1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Borders to sell O.J.'s book, but will donate profits to charity ...

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Claws for Concern, Nov 17, 2006.

  1. Claws for Concern

    Claws for Concern Active Member

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061117/ap_en_bu/simpson_book

    Borders will do it, Barnes and Noble will not.
     
  2. Kaylee

    Kaylee Member

    OJ...Father of the Year.
     
  3. Oz

    Oz Active Member

    While it's a nice gesture by Borders, if they really wanted to show some decency, they wouldn't sell the book period. Same with Barnes and Noble.
     
  4. Ledbetter

    Ledbetter Active Member

    Maybe they should donate the book to O.J., so he can use it in his search for the real killer(s).
     
  5. ballscribe

    ballscribe Active Member

    They should donate the proceeds to the family members still waiting for the court settlement.
     
  6. PopeDirkBenedict

    PopeDirkBenedict Active Member

    Translation: We feel really dirty about selling the book, but not so dirty that we are willing to lose business to Barnes and Noble.
     
  7. ifilus

    ifilus Active Member

    Big fan of censorship?
     
  8. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    Censorship is when someone else says you are forbidden to publish something, excerising editorial control is when you limit yourself.
     
  9. shotglass

    shotglass Guest

    And I wouldn't care for them doing either one.
     
  10. Oz

    Oz Active Member

    You know Borders and Barnes and Noble don't sell every book, just like MTV chooses not to run certain videos they deem to be too racy. Businesses have standards to either accept or reject products. They could go either way here.

    And no, I'm not for censorship. It's funny, I was on the complete opposite end of the argument when it came to the Dixie Chicks only months ago.
     
  11. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    O.J.'s children are now legal adults. He is not responsible for their support.
    It is to be assumed whatever profits are diverted to them will be, in large part, diverted right back to him.

    Unless, of course, they decide to use that money to explore extra-legal avenues to deal with their mother's killer. Now, THAT's an idea. :)
     
  12. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    Maybe in this case, but strict editorial control and self censorship are the landmark of late 20th century early 21st century journalism. The politically correct world to which modern, main stream journalism created, demands censorship.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page