• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Jordan Peterson

Vardoger said:
Peterson is not popular among the identity politicals. Employees of Penguin Books wants his last book to be stopped.
-------------
Penguin Random House Staff Confront Publisher About New Jordan Peterson Book

During a tense town hall, staff cried and expressed dismay with the publishing giant's decision to publish 'Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life.'

Manisha Krishnan
By Manisha Krishnan
TORONTO, CANADA
November 24, 2020, 10:16pm


Several Penguin Random House Canada employees confronted management about the company’s decision to publish a new book by controversial Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson at an emotional town hall Monday, and dozens more have filed anonymous complaints, according to four workers who spoke to VICE World News.
On Monday, Penguin Random House Canada, Canada’s largest book publisher and a subsidiary of Penguin Random House, announced it will be publishing Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life by Peterson, to be released in March 2021. The book will be published by Portfolio in the U.S. and Penguin Press in the U.K., both part of the Penguin Random House empire.

Four Penguin Random House Canada employees, who did not want to be named due to concerns over their employment, said the company held a town hall about the book Monday, during which executives defended the decision to publish Peterson while employees cited their concerns about platforming someone who is popular in far-right circles.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/evqekn/the-fundamental-errors-of-jordan-peterson

“He is an icon of hate speech and transphobia and the fact that he’s an icon of white supremacy, regardless of the content of his book, I’m not proud to work for a company that publishes him,” a junior employee who is a member of the LGBTQ community and who attended the town hall told VICE World News.

More at https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5b...ront-publisher-about-new-jordan-peterson-book
Click to expand...

Makes me feel like buying multiple copies.
 
Mythopoeika said:
Well, they are free to voice their displeasure and go to work at another publishing house.
Their free speech should not affect another person's free speech.
Click to expand...
A publishing house really ought not to publish (or not publish) books based on whether their employees unanimously agree on the content. Mind you, I don't think employees should be sacked either because they publicly dislike a particular book, unless their dislike interferes with getting it published.
 
Cochise said:
A publishing house really ought not to publish (or not publish) books based on whether their employees unanimously agree on the content. Mind you, I don't think employees should be sacked either because they publicly dislike a particular book, unless their dislike interferes with getting it published.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly what I was getting at. They shouldn't be fired for simply voicing their dissent.
 
Krepostnoi said:
So Peterson gets his free speech but the publishing house employees don't? Gotcha.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... One person employed in a media outlet (or planted there by someone with an axe to grind) is empowered to veto any aspect of that company’s output that they - or their handler - disapproves of...

Nope: Can’t see any potential downsides there!

maximus otter
 
Cochise said:
A publishing house really ought not to publish (or not publish) books based on whether their employees unanimously agree on the content. Mind you, I don't think employees should be sacked either because they publicly dislike a particular book, unless their dislike interferes with getting it published.
Click to expand...

Must say I agree with you.

There is a danger of the Culture Wars starting up again here though.
 
maximus otter said:
Hmmm... One person employed in a media outlet (or planted there by someone with an axe to grind) is empowered to veto any aspect of that company’s output that they - or their handler - disapproves of...

Nope: Can’t see any potential downsides there!

maximus otter
Click to expand...
They could always burn them. There’s a historic precedence for that sort of behaviour.
 
Analogue Boy said:
They are perfectly free to reply in kind. Like writing a book of their own and getting it published maybe.

But that would be too much like hard work wouldn’t it?
Click to expand...
Quite so. Because all that's involved in getting published is producing the manuscript in the first place.
 
EnolaGaia said:
... And it means more sales! :boss:
Click to expand...
Hang on, Enola, you're never implying that the publishing houses are motivated by profit, are you? I'd been led to believe by some of the previous posts here that they were engaged in a noble fight to protect free speech. :dunno:
 
So what is the definition of "Freedom of Speech"?
Feel free to state your own, but I always go with the idea that you can't be arrested for what you say, but that doesn't mean there will be no consequences for what you say.
I will say that I DO NOT believe in unfettered free speech (the common don't yell fire in a crowded theatre example).
No one at the publisher is saying that Jordan Peterson should be arrested for his statements, but they are free to say they don't believe that his books should be published by their employer, this is not infringing his freedom of speech.
He could find another publisher or in this day and age, self publishing is quite easy.
If I was employed and called my boss an objectionable term and he fired me, that doesn't impinge my freedom of speech, but there were consequences for my actions.
 
maximus otter said:
Hmmm... One person employed in a media outlet (or planted there by someone with an axe to grind) is empowered to veto any aspect of that company’s output that they - or their handler - disapproves of...

Nope: Can’t see any potential downsides there!

maximus otter
Click to expand...
That's all a bit reds-under-the-bed, isn't it, Max? Anyway, thankfully, our media companies have the likes of Murdoch, the Barclay brothers, Bannon etc. to ensure that none of that nasty ideology corrupts their objective reporting.
 
maximus otter said:
Hmmm... One person employed in a media outlet (or planted there by someone with an axe to grind) is empowered to veto any aspect of that company’s output that they - or their handler - disapproves of...
Nope: Can’t see any potential downsides there!
Click to expand...

One person? ... What one person might that be?

And who said anything about anyone having veto power over the already-announced 2021 release of Peterson's sequel?
 
Krepostnoi said:
Hang on, Enola, you're never implying that the publishing houses are motivated by profit, are you? I'd been led to believe by some of the previous posts here that they were engaged in a noble fight to protect free speech. :dunno:
Click to expand...

The publishers who don't pay attention to profit are self-selected for extinction, unless of course they're vanity presses financially sustained by other means.

Penguin Random House published Peterson's 12 Rules for Life almost 3 years ago (January 2018), and its eventual bestseller status worldwide has certainly contributed to their bottom line. Why would they shrink from publishing a sequel?
 
One wry comment I read ran something like:

Some staff at Penguin/Random House are weeping over a Jordan Peterson book?

Wait until they find out the same company publishes Mein Kampf...

I don't want to limit anybody's free speech, but publishers publish books and nobody sensible assumes that that act implies agreement with the texts of those books. I also don't think it's fair to expect any employer to long employ staff whose aim is to sabotage their core task.

If staff can't accept that, they ought to move into another industry.
 
From the original news article:

Several Penguin Random House Canada employees confronted management about the company’s decision to publish a new book by controversial Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson at an emotional town hall Monday, and dozens more have filed anonymous complaints, according to four workers who spoke to VICE World News...

Four Penguin Random House Canada employees, who did not want to be named due to concerns over their employment, said the company held a town hall about the book Monday, during which executives defended the decision to publish Peterson while employees cited their concerns about platforming someone who is popular in far-right circles...
Click to expand...

So, basically - that there is called a discussion, where elements of one side voice their concerns about an issue, and elements on the other defend their own position on that issue.

That is actually freedom of speech.

It's ironic that those who bandy the term around as if it self evidently backs up their own blind triggering are effectively telling people to shut up.
 
Last edited:
Spookdaddy said:
From the original news article:



So, basically - that there is called a discussion, where elements of one side voice their concerns about an issue, and elements on the other defend their own position on that issue.

That is actually freedom of speech.

It's ironic that those bandy the term around as if it self evidently backs up their own blind triggering are effectively telling people to shut up.
Click to expand...

Remind me to confront fellow members at an emotional meeting and file anonymous complaints next time I want a 'conversation' with fellow board members.

Description from the original news article.
 
Yithian said:
Remind me to confront fellow members emotionally and file anonymus complaints next time I want a 'conversation' with fellow board members.
Click to expand...

When did confrontation and emotion become incompatible with freedom of speech?

(Myself, I'd tend to discount anonymous complaints too - but there doesn't seem to have been anything anonymous about the actual meeting between employees and executives reported on in the article.)
 
Spookdaddy said:
When did confrontation and emotion become incompatible with freedom of speech?
Click to expand...

Never.

But both are inamicable with the plain 'conversation' you implied above.

I respect your opinion greatly, Spook, but I personally won't lend any support to people who protest against the publication of a man's book 'Regardless of the content of his book' (direct quote).

Edit:

Vardoger said:
“He is an icon of hate speech and transphobia and the fact that he’s an icon of white supremacy, regardless of the content of his book...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5b...ront-publisher-about-new-jordan-peterson-book
Click to expand...

It seems to me that he's saying bad people like the author, so the book is bad regardless of what is in it.

What kind of logic is that?
 
Yithian said:
Never.

But both are inamicable with the plain 'conversation' you implied above...
Click to expand...

Actually 'discussion', and that word has no inbuilt inference of a particular heat setting - as, at times, events on this board clearly illustrate.

...I personally won't lend any support to people who protest against the publication of a man's book 'Regardless of the content of his book' (direct quote)...
Click to expand...

No, I agree, and I'm not necessarily siding with the complainants on the content of their actual complaint. It just that these discussions sometimes remind me of opposing forces clearing the same field of mines - carefully digging out the one in front of them...and then equally carefully resetting it just behind them, and then wondering, at the end of the day, why they still have a field full of mines.
 
Spookdaddy said:
Actually 'discussion', and that word has no inbuilt inference of a particular heat setting - as, at times, events on this board clearly illustrate.
Click to expand...

Sorry, slip of the memory.
 
I wonder if a lot of sales of Peterson’s books are due to those disagreeing with him having to read them to counter his arguments.
 
Analogue Boy said:
I wonder if a lot of sales of Peterson’s books are due to those disagreeing with him having to read them to counter his arguments.
Click to expand...
Those who disagree with him have probably never read any of his books and may not even know why they disagree with him.
AFAIK, it's just a self-help book like the first one. It probably contains a lot of good advice (and maybe some that can be argued about).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top