Publishing staff, in rows over authors from Mike Pence to Woody Allen, are voicing their reluctance to work on books they deem hateful. But is this really ‘younger refuseniks’, or a much older debate?

In the 1960s, Simon & Schuster’s co-founder Max Schuster was facing a dilemma. Albert Speer, Hitler’s chief architect and armaments minister, had written a memoir providing new insights into the workings of Nazi leadership. As Michael Korda, Schuster’s editor-in-chief, recounted in his memoir Another Life, Schuster knew it would be a huge success. “There is only one problem,” he said, “and it’s this: I do not want to see Albert Speer’s name and mine on the same book.”

In the liberal industry of publishing, the tension that exists between profit and morality is nothing new, whether it’s Schuster turning down Speer (the book was finally published by Macmillan), or the UK government introducing legislation to prevent criminals making money from writing about their crimes.

Continue reading…

You May Also Like

Boat Race organisers ask defeated Oxford crew to clarify sickness claims

Oxford men’s team ‘had a few guys go down with E coli…

Home Office paying for thousands of empty beds reserved for asylum seekers

Government keeps ‘buffer’ of 5,000 beds to avoid repeat of overcrowding seen…

One good can come from the Boris Johnson debacle: the will to look afresh at the House of Lords | Norman Fowler

We should consider whether PMs should have such power to shape the…

Liberty threatens to sue government over ‘racist’ joint enterprise law

Human rights group argues law unfairly attaches gang motives to black and…