Andy Jassy, Amazon's CEO, is not about to remove a controversial film about African-Americans from the company's website. Despite its anti-Semitic content, the film got a boost after NBA player Irving, who has over two million followers on Amazon, linked to the movie on his social media page.
Due to the controversy surrounding the book, Jassy has been under increasing pressure to remove it from Amazon. According to the New York Times, he argued that customers have the right to access various viewpoints, even if they are offensive.
During an interview, Jassy stated that it's easier to remove a book if it's intentionally inflammatory or teaches people to engage in activities like pedophilia.
In response to the controversy, Amazon said earlier this month that it would add a disclaimer on the film's page. However, it hasn't done so.
The company did not respond to an attempt by The Associated Press to ask if it would add a disclaimer on the page. Jassy, who is Jewish, said that Amazon has employees who flag content that is offensive. However, scaling that effort would be challenging.
Despite the company's massive number of reviews, Jassy stated that it's still hard to remove a book due to its content. He noted that customers do their own research before they buy a book.
The best censors in the world are those customers who refuse to buy a book or a film due to its content that's offensive. While there are some books that are anti-Semitic or racist, why should they be banned if they're not promoting violence? Also, why should they allow sexually explicit content in order to avoid censorship, which is content that millions of Americans find offensive?
The book Hebrews to Negroes is based on an erroneous historical interpretation of the Bible, which uses a skewed reading of the book as a historical record. Despite its offensive content, the First Amendment allows people to read and discuss it.
Today, there's a debate about whether or not the thoughts should be "rejected" as they are "violence." This is not the case, as the difference between actions and thoughts is not necessarily significant. When it comes to censorship, the actions and thoughts are interchangeable.
Those who can't see the situation are blind to history. Once a person makes their thoughts "censorable," they are only a short step away from making them a crime.
The preceding is a summary of an article that originally appeared on PJ Media.