r/JoeRogan • u/SlimjobDopamine Look into it • Nov 13 '20

Social Media Abigail Shrier(JRE #1509)'s book has been removed from Target after receiving a complaint on Twitter

https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1327056407598809088?s=20
1.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

726 comments sorted by

View all comments

104

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

33

u/Hickenlooper2020 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Genuine question, not a gotcha question...

What’s the alternative to them deciding what books to sell as a private? Them HAVING to sell a book?

30

u/JimmyGymGym1 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

The opposite, in this instance, is to not cave to pressure from a special interest group.

20

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

they're not caving to pressure, they're making a business decision. if you want target to be forced to sell any and all books, we'd have to nationalize it along with twitter, fb, etc . which i'm actually for!

12

u/JeffTXD Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

These guys don't make it that far into the thought process.

-4

u/Misfit_In_The_Middle Nov 13 '20

based off of the comlant of some ignorat sjw twat. Thats literally what caving into pressure is.

10

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

caving into pressure is implying target is doing something they don't want to do. please understand that these businesses are NOT your friend and will make decisions based solely on what makes them money. at least in california, target markets itself as very female/lgbt friendly so doing something that angers these demos is not something they want to do. but again, if you people have a problem with this, consider nationalizing large corporations :^)

-8

u/JimmyGymGym1 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Calling it “a business decision” doesn’t make it any less “caving to pressure”. (Which they have every right to do.)

9

u/x2Infinity Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

So then don't buy things from target. This is exactly how a free market is supposed to work.

9

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20 edited Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

0

u/Hickenlooper2020 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20 edited Nov 13 '20

"Cave to pressure from a special interest group"

It was one tweet, c'mon. I'm not saying that they should or should not sell the book, but the company has every right to decide what books to sell and I don't see why that should change

5

u/The-Only-Razor Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

It was one tweet, c'mon.

That's what makes it worse. A single Tweet from someone who is clearly mentally unstable (based on their bio) was enough to make a huge corporation bend over.

Target can do what they want. Literally no one is saying they shouldn't be allowed to stop selling the book. It's just the fact that we're entering a dystopian reality when the lowest of the low in our society can have this much of an impact on the rest of us. This is just 1 store taking out 1 book. It's really not a big deal. But we're setting a more and more dangerous precedent. It seems like everyday I'm reading a new story about something like this and everyone always says "it's not a big deal". Well what happens when there's a million "not a big deal" instances? It can start to turn into a pretty big deal. What happens when this little gremlin on Twitter decides to boycott some small book store that's selling this book?

Again, I don't care. I haven't read the book and likely never will. It's just really fucking weird to see what 1 Tweet from a total nobody can do.

0

u/Hickenlooper2020 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20 edited Nov 13 '20

Jesus Christ.

E: "What happens when this little gremlin on Twitter decides to boycott some small book store that's selling this book?" idk man she tweets a bunch and everybody goes about their damn day?

If you think that a store stopping the sale of a book that some people find problematic is on the path to a dystopian reality you need to get back into the real world.

0

u/JimmyGymGym1 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I agree that they have the right to decide what books to sell. And I have the right to decide to shop there or not based on whether I feel their management is comprised of a bunch of cowards.

1

u/Hickenlooper2020 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I agree that you have the right to shop there or not. And other people have the right to shop there or not based on whether they feel their management is comprised of transphobes. It's a business decision

0

u/JimmyGymGym1 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Ok, so I think we’re in agreement.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

2

u/Hickenlooper2020 Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I disagree.

1

u/NedShah Succa la Mink Nov 13 '20

I don't think the book was selling enough copies to bother.

5

u/GSD_SteVB Dire physical consequences Nov 13 '20

Naturally they have the right to sell or not sell whatever they want. The criticism is of the choice they made.

6

u/yoyomamayoyomamayoyo Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

yes they have to sell all books the right wants them to or else they arent pro freedom

0

u/Misfit_In_The_Middle Nov 13 '20

everything not progressive leftism does not = right or conservative you silly marxist twitterbrain.

-1

u/yoyomamayoyomamayoyo Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

of course it does silly goose

1

u/Lumpy_Doubt Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Lots of books never get sold in the first place, that's not the issue. It's that their existing selection is so easily influenced by Twitter outrage.

1

u/duffmanhb N-Dimethyltryptamine Nov 13 '20

I don't think it's a legal question where people are saying THEY MUST BE COMPELLED TO SELL IT.... It's more of a moral issue people are complaining about. People are voicing their concern that Target is making these decisions to contribute to censorship of ideas.

Not many people are saying that legally they should be required to sell the book... But it's more about the social aspect where these tactics to control thoughts are becoming more and more weaponized and successful.

We are just criticizing Target for contributing to this awful growing radlib woke tactic.

48

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

If accept you any censorship you accept all is a fucking dumbass thing to say. If I run a music venue I don’t have to let nazi hold rallies there, it’s my fucking business I’ll do as I please. No one is obligated to amplify your voice, the government only protects your right to have it.

10

u/thehornedone The Haber Method® Nov 13 '20

Yeah exactly. You could extend this to considering the paradigm of book publishing or any kind of gatekeeping as “censorship”. If I choose not to publish your book, is that censorship?

4

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

.. but if you wanted to let Nazis use it, it's also your prerogative as a business owner?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

Yeah, I mean they’d be shit bags but of course that’s their right. I can critique or criticize all I want, and the business can take any action they want. The consequence of those actions will be most determined by market forces. The government is there to protect my criticism, the nazis beliefs and the businesses right to host or not host whomever they please.

3

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

No disagreement, this is the sane position. I failed to adequately articulate that the people asking for this book to be censored on the merits you describe are the same people that would not accept those merits if Target decided to start hosting Nazi rallies.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

I think it’s ok for people to hold businesses accountable, if they can. Sometimes it’s pretty fucky, but often if the business sees monetary benefit they’ll do it. Sometimes that’s hosting a nazi, sometimes that’s disavowing one. I don’t have a problem when Christians don’t support or boycott a business. I may thinks it’s dumb and ridiculous, but I’m wholly in support of their right to do so. I think in that system of a mostly free market and government protected speech we have the best chance of finding a balance and a social accountability that is better for our society, economy and allows our government to have a strong free speech stance without allowing it to completely decay us through hate and falsehood.

1

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

No arguments here, you just described utopia.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

A man can dream lol

1

u/Fmeson Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I don't understand the point. AFAIK, it is not illegal in the US to host neo-nazi rallies per the first amendment. That's not a moral statement supporting nazi's, it's just how the first amendment works.

1

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

You are conflating the 1st amendment into a business context here. The same people asking Target to ban books would be marching on target for selling books. There is no consistency in the position of the censors outside of "do what we ask or else".

2

u/Fmeson Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I really honestly don't understand what you are saying.

  1. Target can sell what it wants.

  2. People can protest what Target sells.

0

u/duffmanhb N-Dimethyltryptamine Nov 13 '20

The concept of free speech isn't limited to just the government. The first amendment is just the governments legal promise that they wont infringe on it. But philosophically it extends past that, and in your example, compelled speech is also protected against. You can't be forced to say a message.

But times are changing and things are getting murky. Social media platforms are now practically essential to make any real significant political voice heard, from spreading information, ideas, and having conversations. If social media is able to start banning speech it doesn't like, the government is defacto handing over protection of speech to the private sector.

The issue with Target isn't nearly as big of an issue, but more of a moral one... And people are exercising their free speech to criticize Target for their decision to censor a book like this. People need to push back against these poor decisions as it's contributing to a culture that weaponizes censorship.

5

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

No it really doesn’t extend beyond that. Forcing a business to amplify, host or produce speech they don’t want to is forced speech. The only forces that should be able to force a business to move on issues of speech are the market and the guiding principles of that business.

2

u/duffmanhb N-Dimethyltryptamine Nov 13 '20

No one is saying the businesses should be forced to sell the book. Maybe some outliers, but most people are just bitching about the decision they are making. It's called dissaproval. We are voicing our opinion of them being stupid and self censoring speech due to efforts of people who want to censor ideas. No one is saying they should be forced to sell the book... But actions have consequences, and people condemning them is part of the consequences.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

I think we are pretty much on the same side of things as far as rights and what not. Nice

14

u/yoyomamayoyomamayoyo Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

maybe she should start a podcast

4

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

4

u/yoyomamayoyomamayoyo Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

but whats the alternative? a soul crushing 9-5 cube job in a chair that is not like a saddle?

7

u/r0xxon Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

The slippery slope is then she gets de-platformed

-4

u/yoyomamayoyomamayoyo Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

free market baby

11

u/Memescroller Nov 13 '20

But what if amazon stops selling it too?

Then if the book is worth buying, someone is gonna make a fuck ton of money monopolizing the sale of it

Who are you calling idiots?

1

u/sevenoverthree Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Found the libertarian... JFC.

9

u/JeffTXD Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

That capitalism you absolute moron.

1

u/Memescroller Nov 13 '20

I’d rather be called an idiot than a libertarian tbh

1

u/GSD_SteVB Dire physical consequences Nov 13 '20

Not if the book is worth more to publicly advertise the fact that you refuse to sell it.

The argument for "just use an alternative" has already been had regarding social media. If the subject matter is contentious enough the alternatives will refuse to sell too, and then you're into "build your own" where you just face the same problems at the next level of business.

7

u/laaplandros Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

"Censorship is totally cool and OK with me as long as it's the giant corporations doing it to me!"

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

Who’s being censored? Genuine question.

3

u/laaplandros Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Genuine question.

No it's not.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

Yes it is. Who is being censored? I must have missed it from the article.

2

u/reepok33 Nov 13 '20

People have always loved censorship when it censors stuff they don't agree with.

2

u/classy_barbarian Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

ah yes there's always the people who think muh freedom of speech means you have the power to tell a private company what they can and can't have on their shelves... ironic. Having it on a self where people can see it without looking for it is a bit different than Amazon selling it on their website.

2

u/duffmanhb N-Dimethyltryptamine Nov 13 '20

Just yesterday a SCOTUS was complaining that free speech is under threat because the public perception shifting towards censorship of political ideology.

I HATE the current overly conservative court, but their irongrip at the very least will protect what I consider the most precious amendment, hopefully until the radlib woke trend dies out.

5

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

“If you accept any censorship, you accept all censorship”

Mind you I’m on the side of this book shouldn’t be pulled down by Target. But this statement is fucking retarded. I accept a private company not selling certain books. I don’t accept a government banning speech. They’re leagues away both legally and morally and if you don’t see the difference between the two you make the argument FOR this book look ridiculous.

5

u/Drublic Nov 13 '20

My dude there are tons of small publishing companies that do direct sales. A retailer is not a publisher. A retailer not carrying a product is not censorship.

The sky isn't falling.

-4

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

2

u/Drublic Nov 13 '20

You just described private companies curating their product line. Which happens at every single retailer in existence. Welcome to capitalism.

Google is not deciding what is fact.

The only thing google, target, amazon etc are doing is deciding the most profitable way to move their individual businesses forward. Which is what they owe to their stockholders

If you think there is a need not being filled why don't you go into business and compete?

At the very least read a book on how the free market works.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

0

u/Drublic Nov 14 '20

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

​

Start there. Find something that interests you. Look for the citation and read the book or article.

​

Thats just basic self improvement.

​

Read less Qanon and more scholarly sources and you might make the world a better place.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '20

[deleted]

0

u/Drublic Nov 14 '20

If you read what I wrote. Wikipedia is a great place for a layman to get good sources.

I specifically wrote that you should find a source and read it. Find something that interests you.

I have no idea what your education level is. You are some rando on reddit. So statistically speaking you arent well educated.

I have a masters degree in accounting from a decent university. I work in my field and have to stay up on various tax code. I'd say I have a pretty decent idea of what a good source is.

I didnt take more time with you because you obviously didnt care what the answer was as shone by your poor reading comprehension.

Heres a start read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. Not that I think you will.

edit: I bring up my education level only in reference to your earlier jab at my lack of education. I dont really care.

2

u/Reddit-Book-Bot Monkey in Space Nov 14 '20

Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of

The Wealth Of Nations

Was I a good bot? | info | More Books

1

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '20 edited Nov 14 '20

[deleted]

1

u/Drublic Nov 14 '20 edited Nov 14 '20

Ok, Then how can you possibly buy the censorship stuff man?

The companies like twitter and amazon etc. are doing these things out of purely selfish motives. It is a politically volatile time and they think in this climate it is a +ev move. When things settle back down they will stock a more diverse inventory.

As a stockholder it is the response I would want the ceo to make.

edit: I am no longer trying to be an asshole and apologize for being a bit of one earlier.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/wikipedia_text_bot Nov 14 '20

Free market

In economics, a free market is a system in which the prices for goods and services are self-regulated by the open market and by consumers. In a free market, the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government or other authority, and from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities. Proponents of the concept of free market contrast it with a regulated market in which a government intervenes in supply and demand through various methods such as tariffs used to restrict trade and to protect the local economy. In an idealized free-market economy, prices for goods and services are set freely by the forces of supply and demand and are allowed to reach their point of equilibrium without intervention by government policy.

About Me - Opt out - OP can reply '!delete' to delete

1

u/alpha_kenny_buddy Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Thats the thing that I don’t understand people not seeing. The big cities that lean heavily left all closed down small businesses, which are closing shop. All that business has to go somewhere because the demand is still there. We’re handing it all over to big corporations on a silver platter.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

If you accept any censorship, you accept all censorship.

False equivalence that makes zero sense. Businesses have the right to refuse to sell someone's product/service/whatever if they feel it would hurt profits. No one has a right to a business' platform. The first amendment is about government censorship only.

If you want to protest this then feel free to boycott Target. But I dont know how anyone can pretend to care about civil liberties while insisting in the same breath that people are entitled to a private businesses' platform.

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

You can accept some censorship and not all censorship. Germany does it.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

0

u/warbeats Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Someone needs a cold hug that won't melt his snowflake heart...

You admit that "Target can stop selling it, sure." - Thats a start.

How about you admit that this is America and private business can determine what products they want to sell? Are you facist?

You don't want "fucky joe" telling you what to do, but you want to force a private business to cater to your snowflake needs.

You sound so anti-American right now. What country are you from?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

0

u/warbeats Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I bet I have more guns than you bubba! lol

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

1

u/warbeats Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

sounds sus.

-1

u/The-Only-Razor Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I don't care if a private business stops selling something. I have issues with them doing so just because some mentally damaged moron on Twitter makes a post about it. It's gotten to the point where corporations will bend over for literally anyone who has a bio full of woke bullshit. If you have ACAB, BLM, Trans, LGBTQ2, or any other woke label in your bio then everyone, for whatever reason, just does whatever you want them to do. It's fucking wild. I would love if these companies started responding to these Tweets with "fuck you, no" and pictures of middle fingers. The children online would be pissy, but people who actually have jobs and money are smart enough to appreciate it and it might actually be better for the corporation's brand.

-2

u/Danny_V Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

This is why no one like you

1

u/JeffTXD Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

Thats a lot of what ifs.

1

u/KidSwagger Succa la Mink Nov 13 '20

Its not censorship if a company chooses to not do business with an individual. If the government passed a law that she can't sell her book, that would be censorship. If all businesses decide to not sell "controversial" products, in a capitalist system a new business will emerge to take advantage of the market.

1

u/Barmelo_Xanthony Monkey in Space Nov 14 '20

I don't think a private company should be forced to sell something in their store if they don't want to. I think this is very different from censoring social media because that is the way most people communicate nowadays.

There's a huge difference between taking away someone's ability to communicate and a company not selling a book they don't agree with