Hachette Publishing has canceled their planned  release of Woody Allen's autobiography due to pressure from their employees and vociferous opposition from Ronan and Dylan Farrow. I don't like the idea of this. Whatever you may think of Mr. Allen, he was cleared of all charges he was accused of, and has never been convicted of any wrongdoing. This is tantamount to censorship as far as I am concerned and another sad example of cancel culture run amok. Mr. Allen has every right to have his book published. Dylan Farrow even made the silly statement that nobody fact checked the book with her. Since when does an AUTOBIOGRAPHY have to be fact-checked by people who may or may not be mentioned in it? It's not a textbook or a news story. By it's very nature an autobiography is subjective.

Read story here:

www.npr.org/2020/03/06/812687472/after-woody-allens-memoir-was-signed-book-publisher-s-employees-walk-out

He can always self-publish the book thru Lulu Publishing or similar.

Pathetic. He did nothing wrong.

He can always self-publish the book thru Lulu Publishing or similar.


Yes, but that's not the point. The point is his book shouldn't have been cancelled in the first place.

He can always self-publish the book thru Lulu Publishing or similar.


Yeah, pretty much.

Woody Allen's book finds new publisher:

https://apnews.com/6e7f6ad6a0daf117ec54c765bdf838b2

I'm glad not everyone has given in to repressive and fascistic cancel culture. Keep in mind Woody Allen was cleared of all charges brought against him and has never been convicted of anything. It is up to each individual to decide whether they wish to read his book or not. Enough with herd mentality.

Looks like the cancellation... has been CANCELED.  ;D

I don’t feel bad about it. He’s a creep who made some good movies in his time.

I don’t feel bad about it. He’s a creep who made some good movies in his time.


That's exactly the point. Someone should not experience censorship because they are a creep. That's cancel culture at it's repressive worst. Even if someone has committed a crime (something Allen was never convicted of) we use the courts, not censorship to punish people. Free speech isn't a reward for good behavior. It's a right that stays meaningful only if we extend it even to people we find repugnant.

I think you're confusing freedom of speech for complete freedom to say whatever the hell you want. The First Amendment simply states that your speech is protected from limitation by the government. It doesn't say a damned thing about private companies or individuals deciding they don't want to hear from you.

I realize how disappointing this can be to people, especially those who clutch their pearls at the mere thought of not being able to mouth off whatever and whenever they feel like, but freedom of speech is a negative right (from from something), not a positive right (freedom for something).

Also the guy is a slimeball. I don't care if he did it or not, but his recent movies, which are all the same movie done a dozen times, reveal that the accusations are totally on-brand for him even if they're unfounded.

I think you're confusing freedom of speech for complete freedom to say whatever the hell you want. The First Amendment simply states that your speech is protected from limitation by the government. It doesn't say a damned thing about private companies or individuals deciding they don't want to hear from you.

I realize how disappointing this can be to people, especially those who clutch their pearls at the mere thought of not being able to mouth off whatever and whenever they feel like, but freedom of speech is a negative right (from from something), not a positive right (freedom for something).

Also the guy is a slimeball. I don't care if he did it or not, but his recent movies, which are all the same movie done a dozen times, reveal that the accusations are totally on-brand for him even if they're unfounded.


You are correct about the legalities of freedom of speech. Maybe we should call the Woody Allen situation freedom of EXPRESSION. Regardless of who it is or what they are saying, I hate to see it curtailed by mob mentality, which is what the current cancel culture is.  An argument can be made that the original publisher, Hachette, made a dumbass move in the first place by agreeing to publish Allen's book when their main client and likely biggest seller is Ronan Farrow. Talk about a conflict of interest. But once they agreed, they should have stuck to their guns. That's freedom of expression. The public is then free to thumb their nose at Allen should they choose to, by not buying the book. But Hachette allowed themselves to be shouted down and were likely terrified to appear "unwoke".

They’re a private company; they’re free to “cancel” Woody Allen if they can see it’s not going to fly well with the purchasing public. Simple as that.

Like I said, just because you have the freedom to talk doesn’t mean anyone is obligated to listen.