|
C Pitt
|
|
|
|
With the Mccann case in the headlines again, their lawyers have served an injunction banning the book based on the official investigation files. Should any book be banned, however controversial?
|
|
eamharris
|
|
|
|
Quote: C Pitt, Friday, 6 Nov 2009 21:07With the Mccann case in the headlines again, their lawyers have served an injunction banning the book based on the official investigation files. Should any book be banned, however controversial? Hi C Pitt, I understand your concern, but this is a private action not a banning by 'authority'. I think the family has a right to try and stop it if they don't want anyone else cashing in on their grief. It must also be borne in mind that if the police records are used it may affect the investigation outcome. I can't understand how the author can have access to the files - surely they are confidential? If I were one of the people who had been questioned but was innocent I would be up there with the McCann lawyer. I don't know the details but this sounds to me like a tasteless, exploitative book which will not help Madeleine's situation at all. Cheers
Elaine
|
|
sophiemp
|
|
|
|
No book should be banned, but some books should be boycotted.
|
|
spotty leopard
|
|
|
|
Not quite sure why books should constitute a special case. Are we in favour of banning badger-baiting, or boycotting it? Or is it all right to print anything, no matter how vile or misleading, because after all, it's 'only' words? This is a surprising view for any writer to espouse.
LexiTrying to be a Time Lord: click here for my blog
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
The Law must be the ultimate arbiter. If the book contravenes the Law and that includes preservation of evidence that may be used in a Court case, then there is a perfect imperative to ban it. If it stays within the Law, no matter how much in bad taste it is held to be, then it has to be let go into print. Whether you are happy with what the Law allows and doesn't allow is another argument altogether.
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
sophiemp
|
|
|
|
Quote: spotty leopard, Saturday, 7 Nov 2009 13:29Not quite sure why books should constitute a special case. Are we in favour of banning badger-baiting, or boycotting it? Or is it all right to print anything, no matter how vile or misleading, because after all, it's 'only' words? This is a surprising view for any writer to espouse. Would you ban books about badger-baiting? Books ARE only words, and what's surprising to me is that a writer would be in favor of allowing some arbitrary 'authority' to tell them what they can and cannot write about, and what they can or cannot say about it.
This post was last edited by sophiemp, 08 Nov 2009, 00:21
|
|
C Pitt
|
|
|
|
I remember reading Chairman Mao's little red book. My Dad was responsible for installing the engine in a merchant ship for the Chinese on the river Wear. The book was given as a gift to those who worked on the ship. As long as we continue to have free speech, I think that's the most important issue here.
This post was last edited by C Pitt, 08 Nov 2009, 00:42
|
|
D666
|
|
|
|
Quote: C Pitt, Friday, 6 Nov 2009 21:07With the Mccann case in the headlines again, their lawyers have served an injunction banning the book based on the official investigation files. Should any book be banned, however controversial? I personally don't think any book should be banned. It's up to the general public if they read it or not. And more importantly if they judge what they read to be truth or fiction! David
|
|
Cinnamon
|
|
|
|
Quote: C Pitt, Sunday, 8 Nov 2009 00:39I remember reading Chairman Mao's little red book. My Dad was responsible for installing the engine in a merchant ship for the Chinese on the river Wear. The book was given as a gift to those who worked on the ship. As long as we continue to have free speech, I think that's the most important issue here. I agree with C Pitt. Freedom of speech is vital.
E-asy Peasy?
|
|
Cinnamon
|
|
|
|
Quote: spotty leopard, Saturday, 7 Nov 2009 13:29 Or is it all right to print anything, no matter how vile or misleading, because after all, it's 'only' words? This is a surprising view for any writer to espouse. I wouldn't use the phrase 'all right', but yes, anyone should be able to write anything they like. As Sulcus said upthread, if what is written breaks the law, then the courts are there to deal with that.
This post was last edited by Cinnamon, 08 Nov 2009, 09:54
E-asy Peasy?
|