwords and PayPal are definitely covering their asses, but that's what businesses do. I agree with Steve, the authors' argument is (and should be) with the law.
Depictions of pedophilia, bestiality, rape, and necrophilia are a bit of a gray area. As authors, I believe we have the right to write about such things as a reflection of what we see in society (along with murder, domestic violence, and drug use), even if we don't wish to glorify them. But the government is clearly afraid that depictions and promotion are the same thing. I don't doubt that some authors are writing about such things because it's a fantasy they have and they wish it was legal, but it becomes a question of what is promotion?
I'm guessing people are simply worried that they will eventually be censored over things far less controversial.
Free speech itself seems to be the biggest gray area of all, it often comes into conflict with other civil rights. People have to remember that there are legal exceptions to free speech, such as hate speech, slander, perjury, libel, etc.
A few years back a porn producer in California named Max Hardcore was successfully thrown in jail for making movies featuring girls of legal age who claimed on camera to be minors. He tried to use free speech as a defense and failed because of a legal exception related to depictions of minors engaged in sexual acts with adults.
Agree or disagree, it's hardly black and white.
But let's face it. The market for bestiality, necrophilia, rape, and child molestation fiction is so limited to begin with, it's not like authors will lose millions of dollars over this.