Comments on: Banned Books Have Now Jumped the Shark

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 02:54:53 +0000

I can see your point and might find myself drifting towards your way of thinking on this one. The email he sent to the article felt rather superficial; “well, if bookstores are doing it, then I can do it as a marketing gimmick”. It doesn’t seem like there was much more thought to it and the depth and history of banned and challenged books.

By: Liz Burns (@LizB)

Liz Burns (@LizB) — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:18:41 +0000

I’ve been mulling this and think, rather, that people like Ferriss (aggressive self promoters within a narrow type of sphere) have jumped the shark it what they will do to say “listen to me, buy my book, have me at your organization for a speech, follow all my wisdom.”

By: Jeff Allen

Jeff Allen — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:42:19 +0000

“Sure, the whole ‘banned ‘books’ angle may be used as a marketing gimmick for bookstores and libraries. But within this usage is a kernel of truth; the books being displayed have been challenged, banned, and in some cases, outlawed.”
– but this requires a kernel of critical thought, and marketing is not usually so inclined (not their job?). To steal a line from Francisco D’Anconia (q.v.) they see “no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip…” or gun, as the case may be.
Bad times all round.

By: john schoppert (@bodleianItch)

john schoppert (@bodleianItch) — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:06:25 +0000

Well said Andy. This is a commercial decision not an editorial decision. An apt analogy would be a local hardware store deciding to not carry a Walmart produced shovel.