Ethics of Amazon

[Gorbles]

The EDL guy’s book, is that an ethical question? Would there be a reason for Amazon to take it down other than that people don’t like it?

I believe the article talks about this explicitly:

Joe Mulhall, the director of research at the campaign group Hope Not Hate, said: “Everyone has the right to write and publish a book as long as the content doesn’t break the law. The question is whether Amazon feel comfortable platforming him, and facilitating the sale of a book that will funnel thousands of pounds into the pockets of Britain’s best known far-right extremist. Freedom of speech is not freedom of reach.”

Question to you, @amadeus: if someone was trying to sell a book via Amazon that instead of "great replacement theory", instead raved about antisemitic conspiracy theories and the like - would you describe any public outcry over said book as "people not liking it"? Or would it be considered more seriously?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I'm not the one who decided to question the journalistic practise of pointing out the real name of someone who took up a moniker to avoid identification for criminal charges,

I think I was mocking it rather than questioning it

 

[amadeus]

Question to you, @amadeus: if someone was trying to sell a book via Amazon that instead of "great replacement theory", instead raved about antisemitic conspiracy theories and the like - would you describe any public outcry over said book as "people not liking it"? Or would it be considered more seriously?

To an extent, yes, I would treat it the same: if someone wants to read Mein Kampf, is it my job to inconvenience them in doing so? Amazon has the right to stock whatever it wants within the law, but I tend to be on the more cautionary side of things for the most part.

 

[Samson]

To an extent, yes, I would treat it the same: if someone wants to read Mein Kampf, is it my job to inconvenience them in doing so? Amazon has the right to stock whatever it wants within the law, but I tend to be on the more cautionary side of things for the most part.

It has the right, but it used to be the publishers were mostly vaguely responsible when deciding what to print. Amazon has no ethics, so prints stuff that gets compared to Mein Kampf.

 

[Gorbles]

To an extent, yes, I would treat it the same: if someone wants to read Mein Kampf, is it my job to inconvenience them in doing so? Amazon has the right to stock whatever it wants within the law, but I tend to be on the more cautionary side of things for the most part.

Mein Kampf at least has some passing, nominal historical value.

Anyhow I'm not talking about inconveniencing anyone. Nor am I saying Amazon doesn't have the right - it does. I'm talking about the framing of the reaction as mere dislike. I'm surprised to see you equate (hypothetical) pushback to antisemitic content as being the same.

 

[Zardnaar]

Mein Kampf at least has some passing, nominal historical value.

Anyhow I'm not talking about inconveniencing anyone. Nor am I saying Amazon doesn't have the right - it does. I'm talking about the framing of the reaction as mere dislike. I'm surprised to see you equate (hypothetical) pushback to antisemitic content as being the same.

Mein kampf is awful but has historical value.

Problem is if Amazon removes that other book the pushback will be to remove something you care about.

Ironically you can buy Marx and assorted writings as well from Amazon. And modern literature among those lines.

Ff you start policing content it can rapidly backfire. I don't know where the exact line lies. Das Capital, Mein Kampf sure. Turner Diaries maybe beyond that idk.

 

[Samson]

Amazon’s emissions have tripled since 2019, when the company committed to achieving net-zero emissions across its operations by 2040.

Amazon’s emissions rose in 2024 for the first time in three years, primarily driven by the construction of new data centers and fuel consumption by its delivery providers.

The world’s largest online retailer’s emitted 68.25 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e), a 6% rise from the previous year, according to its latest Sustainability Report published Wednesday. Its emissions had been slowly declining since 2021, when the company emitted 71.54 million MTCO2e.