The civil rights organization has put Amazon, Google, AudioBooks and Barnes & Noble on blast for not pulling racist materials from their digital shelves. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) read Amazon, Google, AudioBooks and Barnes & Noble for promoting and selling White supremacist and pro-confederate materials. The nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization has called for the removal of any digital audio books and related social media ads that share those stories, via an annoucement made yesterday (December 9). “It is inexcusable for internet retailers like Amazon, Google, Audio Books, and Barnes and Noble to profit from the mainstreaming of White supremacist historical revisionism that celebrates the treason of the Confederacy and excuses the abomination of slavery,” said CAIR Director of Government Affairs Robert S. McCaw. The proposed boycott includes the titles “The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War,” “The South Was Right” and neo-Nazi recruitment novel “The Turner Diaries.”
via colorlines: CAIR Calls for the Removal of White Supremacist Books
siehe auch: Amazon, Google Urged to Remove White Supremacist and ‘Neo-Nazi Recruitment’ Materials From Sale. Several major retailers have been urged to remove a string of white supremacist and pro-Confederate materials from sale, including a so-called “bible of the racist right” which inspired the 1995 Oklahoma Bombing. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has found that Amazon, Google Play Books, AudioBooks, and Barnes and Noble are currently selling several racist novels, eBooks and other materials online. The advocacy group found that all four sites are selling The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War, a book which contains white supremacist myths such as the 14th Amendment was “never constitutionally ratified.” The book also argued that the Civil War was unnecessary because slavery was expected to “fade away naturally,” under the Confederacy. The book, written by H.W. Crocker III, was accused of using “cherry-picked research and one-sided judgments of figures” in its arguments by the Harvard Political Review.