According to this post in The Huffington Post

Few, if any, will lament the loss of the OJ book and interview, but make no mistake, unprecedented media, and newspaper consolidation poses the gravest threat to freedom of expression, and the First Amendment.

Newspaper consolidation has been going on since I was born. I vaguely remember when there were nine newspapers in New York; now I don't really know how to count the papers, but basically there are three big ones, with The Times being the only one of "substance." And like The Wall Street Journal which I didn't count, it has become more a national paper, and I believe has suffered greatly for that.

Regan's OJ mixed media event was unconscionable. I hate agreeing with Rupert Murdoch, but it was shady to begin with. Who goes through a third party for payment? I would be wary just for that.

As a blogger who has been fighting the radical right since I began to blog, I am scared for the future of The First Amendment. Let Regan self-publish the book if she believes that it will be a cathartic experience for abused women. But she probably wouldn't put her own money into it, because she knows in her heart that this is pure exploitation.

Reality shows, which grow in number all the time, don't use writers, and nobody talks about The First Amendment because it's the stations, producers, etc., right to to make profit making shows as cheaply as possible.

Maybe many individual TV stations would pull the show. It was still number 22 in pre-orders in Amazon yesterday, though it did fall to number 50 by the time the cancellation was announced. Most authors consider their book to be doing great if it cracks the top several hundred.

OJ' Simpson's hypothetical confession would probably have made much money because the American public reacts to cheap shots and seems to thrive on them.

It's very hard to believe this:

The cancellation was a stunning rebuke to ReganBooks — a high-profile imprint of HarperCollins — and Judith Regan, who had labeled the book and interview Simpson's "confession." She insisted that she had done it not for money, but as a victim of domestic violence anxious to face down a man she believed got away, literally, with murder.

As both a woman who was abused and then stalked by a boyfriend, and a Licensed Social Worker who worked with victims of domestic abuse, I know that there would be no cathartic affect from Simpson's hypothetical confession, except for Regan and Simpson who would make much money.

It upsets me that this is being used as an example of the dilution of The First Amendment. We are a capitalist country. Consolidation of the media has to do with the law of supply and demand, with power being concentrated in the hands of a few of the richest of the rich.

That is another problem that only affects the First as it has been affecting it for years. The same authors get published because they have been proven to make money. Newspapers die because of rising costs, of competition, of union rules, of many things, but that isn't a First Amendment problem.

It's a problem of greed. Greed caused Judith Regan to buy this book and to speak nonsense about it. She not only hurt Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman's families but she hurt every woman who has been truly abused.

I can't help but feel that for once in his life Murdoch did the right thing, if for the wrong reasons.

What happens to the OJ tape?
If Regan finds somebody willing to buy it, she will. If people at The Huffington Post feel strongly that this is a violation of The First, Arianna has much money, the blog does exceptionally well. Let them buy it and play in the name of free speech.

When Regan brought up Mein Kampf she also went too far in another direction. Mein Kampf explains Hitler's "ideology," and why he rose to power. OJ Simpson was newsworthy a decade ago. Nothing about Mein Kampf and Simpson's book are parallel, and to suggest that they are is giving Simpson historical credit he doesn't deserve.

Regan did something stupid and is paying for her actions. That's what happens when a democracy works. She's no longer the powerful woman who can call the Police Commissioner to come and interrogate workers because she mistakenly believed that they robbed her.

Her cries of cathartic experiences through Simpson's book ring hollow because they are false. It's that simple. If I believed that this is a dilution of The First Amendment, I would be the first person to want it published though personally it angers me. I can and often do separate the two.

If Regan believes so strongly in this project, let her find a publisher that is willing to publish it or let her publish itself. I know somebody who did self-publish a book. It even made The New Times best seller list. I'm sure that he would be happy to explain how to self-publish for a profit.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

| | | | | | | |