Cancel Culture Takes Out Dr Seuss, Sort Of (Page 10/12)
sourmash MAR 12, 06:34 PM
That's delusion. They're apt to be stormed with domestic terrorists too if they do. That's what America means now.
theBDub MAR 13, 04:47 PM

quote
Originally posted by 2.5:


On the other hand, self censorship is probably the most desired form of censorship by those who desire censorship.



Fear.




Think about the opposite of what you are suggesting.

Should Disney be required to continue selling copies of Song of the South?

Should old racist toys be required to be sold? How about books that teach about “n*****s” as less than? Do we require all books that have ever been published to continue to be published?

If we aren’t allowed to self-censorship, what right to our own speech do we have? If we aren’t allowed to look on our past word choice, opinions, products, etc. and determine they don’t reflect us today, then how can we even make good decisions today?

These books weren’t outlawed, they were determined by the owner to not be worth publishing anymore. Remember: Everyone upset about this is upset about a private company making a private decision. If I hadn’t come to expect this, I’d call it shocking. But here we are.
maryjane MAR 13, 06:01 PM
Is it really self censorship, if the change is prompted by social norms changing and they as a company (or as individuals) do it as a pre-emptive move to head off criticism/backlash from specific demographics?

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 03-13-2021).]

Hudini MAR 13, 06:21 PM

quote
Originally posted by theBDub:


Think about the opposite of what you are suggesting.

Should Disney be required to continue selling copies of Song of the South?

Should old racist toys be required to be sold? How about books that teach about “n*****s” as less than? Do we require all books that have ever been published to continue to be published?

If we aren’t allowed to self-censorship, what right to our own speech do we have? If we aren’t allowed to look on our past word choice, opinions, products, etc. and determine they don’t reflect us today, then how can we even make good decisions today?

These books weren’t outlawed, they were determined by the owner to not be worth publishing anymore. Remember: Everyone upset about this is upset about a private company making a private decision. If I hadn’t come to expect this, I’d call it shocking. But here we are.



All a company has to do is relinquish copyrights on any book or song or published piece. Let the marketplace determine what gets published. You cannot have it both ways. If it's that problematic then give up all rights to a work.
sourmash MAR 13, 06:22 PM
Like when the communist Stasi had 50% of the East German population spying on 100% of the population waiting for them to do something nonconforming to turn them in about?

Somewhere there is a boundary crossed. And if the threat of cancel culture isn't a real thing then it wouldn't be talked about as a reason.

Let's not gloss over the cry-bullying and criminality of that group.
cliffw MAR 13, 08:42 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
People here on Pennock's are making this way more complicated than it actually is.



People ? You.
rinselberg MAR 14, 10:13 AM

quote
Originally posted by Hudini:
All a company has to do is relinquish copyrights on any book or song or published piece. Let the marketplace determine what gets published. You cannot have it both ways. If it's that problematic then give up all rights to a work.


Noooo. Dr Seuss Enterprises isn't just about making money. They have been entrusted with the responsibility of perpetuating and curating the memory of the life and works of Theodor Seuss Geisel. They have both the remit and the responsibility to think along the lines of "If Dr Seuss were alive today, how would he feel about some of his books? Would he want to have these particular books continue in publication, or would he want them to be discontinued, leaving only the original manuscripts and whatever copies have already been published as a legacy?"

They are not under any obligation to cede that privilege and responsibility to anyone else.

They could, but they are in no way obligated to do it. They are in no way obligated to turn Dr Seuss into Dr $euss. (See what I just did there?)

I don't think that Dr Seuss Enterprises is a publicly held corporation, but that wouldn't change the fundamentals here. If it were a publicly held corporation, the discontinuation of 6 of the more than 60 Dr Seuss titles could become some kind of issue between the CEO, the corporate Board of Directors and the stockholders, but that is not to say that the CEO and her management team would be under some arbitrary obligation to continue the publication of every title in the Dr Seuss catalog.

The fraudulence of this anti-Cancel Culture kerfuffle over the Seuss books is even apparent to Maple Buescher (of all people) who writes about it today online at Cleveland(.com).

Maple Buescher is a senior at Cleveland Heights High School.

"Dr. Seuss uproar is actually a reminder of how private enterprise is supposed to work"
Maple Buescher; guest columnist for Cleveland(.com); March 14, 2021.
https://www.cleveland.com/o...-maple-buescher.html

Here's Democratic Congressman Tim Ryan of Ohio playing the "Stop Talking About Dr Seuss" card.
https://youtu.be/5F80FHCB70k

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-14-2021).]

sourmash MAR 14, 10:39 AM
Song of the South used to be available in Europe long, long after being dropped in America.

"Bystander Responsibility" is the term cry-bully & violent criminals are working up to attack those who don't join the mob. Silence is Violence. All this means is join us attacking people or we'll attack you too.
2.5 MAR 14, 08:37 PM

quote
Originally posted by theBDub:

Should Disney be required to continue selling copies of Song of the South?
...



No. I understand we all seem to have our thought patterns on different things. Concerning ourselves with that we think the important aspect is. While dismissing the others view, as out if touch or not currently relevant, or an over the top cop out.
I recognize that is also freedom of speech.
2.5 MAR 14, 08:39 PM

quote
Originally posted by maryjane:

Is it really self censorship, if the change is prompted by social norms changing and they as a company (or as individuals) do it as a pre-emptive move to head off criticism/backlash from specific demographics?




Sure seems like it, no?