The Clean Reader saga continues:
– Joanne Harris has another round of reply and response with the Clean Reader folks.
– Lilith Saintcrow had a reply and response round, too — and got her books taken off the site.
– Jennifer Porter hilariously looks at what Clean Reader actually does, and lists the word replacements (and notes, as Joanne does, that it scrubs references to female anatomy and changes them all to “bottom,” thus suggesting that Clean Reader is not-so-secretly a fan of anal sex).
– Smashwords has removed access to its library, so its books won’t automatically end up at the Clean Reader store anymore.
(They have a book of mine — The Cormorant — for sale, which is ha ha ohhh, not actually awesome because that book is no longer for sale. It has changed publishers and will be republished by Simon & Schuster SAGA in April, so how exactly they’re selling that book is somewhat beyond me. They also have Kick-Ass Writer for sale, and at this point I’m pretty sure that any of my books run through their colonic cleansing process will cause whatever device is using it to catch fire and melt into a ball of sparking, smoking slag.)
For those saying that this doesn’t modify the file and isn’t illegal — well, maybe so. I’m not a lawyer. Lots of things are legal that I think jolly well shouldn’t be. For my mileage, that this modifies the reader’s experience is the same as modifying the book. Yes, the file of the book has meaning, but so does the content, and when you change the content or allow it to be changed, that concerns me.
Look at it this way:
Imagine that in the real world there existed a bookstore, and the clerk at this store will modify any book on the shelves and sell it to you. He’ll change words, characters, whatever. He makes money off the exchange. The book received is not the book you wrote.
Okay, your objection to that is — ahh, but this is the reader’s choice and it’s not one change but an entire host of permutational programmatic changes, so, okay.
Let’s change the story.
Imagine that in the online world (which is still real, by the way), there existed an online bookstore and the magical online robot at this store will modify any book on their digital shelves and sell it to you. The content of the book — whether technically changed or overlaid with changes — is marred. And not just with one set of changes but with a whole host of permutational possibilities — a finite set, however, of those possibilities, because a book contains only so many tsk-tsk naughty fuckbuckets and shitkittens within its pages, and so only so many changes are possible.
Maybe that sits okay with you.
It does not sit well with me.
The reader can take my books and do whatever he or she wants with them after sale. Read them backward, forward, upside-down, block out whole pages of text, draw dong doodles in all the margins, write phone numbers in the front, scratch out my name on the cover and write in theirs, use it as a butt plug for an elephant. The trick is, you then cannot go and sell that modification back to the consumer. Much as you are free to mod a game or download mods to a game — but you are not then able to sell/resell the game with that mod (or a host of potential mods embedded in or overlaid upon the code) in place.
And so, the battle against this silly, septic product continues. As the only profane thing here that I can see is what this app does to books and stories and history.
Hilariously, if you used this app, you could have substitutions like:
Was: “Jon Snow was the bastard son of House Stark.”
Becomes: “Jon Snow was the jerk son of House Stark.”
Was: “The bitch had her puppies.”
Becomes: “The witch had her puppies.”
Was: “This chicken breast is delicious.”
Becomes: “This chicken chest is delicious.”
Was: “The needle stuck in his arm with a prick.”
Becomes: “The needle stuck in his arm with a groin.”
Was: “Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
Becomes: “Geez is the Son of God.” / “Gee Gosh is the Son of God”
Was: “Would you care for one of these Oscar Meyer wieners?”
Becomes: “Would you care for one of these Oscar Meyer groins?”
Was: “She’s a real pussycat.”
Becomes: “SHE’S A REAL BOTTOMCAT.”
Was: “Oh, fuck, I want you to put your prick inside me and fuck my asshole.”
Becomes: “Oh, freak, I want you to put your groin inside me and freak my jerk.”
Just a sampling of the absurd delights! Change the words but don’t change any of the context or content for maximum whatthefuckery. (Because changing words doesn’t change what goes on inside the book. Just because you change the words fuck my asshole doesn’t mean the sentiment isn’t still fuck my asshole — and the scene that ensues is likely very much about some kind of anal penetration with all the context and sexery remaining relatively explicit. Changing a few words does nothing except make explicit material goofy.)
Good times.
For my mileage, if you require action items:
You can email them at cleanreader@inktera.com and demand your books be taken off.
You can also talk to your publishers about keeping your books off of Clean Reader.
You can air your grievances on Twitter — they are at @CleanReader.
And you can rate and review the app at either the iTunes or Google Play marketplaces.
Matt Black says:
Mmmm… Chicken chests and Oscar Meyer Groins… Just like mama used to make.
March 26, 2015 — 7:49 AM
M T McGuire says:
Mwah hahahargh! Are these actual real results? I take it back! It’s not sceptic pissery it’s pure comedic genius. I’d like to see a theological treatise put through that thing. But chicken chest? Seriously, Mwhahaahhrgh I’m laughing so hard I may wee in my pants.
And I loved your ball of sparking, smoking slag line. Are we sure this isn’t some kind of April fool? It really feels to stupid to be real.
Cheers
MTM
March 26, 2015 — 7:52 AM
Dianna E Anderson (@diannaeanderson) says:
I put my own book of theology and sexual ethics through it and it came out with some really weird results. Every single mention of “sex” became “love” – which is not merely a change in wording but a theological and intellectual statement that fails to accurately account for the context.
March 26, 2015 — 11:31 AM
M T McGuire says:
I can believe it.
March 26, 2015 — 1:23 PM
Bella Higgin says:
I just read the Jennifer Porter blog on this and it’s actually pretty shocking. She compiled a list of words that Clean Reader will block and, to my disbelief, ‘sex’ was among them. Clean Reader has designated ‘sex’ a bad word!!
The app that seems to want to shelter the innocent eyes of our cotton-wool swaddled offspring instead gives the message that any mention of sex is bad. Children are impressionable and the last thing they need to be told is that a simple word – one which will be a large part of their adult life – is actually a bad word. It gives the message that sex is something to be ashamed of. If the word itself is bad, the act itself must be truly horrific. Telling children that words like this are bad is far more damaging than exposing them to the word in the first place.
When I was a kid, I would read whatever books I could lay my hands on. Those weren’t always kiddie books. I was reading books with ‘bad’ words in from an early age and it hasn’t corrupted me or damaged me in any way. If parents want to determine the suitability of a book, maybe they should read it themselves first, rather than relying on a stupid piece of technology to do the parenting for them.
Rant over.
March 26, 2015 — 8:12 AM
terribleminds says:
Yes, we definitely have an issue — which Joanne points out — that this is an app that body-shames. Women in particular. And I’m not fond of someone using my work or the work of any author to springboard the shaming of women or anybody for their bodies.
March 26, 2015 — 8:37 AM
Bella Higgin says:
The body-shaming thing shocked me so much I went and wrote my own blog post on it. So many angles of this Clean Reader thing have already been examined but I really feel that the body-shaming thing needs to be looked at in closer detail. I know you’re probably far too busy being an awesome Social Justice Warrior to read it, but I’m including a link just in case 🙂
http://www.writersramblings.com/blog/
March 26, 2015 — 12:40 PM
Lee says:
On the plus side, if more of these folks reach adulthood, horrified of sex, then perhaps they’ll stop reproducing and die off.
March 26, 2015 — 10:25 AM
ElctrcRngr says:
Regretably, Lee, they won’t. I grew up in the kind of environment that MindCleaner would like to create. Sex was something that wasn’t talked about, and if you showed any curiosity about it, there was something wrong with you. Girls in that environment ended up pregnant at a disturbingly young age.
March 26, 2015 — 10:59 AM
Matt Black says:
I also grew up in a similar environment. However, I don’t think it’s regrettable that my sisters and I haven’t died off yet. You’ll excuse me for wanting my family to continue living. *flips middle finger at Lee*
March 26, 2015 — 11:45 AM
warjna says:
Amen, Bella Higgin. Well said! I grew up in just such an environment. One day my mother–a repressed and repressive woman who feared men and sex to an astounding degree–by mistake left her copy of Peyton Place out where I could find it. (Yes, wrap your head about that conundrum if you can!) She found me reading it. In one of the very, very few acts of intelligence regarding such she did *not* whip the book out of my hands and punish me for reading it. Instead, she cringed and walked away. For once she understood that I was simply curious, not actively experimenting. No matter what she thought or felt, she was able to allow me to educate myself without let or hindrance. At least, if it was on paper.
March 26, 2015 — 10:15 PM
Sally Ember, Ed.D. says:
Oy. What will it do with Yiddish words for penis, like “shmuck,” “shmendrik,” “putz”? What about all the words for masterbating, like “wanker,” and phrases like “spanking the monkey”? Does it allow “kiss” or “pet,” perhaps a little “groping” or “caressing,” but no “grinding”? Sheesh.
March 26, 2015 — 8:23 AM
Susan Frank says:
I suspect schmuck and even schwanschtücker will be fine, since it also missed ‘shite’ in Trainspotting. Like it’s creators, the app isn’t the brightest candle on the xmas tree.
March 26, 2015 — 8:38 AM
terribleminds says:
Well, this is also a larger issue with the app — it’s woefully ineffective at its aim. It’s not just bad for authors (and to my mind, bad for readers), but it’s actually bad even for those readers who *want* the app to do what it is designed to do. It fails spectacularly.
March 26, 2015 — 8:45 AM
Michelle at The Green Study says:
I had never heard of this app before and find it horrifying. I’ve seen boatloads of religious tripe being written and sold. Why would someone choose to read the work of unwashed heathens if they’re offended by the word “sex”? Every time I think the world has hit some new level of batshit crazy, evidence mounts that we’re not done yet. In the previous sentence, “mounts” would likely be altered to “rises” – it’s the resurrection correction.
March 26, 2015 — 8:23 AM
zeros83 says:
As my friend Davide wrote in his post on the subject (https://strategieevolutive.wordpress.com/2015/03/26/libri-bruciati-con-delicatezza/), the best answer those parent should have given their daughter was an educational one, not buying her a tablet and creating an app to hide her from the world.
The fact the app is crappy; that it destroys a writer’s work; that the synonyms (?) are idiotic; that the app sells the idea sex is bad and shouldn’t be spoken of because oh my goodness sex is bad… gee, it’s only a truckload of horror on top of stupid premises.
(and reading the spokesperson replying to Joanne Harris saying children books don’t speak about sex… Gosh, there are children books that speak about sex, about consent, about abuse, about death, about ANYTHING a parent would need to tell his/her children to inform, educate and strenghten them. Can the idea those books exist scare you? Maybe, but they still exist)
March 26, 2015 — 8:52 AM
Andrew says:
To be fair, re-selling a book as an elephant butt plug does seem like a viable situation for fair-use.
March 26, 2015 — 8:53 AM
Wendy Christopher says:
Okay, what I’m now wondering is when do the pro-Clean Reader people take this a step further, inventing a microchip that can be implanted into the brain to stop the owner from hearing ‘profanities’ spoken by real-life people in real-life, everyday life? You could have a whole section of society who just live in this alternative universe, where they’re not hearing and experiencing the same reality as everyone else.
And now I just gave away a cool new idea for a story on the massive interweb…. furry-kitten YOU, Clean Reader!
March 26, 2015 — 8:59 AM
Susan Frank says:
Ummm…Doesn’t that exist already? Isn’t is where anti-vaxxers, creationists, teabaggers, climate change deniers, Clean Reader-app proponents, and others of their ilk spring from?
March 26, 2015 — 2:52 PM
warjna says:
“furry-kitten you” OH how I love that! One of my friends from years gone by used to say “Fire Cat” in a heavy southern drawl (she’s NOT southern!) instead of “fuck it.” It’s been years since I thought of that!
March 26, 2015 — 10:19 PM
22pamela says:
I say Fire Cat all the time, mostly now because I gave up cuss words for lent. And sort of because I am southern woman and it’s really not lady like to swear. At least, that’s what I was told growing up. But like everything else, we find a way to get around it. I’m completely digging on “furry-kitten.” Could be my new coin phrase if Wendy Christopher has no objections.
April 1, 2015 — 11:29 PM
Paul Anthony Shortt says:
I contacted them about having my books delisted. They said they already were. Yay for me! Though I’m wondering if it was my publisher or if they saw my blog post from yesterday and decided to remove them. I dunno.
March 26, 2015 — 9:11 AM
Nick Nafpliotis (@NickNafster79) says:
“Oh, freak, I want you to put your groin inside me and freak my jerk.”
That actually sounds pretty much nastier than the original.
March 26, 2015 — 9:12 AM
Deanmcsmith says:
reminds me of badly written cyberpunk.
March 26, 2015 — 11:24 AM
Mela says:
Wow. Just stumbled over this topic for the first time.
Funny note at the side: A similar stupid approach was planned by the lobby group of German publishers and book seller. The planned to randomly change words in every ebook, to create some kind of soft-DRM so pirated books could be followed to the source.
Besides the BIG privacy problem to be forced to record every book buyers data – forever – it would have rendered ebooks un-cite-able and, hey, why invest so much work and pain into polish your sentences when a random algorythm will change them anyway? Not to mention the problem with non-fiction books and randomely changed information with something that sounds similar …
March 26, 2015 — 9:13 AM
TymberDalton says:
And Oscar Meyer has a way with G-R-O-I-N-S yay!
March 26, 2015 — 9:23 AM
Peter Hentges says:
I took a peek at the demonstration video on the Clean Reader site. From a programming perspective (and I’m not a lawyer and have no idea what if what I’m about to say has any relevance to legality) it seems that what their app is doing is roughly equivalent to you handing someone a book you bought and that person then goes through a puts post-it notes over naughty bits and hands it back to you.
Where they take it a step further is by effectively adding words to those post-it notes when you tap on them.
Leave that off and I don’t think anyone would have much to say one way or another about the app. I doubt many would be so het up about the whole thing if the app offered a user-defined set of substitutions. So a reader could swap in a feck for fuck if they wanted but could just as easily swap in “cock-waffle” for “Clean App publisher.”
March 26, 2015 — 9:26 AM
Stephen Dunscombe (@cythraul) says:
Hmmm. In your previous post, your position on readers modifying their own copies of books seems to have hinged on the fact that they’d still have to *read* the naughty bits in order to do so.
What about someone reading to someone else, and modifying on the fly? (Patrick Rothfuss has an anecdote where he rewrote the end of a Roald Dahl novel as he was reading it to his son.)
(It’s an ugly, complex question in general to my mind, and there are lots and lots of potential boundary cases. What of Mystery Science Theater 3000? Or Rifftrax? Or “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”?)
March 26, 2015 — 9:33 AM
terribleminds says:
Mystery Science Theater either got permission or used material in the public domain.
Pride and Prejudice is presumably also in the public domain.
A reader can of course modify the story on the fly. Like I said, you can do whatever you like with your copy of my book. Rip out the ending. Use it to abuse yourself. Write your own book in the margins. Don’t care. But I take issue with an app that sells and programmatically modifies the work it’s selling.
— c.
March 26, 2015 — 9:57 AM
Graham Powell says:
In addition to stuff being in the public domain, there’s an exception for parody. It rides on fair use for the purposes of criticism, defining parody itself as a form of criticism. But I know many artists (eg Weird Al) get explicit permission anyway.
March 26, 2015 — 10:39 AM
Sara Crow says:
I think those of you who have books on this site should see if you can find a sympathetic IP lawyer (which should be damn easy to achieve) to establish an initial consultation about this. The app is fundamentally altering the work, and there’s lots of precedent for this sort of thing in IP law, especially since they’re taking money for it (not sure of the legality of donations as opposed to an actual CHARGE, but it seems hinky to me regardless). It’s been a while since I had my nose in my husband’s IP law books, but I might even be able to dig something out if you’re interested that you can use as a starting point. This is just utter bullshit.
I find this PARTICULARLY worrisome if they’re offering a book that’s not currently being offered by the publisher. Even if you can’t get them scuttled for altering your work without consent (which would surprise me), I’m suspicious there’s a little piracy going on int he background that could be problematic.
March 26, 2015 — 9:34 AM
Anthony says:
Not to be a slippery slope person, but in a world where Indiana is passing a discrimination law (or close to it) how long before something like this app is also used to re-gender characters, “straighten” sexuality, or even further white wash the literary world?
March 26, 2015 — 9:45 AM
Sara Crow says:
Holy hell that’s a good point. And creepy.
March 26, 2015 — 9:49 AM
ElctrcRngr says:
Nothing wrong with fearing the slippery slope. In this country, we don’t lose our freedoms through landslides, we lose them through the slow process of erosion
March 26, 2015 — 11:30 AM
athenagrayson says:
Even more likely (and more terrifying) is how long before Clean Reader gets an advertising deal with Pepsi and now every time character fixes a drink it becomes “fixes a Pepsi”? Because it’ll happen.
How long before Clean Reader App will helpfully begin “Pride and Prejudice” with “It is a truth, universally acknowledged, that a young woman in possession of a good fortune, simply does not feel fresh without a Summer’s Eve douche in the morning.”
I, for one, can’t wait.
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. It was the CRAAAZY EDDIE’S 95% OFF SALE OF CARPETS CARPETS CARPETS! FACTORY DIRECT TO YOU!”
“Call me Ishmael AT 555-1212 FOR PAYDAY LOANS NOW!”
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth and cruised around them in his Prius, and they were good, at fifty miles per gallon highway. And God was pleased because the Limited Edition comes with two cup holders and a cargo net for busy deities on the go.”
March 26, 2015 — 11:58 AM
Ivy says:
Athena, you are hilarious! I had no trouble imagining any of those commercial diversions. Cracked up laughing at them!
March 28, 2015 — 12:46 AM
Catherine says:
Someone recentre said that the app was justified because of children- specifically “won’t someone think of the children!”- Helen love joy voice and all.( ok ok maybe I’m exaggerating that but you get the jist) My reply was simple- if my kid was able to read, understand and enjoy books that had swear words in it- I would be jumping for joy at her clearly massive IQ, not worrying about the word fuck. Also swear words are just words. you teach children to not use them out of respect- not because they have any power to corrupt- but you also teach them that they are an important part of a writers final vision. They help display tone, emotion, character, hell even time period, and are important and should not be tampered with because someone took offence.
March 26, 2015 — 10:19 AM
Peter Hentges says:
Time period is a good point. Makes me wonder what the app would do to the raunchier bits of Shakespeare or Chaucer!
March 26, 2015 — 10:23 AM
Rebecca Douglass says:
Based on the samples I’ve seen, I would fail to understand them. So maybe we can suggest they replace “fuck” with. “swive”.
March 26, 2015 — 10:46 AM
warjna says:
I be likin’ dat!
March 26, 2015 — 11:05 PM
Michael says:
I don’t really think something like this should be illegal, but mostly because I can’t see a way to make it illegal without a whole host of other things getting caught in the crossfire. I’ve used phone apps to auto-translate books, pamphlets, and restaurant menus (the latter two being free, of course, but I don’t think copyright laws make a distinction). And I know plenty of people who change the layout and content of websites for practical or entertainment reasons. A friend of mine has a browser plugin which turns a set of words into bad puns whenever they show up. Even on content he pays for access to.
On a more serious note, though, this being illegal would probably make changing the file format of a commercial work illegal (even on DRM-free works). After all, what are those except for a robot changing data automatically?
That being said, Clean Reader strikes me as really, really stupid. Not illegal, and probably not even immoral. But dumb, and kind of insulting.
March 26, 2015 — 10:26 AM
Lee says:
How do you determine if your books are on their ‘site’? Aside from the app itself for sale at different spots I haven’t found a place that lists their library. Or do you have to install the app before you can see what books they have?
March 26, 2015 — 10:29 AM
Paul Anthony Shortt says:
I just contacted them vie their online form and told them I didn’t want my books to be available through the app. There doesn’t seem to be any need to check in advance.
March 26, 2015 — 10:31 AM
Tammi Labrecque says:
OMG HAS ANYONE RUN THE BIBLE THROUGH THIS THING?
March 26, 2015 — 10:35 AM
Kay Camden says:
*dies*
March 26, 2015 — 3:19 PM
Karin Kallmaker says:
I imagined just one verse for starters, Matthew 1:1. “Gee” the “Gosh” doesn’t have much of a ring to it. And breast appears throughout the Bible.
March 26, 2015 — 6:40 PM
wildbilbo says:
Jesus Christ is replaced by geez, so I’m guessing JC would come off more like Kanye.
And Geez said onto them…
Also Christ is Gosh
The whore of Babylon becomes the hussy of Babylon
Satan lives in heck
and… I cant see what Sodom would become. maybe ‘ButtLove & Gomorrah?
🙂
March 26, 2015 — 9:53 PM
ElctrcRngr says:
And “sexual immorality” will become “loveual immorality”. Love y’all? No, that’s the Southern version of MindCleaner. Interestingly, here’s a passage that I don’t think will change. From Revelation 2: “So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely… I will strike her children dead” Sounds pretty BDSM to me.
March 27, 2015 — 4:39 AM
wildbilbo says:
Geez Gosh that’s Jerked-up. 🙂
March 27, 2015 — 4:42 AM
ElctrcRngr says:
I wonder if Chuck can come up with a flash fiction challenge for us tomorrow that somehow relates to this issue? Just wondering what his terriblemind would come up with boggles my CleanReadered mind.
March 27, 2015 — 4:51 AM
Karen says:
In telling my son about this app (which, as a reader, I find offensive) he brought up the question of where this app is getting DRM free material. Especially if there are books like Cormorant which are currently unavailable. Hes a programmer & says there must be some level of piracy going on. Which is funny, really, when you think that the app is trying to force Christian values on books is probably stealing the some of material theyre altering.
Its kind of like a modern day attempt at book burning, isnt it?
March 26, 2015 — 10:45 AM
ina says:
If my students turned in a paper that was someone else’s work but with some words removed, I’d call that plagiarism. The fact that they put the original author’s name on is on top of that misleading, since it removes the author’s intent.
March 26, 2015 — 10:48 AM
Demonified™ (@swtlyevil) says:
It kills me that instead of sitting down and having a conversation with their daughter about the words that were making her uncomfortable they decided the best thing to do was to not only hide them from her, but from others as well. Seriously? If they were my parents I would never, EVER, tell them something made me uncomfortable again.
What are they going to do when she comes home and says ‘the outfit that Janie wore to school today made me feel uncomfortable’? Are they going to call Janie’s parents? Doubtful, I see them showing up at the school to talk to the principal or to alter Janie’s appearance when she shows up, or even going so far as to protest very emphatically outside the school with signs and a bullhorn about Janie’s outfit.
I taught my daughter to make choices regarding music, tv, movies, and books. I always told her if something makes her uncomfortable, let me know. We can talk about why it makes her uncomfortable. If she didn’t like something we were listening to in the car, we could change it. We didn’t make a huge deal out of it.
These people took power away from their child. They took her power away to reason and think for herself. That’s the worst possible thing you can do to anyone, especially a child.
March 26, 2015 — 10:50 AM
Tammi Labrecque says:
“That’s the worst possible thing you can do to anyone, especially a child.” <– I agree 100%. It's BS.
March 26, 2015 — 10:54 AM
warjna says:
Re: Janie’s outfit. Considering what they’re trying to do to out books, they’d probably way lay the kid and forcibly change her clothes.
March 26, 2015 — 11:09 PM
warjna says:
And I agree – taking away her CHOICE to reason and think for herself and dictating their own choices–that is absolutely the worst thing to do to a child. If you do that, what’s she to do when you are gone?
March 26, 2015 — 11:11 PM
moreknown says:
It seems like all your readers agree with the points you made here, but the application doesn’t draw the same outrage from me. I’m an author, and I love the idea that people can take my books, write all over them, and share them with their friends.
While this app doesn’t have that same aesthetic of a book with folded corners, scribble-covered margins, highlighted segments, and tiny notes, the end result remains the same. In used bookstores, there is always some level of charm in picking up a copy of a book by one of my favorite authors and seeing what notes the previous owner left inside.
Someone writing over my words in their copy of the book does not diminish my original work.
I understand that may great authors are upset over the idea, but I’m all for it. I like seeing things like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, too.
If kids want to cover the margins in doodles, creating their first animation on the corners of the pages, that’s fine with me. If someone wants to take a red pen and act as an uninvited editor, altering words to create a zombie-version of the story I wrote, that’ s great! Have fun! If conservatives want to censor their copies because some words make them uncomfortable, I might not understand it, but I don’t want to take that option away either.
March 26, 2015 — 11:14 AM
percykerry923 says:
I think that if parents have a problem with their kids reading books with profanity in them, then they should have a frank discussion with their children about what constitutes profanity, and what makes it good or bad or whatever. This app chooses to ‘shield’ kids from profanity, and that ain’t gonna work. Because why? Because nowadays the Internet and social media are feeding everything to an information hungry generation- both good stuff and bad stuff. Kids very young are maturing and learning about ‘adult’ stuff at an alarming rate. You can’t bury your head in the sand like an ostrich and pretend your kids will never hear, read, learn or speak cuss words. Books, kids at school, movies, for starters. This app is just trying to climb a high high horse. If you don’t like profanity in a book, don’t read it. It’s that simple.
March 26, 2015 — 11:25 AM
ElctrcRngr says:
The kind of thought process that comes up with things like CleanReader simply never consider that sort of option. For them, children are to be seen and not heard, and the idea that they can’t completely control their child’s world drives them to do things like legislate their morality, because anyone who doesn’t agree with them is wrong, end of discussion. The idea of children having minds of their own either scares the hell out of them, or never even occurs to them.
March 27, 2015 — 4:48 AM
Walt Socha says:
Ha. So that’s what “clean” means. I was wondering. (And, by the way, I think the idea of “clean”-ing a book is just butt silly…oops, I mean bottom-silly…).
March 26, 2015 — 11:41 AM
Frankie Bow says:
I have nothing constructive to add, except that “freak my jerk” sounds like it could be a huge dance hit. *runs off to fire up Garage Band*
March 26, 2015 — 12:07 PM
Wendy Christopher says:
Question is, do we hire Will Smith or Rihanna to do the honours? 😉
March 26, 2015 — 12:41 PM
Geoffrey Cubbage says:
Potential addition to your action items: authors and readers can contact the Page Foundry leadership and urge them to stop distributing through Clean Reader. No Page Foundry catalog to distribute means no Clean Reader.
I posted the contact info and a sample letter on my own blog earlier today: http://wp.me/pJmEd-24O
The Page Foundry CEO sent a thoughtful and personalized (though obviously noncommittal) reply to my email this morning, so they do seem to be paying attention to this one.
March 26, 2015 — 12:23 PM
Alena says:
Out of curiosity, does the app change “Kick-Ass Writer” to “Kick-Bottom Writer”?
March 26, 2015 — 12:25 PM
Writefully_so says:
This reminds me of when Walmart refused to sell CD’s with explicit language. CD’s were then released with a ‘clean’ version. The significant difference here is that in the Walmart scenario I believe the artist/production company agreed to make the clean copy of the work available.
It’s alarming to me that Clean Reader doesn’t need permision (from artist or publisher) to sell books in their ‘cleansed’ state.
March 26, 2015 — 12:38 PM
Paul Anthony Shortt says:
Exactly. It’s one thing if the rights-holders of a piece of art decide to produce an amended version of a work, to be aimed at a different demographic. But that’s the choice of the producers of that work, in conjunction with the artist.
March 26, 2015 — 12:48 PM
clareelizabet says:
Speaking as someone who discovered Game of Thrones as the age of nine or ten and thought it was awesome, I’m not really CleanReader’s target audience… But even aside from all the issues I have with the censorship, authorial consent, etc, which Chuck and others have laid out, their attempt to censor is simply absurd.
The only times I’ve been disquieted by a book it was never one single word that made the difference, but larger actions, often described using perfectly bland, sanitary words that only together create a frightening picture. In fact, the most disturbed I’ve been were all instances when actions are left to my imagination. Maybe this speaks to the relative powers of my imagination? Perhaps people who steep themselves in sterile, safe environments don’t develop much in the way of creative thought?
A child in the Louisiana watching their father pull on a white hood one evening and seeing a strange swaying shape dangling from a tree the next day is upsetting and there wasn’t a single sexual term or profanity in there. Yet somehow the guy who gets his pants sprayed with water as a car blasts through a nearby puddle and yells “You fucker, fuck this, is that dog shit? Jesus, I’m fucked for that meeting. What an asshole.” is the one getting bleeped out.
If you’re trying to protect your children from all the nasty things in the world and you have a bigger problem with the word fuck than institutions of prejudice then you may very well be The Problem.
To be clear, I’m not advocating the censorship of anything, rather I’m questioning the focus of CleanReader’s disapproval. What exactly is inherently wrong with the word “shit” or “vagina”
CleanReader said somewhere, and I’m afraid I forget exactly where, that books are the last major media type left without ratings, like games or films. It seems to me that the logical conclusion would be to create a rating system for books. Set up you app and say welcome to the G-rated store for you little children, here’s the PG store: some mild profanity… If you are so offended by the world at large, bury yourself in your own sterile little pocket and thank Geez you are in such a position of privilege that you have the means to do so.
March 26, 2015 — 12:42 PM
Indigo Spider says:
In general the app creators seem stuck in the ’30s, maybe ’50s, with the idea that a few curse words are abhorrent, sex only equates with love and a woman’s body, well, it only has “chests” and “bottoms” and “negro” is A-OKAY.
Also seems rather ironic to offer romance novels. If sex is so awful you need to shield yourself from the word, how is reading about it? To me, that is the most disturbing issue, removing a few curse words is one thing, but how are people who feel the need to remove curse words dealing with the larger ideas presented in many of these texts? If even the bible is “cleansed” by this app that should be a clue how ridiculous an idea this app really is.
March 26, 2015 — 3:59 PM
ElctrcRngr says:
Don’t make me deal with large ideas. They hurt my head. Thank you, and God Bless. Signed, The CleanReader staff
March 27, 2015 — 4:57 AM
David says:
Can someone please write an app or – better yet – a web widget that will inverse CleanReader text? You know, parse the text and replace any clean words that CR uses as substitutes with the dirty version? Make it work like Google translate so you can run an entire web page through it.
Now THAT would be hilarious. Pure Comedy Gold.
March 26, 2015 — 1:04 PM
Paul Anthony Shortt says:
“It was the best of fucks, it was the worst of fucks.”
“After all, tomorrow is another fuck”
“And then they realised they were no longer little shits, they were little bitches.”
March 26, 2015 — 1:06 PM
TymberDalton says:
I would read THAT book… Does it get retitled “A Tale of Two Titties?”
March 26, 2015 — 3:09 PM
Paul Anthony Shortt says:
It’d give a whole new meaning to Great Expecations…
March 26, 2015 — 3:14 PM
Karin Kallmaker says:
And David Coppafeel.
March 26, 2015 — 10:27 PM
decayingorbits says:
You beat me to it. LOL
March 28, 2015 — 8:50 AM
TymberDalton says:
So does Moby Dick then become Moby Groin? Because no, that doesn’t sound dirtier at alllll…
March 26, 2015 — 1:07 PM
Sue says:
I think you might enjoy this one bit Patton Oswalt had on his Werewolves & Lollipops album: about “cleaned-up filth” — as in explicit dialogue and the like phrased using more “family-friendly” words — being far worse than if it were said as it was originally.
It’s almost pathetic that this same subject is discussed and debated over and over at different points in time, involving different mediums.
March 26, 2015 — 1:27 PM
Leif Husselbee says:
I feel like there is a serious form of copyright infringement going on. They obviously don’t have authors permission to do this and I feel like they probably don’t have the publishers permission either. And if your book is going through a publisher change, as you mentioned, then how do they have rights to do this. Don’t ever let these guys freak you in the donkey.
March 26, 2015 — 1:35 PM
mckkenzie says:
So now, thanks to Clean Reader, parents can put books through this handy App and blithely hand them over to their kids without worry, right?? Ugh!
When I was nine years old, I read Alex Haley’s book _Roots_.
(Sexual assault trigger warning for what I’m writing next. Deal with it, TW haters).
This was a great book and very important…but not really a book for kids. Anyone who watched the series or read the book knows that there are a couple of brutal sexual assaults described in the story. Now I was nine, so I did not really understand these passages. I literally didn’t understand all the words used. For example, I read “loins” initially as “lions.” It was confusing and I remember reading the first of these scenes and sitting there in stupefied horror, understanding only that something really awful and personal had happened to Kizzy, a character I had come to love, but not entirely getting it.
So my point is that it wasn’t the sexual words that made it a traumatizing and probably pretty unhealthy read for a nine-year-old. It was the scene and the context and the story. In fact, I wonder if there were many overtly sexual words used at all. I think probably not, though it was a long time ago so I can’t say for sure.
Going through books to change the cocks to groins and the tits to chests isn’t going to “save” kids from reading content that they aren’t ready for. You have to do the work, parents. Apps aren’t going to “save” you from that.
March 26, 2015 — 2:02 PM
ElctrcRngr says:
This is exactly why the next step for them will be getting rid of the offending books altogether. They’ll say MindCleaner just isn’t getting it done for them.
March 27, 2015 — 5:03 AM
Jenn says:
Okay this probably sounds awful, but before your examples I never would have considered using something like that program now afterward I kind of want to find an erotica novel and read it with clean reader just to laugh at it. I mean think of the hours of humor you’d have to look forward to. Ethically I think the program is wrong and shouldn’t be offered, but the examples read like a mad libs book come to life….
March 26, 2015 — 2:02 PM
LV Barat says:
“Gee Gosh is the Son of God”
Oh yes she is. And Mahakundalini is the Holy Ghost.
My outrage is due to the clear copyright violations but if some people want to return to 17th century Puritan America, have at it.
March 26, 2015 — 2:11 PM
Jennifer Gray says:
yes, any individual reader can do whatever he wants with any book he owns. but herein lies the problem:
if i choose to exponge or replace all the words i find offensive in my copy of chuck’s book, fine. but i am the sole arbiter of what i find offensive. and, having read the original text, i can make whatever substitution i feel is appropriate.
however, this cleanreader app is making these decisions for me. and clearly it is about as good at anticipating my needs as the average microsoft product. substituting witch for bitch is highly offensive to me. the app removes shit (mildly vulgar) but not shite (same word spelled with regional accent). the app removes cunt (offensive to me) but misses quim (less commonly known but equally offensive) it replaces sex (gender) with love (does not compute). it replaces ass (body part, donkey, mild insult) with jerk (only fits with one possible meaning, certainly offensive to donkeys)
as others have pointed out, how is this app going to deal with profanity in yiddish, german, french, etc? tabernak! c’est un probleme!
what about different cultural biases? just as individuals have differing opinions on what is offensive, so different cultures define profanity very differently.
what about translations or historical texts? as someone pointed out shakespeare and chaucer can be pretty raunchy. anyone read any aristophanes? talk about dirty!
words change in meaning, connotation, and acceptability. somehow i doubt this app will be able to adapt to so many variables.
so if i want to modify a book i own, to my own standard, so be it. but this app is applying one standard to everyone with no regard for personal, cultural, or liguistic variation.
March 26, 2015 — 2:21 PM
Carla Baku says:
Am SO not buying the daughter-came-home-a-little-sad story. I raised five kids (they were all chest-fed, BTW), and this is not within spitting distance of the truth. If they have to “fix” my book, they don’t actually want to read MY book. What they want is to force their words into my mouth (not to mention force their politics into my bottom–but that’s another story…kind of).
March 26, 2015 — 2:49 PM
Geoffrey Cubbage says:
Looks like Page Foundry has pulled their Inktera catalog: https://twitter.com/pagefoundry/status/581160159352889344
So that should pretty much be that!
March 26, 2015 — 2:57 PM
Widdershins says:
WTG Interwebz!!! 😀
March 26, 2015 — 5:43 PM
TymberDalton says:
This is the response I just got:
Here is the post we just sent out via Twitter:
In support of #authors #readers #books everywhere, the @Inktera bookstore system has been pulled from @CleanReader, effective immediately.
Your titles (or any others, for that matter) are no longer available within the Clean Reader app.
Let us know if there is any additional way we can serve you!!
March 26, 2015 — 3:08 PM
Kay Camden says:
I got the same one.
March 26, 2015 — 3:28 PM
Susan H. says:
I’m curious (but not enough to go on their site-)- did they change the title of your book to “The Kick-BUTT Writer”? Oh, my- isn’t the word “kick” a little violent? Using Thesaurus.com, “pounce upon” is a synonym for kick, sooo maybe they can change it to “The Pounce Upon Butt Writer.” There- MUCH better! :-))
March 26, 2015 — 3:09 PM
UrsulaV says:
They just posted that they have pulled all books from the catalog (though those already paid for will remain in user libraries.)
Do not think they expected the shitstorm.
March 26, 2015 — 3:12 PM
Pam says:
I’m so dead here. I’m dying. Am I the only person here old enough to say “this reeks McCarthyism?” Oh! My! God! I’m not even published yet and I want to kill these people with my bare hands, and I’m not even PMS-ing! Go YOU! for bringing this into the light. I need a beer.
March 26, 2015 — 3:16 PM
warjna says:
Chocolate. Or ice cream. Otherwise, YES!
March 27, 2015 — 12:14 AM
jrupp25 says:
There is a term for this. A friend of mine told me about it. I guess some guy named Bowlder would self-sensor literature.
bowd·ler·ize
ˈbōdləˌrīz,ˈboud-
verb
remove material that is considered improper or offensive from (a text or account), especially with the result that it becomes weaker or less effective.
“a bowdlerized version of the story”
March 26, 2015 — 3:50 PM
Jennifer Gray says:
funny how clean reader’s twitter says they asked page foundry to remove their books, but page foundry tweeted more than an hour before clean reader that they had removed their library from clean reader in support of authors.
March 26, 2015 — 4:02 PM
Karin Kallmaker says:
Much has been said and I’m grateful for all of it. Thank you Chuck for making me snort iced coffee out my nose yesterday and again today!
My own take, and conclusion is that this is basically a way for someone to monetize packaging morality. They’re taking products with deemed offensive content and hiding it so people who want to feel righteous are appeased – while still supporting the work they disapprove of. It’s a pretty reliable way to make a buck, selling sin as virtue.
https://kallmaker.wordpress.com/2015/03/26/dear-clean-reader-dont-groin-around-with-my-books/
Plus, if this were legal and advisable, Kindle would already offer a “Kindle Kid Safe” product and be charging parents a monthly fee to deploy it. This app didn’t already exist because other people who thought of it got legal advice perhaps?
March 26, 2015 — 5:47 PM
ElctrcRngr says:
Or had the good sense to realize it was a bad idea. Will my Pollyanna view of the human race never die? I’m gonna give optimism a bad name.
March 27, 2015 — 5:12 AM