Fight ignorance, name that book!

The BBQ Pit
1

In this thread in Great Debates, the moderator removed some key information from the OP, namely the title and author of the book the OP wanted to rave about. I assume it’s okay to list them both here: Under the Banner of Heaven by Jon Krakauer.

Two things come to mind. One is that over the last few months I’ve seen people rave about things over and over–books, movies, TV episodes, some even with subjects like “See it now!” --all without having the name of the book/movie/episode being removed. So perhaps the thread should have been moved to Cafe Society.

The second thing was the nature of the book, and the fact that the official (if that’s the right term) Mormon church (hereinafter “LDS”) sent out emails (4-page, single-space when printed) to a great many book reviewers nationwide, including The Denver Post which printed excerpts of this email but not the entire thing as a sidebar to its review of the book (July 13, 2003 Denver Post book section; sorry, cannot link to it).

Said email contained strong language urging that the book not be reviewed and accused Krakauer of shoddy reporting, lying, and using secondary sources. Seems to me that the LDS officials overreacted a bit, perhaps fearing that this would come back on the LDS which used to condone plural wives–a hundred years ago. People I know who’ve read the book have said Krakauer is in fact very clear that the splinter groups he’s writing about are not LDS, no matter what they call themselves.

As a strategy, this email did not work unless the real strategy was to get lots of people to read the book. It was reported as the most-reviewed book for two weeks in a row following its release (according to Publishers Marketplace’s Book Review Index, a site that requires a password so I can’t link to that either).

Removal of the name and author in the OP seemed the same reaction as the sending of the email. An overreaction, and aimed at steering people away from the book.

Given the nature of the OP and the forum, I guess I can see how the moderator thought it might be “promotion” of the sort prohibited by the SDMB.

On reflection, that seems kind of lame, and not a particularly good way to fight ignorance. (Unless it’s really common for best-selling authors and major publishers to show up on this message board flogging their books. I haven’t seen that, but I haven’t been here that long.)

Given the nature of the discussion, it just seemed silly that this went on and on, discussing information contained in a book the title of which wasn’t mentioned until very late in the thread. It should have been moved to an appropriate forum instead.

I know people on this board love links; sorry the only one I can post is to the thread itself.

2

I don’t see what your point is.

3

My point is that I have read things that said “Go see [this movie] now!” and the name of the movie was actually given. Or “recommend some books” where people reply with things like, “Everybody should read [whatever book–ranging from classics to Harry Potter]” and the name of the book is allowed to stand. Examples of movies: Finding Nemo, Pirates of the Caribbean. Many, many examples of books.

Those seem equally like “product endorsements” to me. The OP did not say go buy this book, but urged people to read it. This is wrong? This is bad? This is unacceptable?

Note in the quotes: The OP said “I urge everybody to read.” The MOD claimed the OP said “Everybody should buy this.” It did not.

4

I think it comes down to intent. As Gaudere made clear, there’s a rule against posting just to endorse a product. There’s also a rule against trolling.

Now, I could say, “Hey, you should read this book!” and that’d be okay. Or, I could say, “Hey, you’re an asshole!” and that’d be okay, too, assuming I did it in the proper forum.

However, if I said, “Hey, you should buy this book!” or “Hey, you’re an asshole, but I’m only saying that to start a fight,” then I’ve broken a board rule. Although the general effect is the same, my intent behind the statement puts me in violation of the rules. The linked OP says explicitly, “This is a product endorsement.” Product endorsements are a no-no. Hence, moderator intervention.

Kind of an esoteric distinction, but it makes sense to me.

5
6

All right. Well, perhaps I was a bit subtle. The action by the moderator seemed to me the same kind of thing as the LDS’s concerted attempt to suppress the book. Particularly when there followed about 25 replies during which said book was not named, and quite a few replies like (not an exact quote) “Just because it’s been published doesn’t mean it’s true” and “Sounds like somebody put it in the nonfiction section by accident.”

The SDMB line as I understand it is against SPAM, not necessarily against product endorsement. Think of all the “recommend a razor blade” threads. I’m sorry–the moderator’s action seemed to be like it was singling out this book due to some other agenda.

7

Lighten up, Cicada. Gaudere did not “suppress the book.” The OP used language that made it appear that it was a blatant attempt to sell something, which is against the rules of the board. This is a discussion forum, not a commercial forum. The discussion of the book and its subject matter continued unabated. Nobody on the staff so much as batted an eyelid when I linked to the book on Amazon, because that was an appropriate part of discussing the book.

Discuss. Sell. Two different things.

8

Well, at the very least, the OP seemed to be treading a fine line. When it comes to weeding out spam and other advertising, I’m cool with the adminstration being a little overzealous.