Bondi library removes book How to Sell a Genocide from shelves after complaint

Comments

• NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  You’d think someone who survived a terror attack might have a bit more compassion for others whose lives are threatened.

  source

  • eremophila@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The world would be a much better place were that the case.

    source
  • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Just FYI the Bondi Beach celebration was by Zionist Jewish orgs and many prominent Zionists were present.

    source

    • Taleya@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      i don’t give a fuck if it was populated by werewolves, you don’t show up to a public festival with a fucking gun and start shooting people

      source
• ianhclark510@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  you guys getting in on the book bannings huh?

  source

  • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The AI companies have already moved onto book burning.

    source
  • eremophila@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yeah they match perfectly with the new usa pedophile warmonger nuclear submarine base

    source
• Taleya@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Man, I remember the days when they’d put a a sign saying “Controversial best seller” on it instead

  source

  • Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’ve never seen that before. It’s a good idea. Seems a bit incongruous books about heavy topics being like this put on “bestseller/hot” shelves. No matter the content, it devalues the books serious content.

    source
• blind3rdeye@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Based on the article, it sounds like there is no particular problem with the book except that a Jewish new organisation says it is “distressing” to see it displayed. At face value, that seems like a very bad reason to remove the book.

  source
• Gladaed@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  To be fair, the title does leave a bad taste and doesn’t communicate scientific rigor, but it being a opinion piece with little value that should not be read.

  source

  • Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The article isn’t much of an opinion piece. It’s pretty straight down the line reporting, they’ve gone to a broad range of sources for comment. Although not all of those sources contacted for comment responded, which has left a gap by absence. This could be a trick by the reporter by not allowing enough time/clear notification to respond, Murdoch media are famous for this practice, or it could simply be the organisations felt it better not to comment, the Sydney Swans Captain is a good example of ‘no comment’ yesterday.

    Maybe what you mean is the language the Guardian chose to use communicates a bias in favour of the ‘book remaining on shelf’ advocates. I’d agree, whether it’s the voice of the author coming through or the stance of the publication this is something that is common and useful in journalism.

    As to opinion pieces, the Guardian are usually quite good at clearly labelling an opinion piece of theirs. As per below,

    Image

    source

    • Gladaed@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I mean the title of the book is asking for controversy. Not of the article.

      And reasoning for book removals from libraries can be pretty shallow in the US according to my perception, though that’s more of a school and minor library thing.

      I didn’t mean the article.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    A German advocating for banning books. Naziism is alive and well in the fatherland.

    source

    • Gladaed@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I didn’t.

      source