| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Should Amazon Stock "Everything"? |
Topic: Should Amazon Stock "Everything"?
| Author | Message |
| GalleyCat | Posted – 8/14/2007 2:44:11 AM | show profile The Humane Society sued Amazon.com earlier this year over the online retailer's continued sale of certain magazines and DVDs catering to animal fighting enthusiasts. Amazon says the First Amendment protects these materials, no matter how offensive most of us might find them; the Humane Society argues that federal law prohibits the sale of products that promote animal fighting. Let's try to look past the particulars and focus on the broader issue: Is Amazon right when it says "we don't think customers want us picking what we think is appropriate for them to read"? And even if they are right about that, is consumer demand the only factor Amazon should consider when making decisions about what to "carry" in its inventory? |
| ejlyman | Posted – 8/14/2007 7:46:33 AM | show profile | email poster Says me Obviously, Amazon should be able to sell anything that's legal and that it can make a profit on. In regards to the specific issue you mentioned (which I am not particularly familiar with) it just comes down to the law. If Amazon is right about the First Amendment protection of this material then they should be able to sell it. If the Humane Society is right that federal law prohibits their sale, then they should not be sold by Amazon or any other retailer. I'm guessing Amazon is too well run to agree to list something illegal just to sell a few dozen books to some fringe segments of their customer base. And so, if, as I suspect, the Humane Society simply thinks the sale of these materials SHOULD be illegal, then they should lobby the government, not Amazon. ------ Italy-based freelancer www.ericjlyman.com |
| Brena | Posted – 8/14/2007 9:14:50 AM | show profile Amazon has an ethical obligation to its customer base. For one, they could lose some customers over this, which is not good for their bottom line. If dog fighting in other countries is acceptable, then they should continue sales there. |
| catlondon | Posted – 8/14/2007 11:45:45 AM | show profile Hmmm...first I've heard of this. As an ASPCA supporter/owner of rescued animals/ and loyal customer and shareholder of Amazon, I can tell you who I would side with in this argument---the Humane Society. Amazon can sell what it wants, but what it sells I can find elsewhere, at a retailer that is more in line with my values. Amazon has a right to sell what it wants and what is legal and I have a right to shop my values somewhere else. I hate it when companies hide behind the first amendment to peddle cruelty. At one time, sending six-year-olds into the coal mines to work was legal, but that didn't make it right. |
| ejlyman | Posted – 8/14/2007 2:10:42 PM | show profile | email poster following I'd hate to see the day when major corporations are the first organizations to take the lead on ethical debates. Multinationals are innovative when it comes to increasing efficiency or building a better mousetrap, but in regards to ethics they follow because they cannot lead. The coalmine analogy is ludicrous. There was a problem with under-age workers, I agree, but it would have been unreasonable to expect one company to stop the practice because by doing it they would have gone out of business. You need a law that bars the practice and then ever mining company stops at the same time. Ditto for books on animal fighting. I deplore the practice and am frankly surprised the books are not illegal already. But as long as they are legal, I would expect Amazon to sell them. Anything else puts one foot on a slippery slope on which we can slide toward removing legal books that don't share someone's political, religious, or racial values. It's a dangerous game. Putting the onus for not something on Amazon or any other company is a copout, because the forum for those debates is between legislators and their constituents. Write a letter. Call. Make your voice heard there. Every consumer has the right not to buy a legal product, whether it's a book on dog fighting or the latest best seller. There are millions of products on Amazon that I choose not to buy. What people don?t have is the right to demand that a company require that everyone not buy the legal product that they don?t care for. ------ Italy-based freelancer www.ericjlyman.com |
| catlondon | Posted – 8/14/2007 2:53:03 PM | show profile American politics is almost completely reactive. From women's voting rights to the civil rights movement to Brown vs. the Board of Education, change occured on the streets, sometimes violently, with government following reluctantly along. There is a strong corporate social responsibility movement in America today, evidenced by socially responsible investing, shareholder resolutions for triple-bottom line accounting and ethical business practices, and resources such as Co-op America's Green Pages and the New American Dream's Conscious Consumer, so that people can make sure their purchases reflect their values. No one is saying that you can't publish these magazines, what they are saying is that they won't support the consumer institutions such as Amazon that make money off them. There is no violation of freedom of speech. As for corporations going out of business, I remember Lee Iaococa on my TV screen back in the 70s making dire predications that the American automotive industry would go under if shoulder seat belts were made mandatory. Thanks to the consumer movement, they were, and now safety features are one of the biggest selling points of cars today. Ask gay rights activists how protective the government has been of their best interests. Won't happen until it's a foregone conclusion at the grassroots level. Oh, and all those organics popping up at Costco and Walmart? Consumer driven, even though there's no law they have to carry them. If it hurt its bottom line enough, Amazon would stop carrying Harry Potter. |
| bayouborne | Posted – 8/14/2007 3:04:59 PM | show profile Hmmm... does Amazon offer 'Hustler' subscriptions? Does it offer John Birch Society publications? Does it offer Soldier of Fortune's "How to Kill" series? If there is a book in existence that's a 'how to' for home abortions, does Amazon carry it? Probably not. Clearly Amazon excises control in some areas of its empire of offerings. It's simple, in a civilized society, publications that traffic in animal cruelty need to be silenced. This isn't a 1st amendment issue, it's just a moral one. Let's save the fights for FOP issues that matter - this isn't one of them. |
| Vox-o | Posted – 8/14/2007 9:35:11 PM | show profile It isn't a 1st Amendment issure, NOR is it moral Amazon can and should sell what they like. I will never ever be in favor of banning any publications save for children in overt sexual situations (and yes I can explain why I view it differently than dog fighting). My moralty is different than the next guy's, and as such it should enter into the discussion at all. |
| Vox-o | Posted – 8/14/2007 9:37:50 PM | show profile and by the way, bayou: Amazon *does* sell Hustler, (and I can't speak on your other examples). So your whole arguement is pretty well done, isn't it? |
| catlondon | Posted – 8/14/2007 11:11:48 PM | show profile Actually, VOX it is a moral issue to a lot of people, in the same way its a moral issue for Christian bookstores that refuse to sell Harry Potter because they believe it promotes witchcraft and Satan. And Amazon can hardly claim that it NEVER gives in. They bow to consumers just like everyone else. Amazon does not sell Hustler Magazine subscriptions, but resellers are selling individual copies through Amazon. And Amazon has removed other items that are legal, such as Nazi propaganda and some religious items, like the book A Piece of Blue Sky in 1999 which is an expose of Scientology (it's now back in stock) and shark fin soup, in response to consumer complaints. In 2006, they removed the question prompt "Did you mean adoption?" that appeared at the top of the page when "abortion" was searched in response to a reproductive rights org protest. So why they choose to make a stand with two cockfighting magazines is beyond me. And to end with a quote from Gandhi, "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.? |
| ladivalex | Posted – 8/15/2007 3:21:28 AM | show profile | email poster I am appalled at Amazon, they have a moral obligation as others have said to be responsible. I will never buy another book from them and that should be the response of anyone who cares for pets or children. There isn't a slippery slope here people. Stop walking on eggshells in our bend over backwards PC society. IT IS WRONG, when wrong equals loss of profits they will develop a moral conscience and get their PR flaks to issue a statement condeming the hideousness of their previous attitude. Someone will be fired and the cycle will continue. For me it stops now and with every friend I can persuade. The founding fathers didn't have this in mind when the wrote the constitution. BOYCOTT EVIL AMAZON!!!!!! |
| ejlyman | Posted – 8/15/2007 7:01:01 AM | show profile | email poster Time Too many people with too much time on their hands.... ------ Italy-based freelancer www.ericjlyman.com |
| GoldLizard | Posted – 8/15/2007 7:14:39 AM | show profile Amazon should be socially responsible I don't have too much time on my hands. I have rescued dogs that were used for fighting. This is not an abstract issue about morals. It is a reprehensible practice, and finally laws are getting put into place to stop it. The animals who are forced into fighting are living a nightmare, and we have a responsibility to stop it. I'm very glad that the Humane Society's lawsuit with Amazon is getting media attention. When ppl know about it, they can make a decision. For those of us who care about animals (all beings are connected), we can join together to boycott Amazon until they stop selling the materials. The books & DVDs are absolutely horrible -- they depict the violence graphically, and promote the sales of products used in animal fighting. We as consumers don't have to support this. And we won't be silenced by insults. |
| WinonaWriter | Posted – 8/15/2007 2:26:32 PM | show profile Let's see...Amazon.com sells High Times magazine; the Anarchist Cookbook; Our Bodies, Ourselves; Forever (by Judy Blume); and a host of banned books. If Amazon.com stopped selling everything that met with moral objections from various (and often opposing) groups of people, what would really happen to their inventory? I personally have a moral objection to misogynistic hip-hop CDs, Machiavellian business books, and anything by Ann Coulter...but I still think Amazon.com has a right to sell the stuff. Be careful when pressuring people with your own morals...if you're going to do that, then don't complain when someone else imposes their morals on YOU! |
| WinonaWriter | Posted – 8/15/2007 2:27:59 PM | show profile And please note, I'm not defending animal fighting or related paraphernalia...only pointing out that if the stuff is legal, then Amazon.com has a right to sell it. |
| catlondon | Posted – 8/15/2007 3:15:02 PM | show profile "Be careful when pressuring people with your own morals...if you're going to do that, then don't complain when someone else imposes their morals on YOU!" So, Winona, are you saying we should never impose morals on anyone? Not the Janjaweed? Not the cultures that still practice female genital mutilation? The cultures that still practice slavery? Everything goes? Including selling materials that promote and teach the training of living beings (animal and human) to harm or kill other living beings for sport (that's what cockfighting is)? It's all okay with you? The North America Man/Boy Love Association would love to have you as member! BTW, I'm playing devil's advocate. |
| WinonaWriter | Posted – 8/15/2007 11:05:15 PM | show profile OK, I'm going to leave that as devil's advocate... ...because I think you know what I mean... If it's legal, then they have a right to sell it. Consumers, of course, have a right to shop elsewhere and to let Amazon.com know why. If enough people speak up about it, they'll realize it's not a good idea to keep carrying it. |
