Written November 22, 2006 O. J. Simpson wrote a book. Not just any book, but one with a hypothetical account of how he would have killed his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in 1994 if he was guilty. The book is hypothetical because Simpson maintains his innocence. If I Did It won’t be released as scheduled November 30. The global media company that owns ReganBooks, a publisher, pulled the plug on the project in a highly rare move. It also canceled a two-part Fox network interview with Simpson scheduled for November 27 and 29. Both ReganBooks and Fox network are owned by News Corp., a global media company. A Harper Collins promotional release quotes Simpson as saying: “I’m going to tell you a story you’ve never heard before, because no one knows this story the way I know it. “It takes place on the night of June 12, 1994, and it concerns the murcer of my ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her young friend, Ronald Goldman," Simpson says. "I want you to forget everything you think you know about that night, because I know the facts better than anyone. The release continues: the book will provide "for the first time ever, a bone-chilling account of the night of the murders, in which Simpson pictures himself at the center of the action.” (5) Is this censorship or the correction of an unsound decision? “I and the senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project…” News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said following widespread howls of protest (and a firestorm of criticism) that pushed a dozen Fox affiliates to reject airing the interviews. As writers, should we view this as censorship, the removal of a person’s right to “tell a story” their way? Do writers have license to write whatever they want regardless of who or what is harmed in the process? The Reader’s Digest Great Encyclopedic Dictionary defines “censor” as an official examiner of manuscripts, plays, etc. empowered to suppress them, wholly or in part if politically or morally objectionable. “Censorship” in the writing world is a given. It’s done in all writing through the choice of what is written, of what is included, by both writers and editors. The road not taken that can result in information withheld, some of which never reaches the light of day or is so obscure it takes future researchers years to uncover the truth, whatever the truth may be. It’s done to protect guilty parties, for self-aggrandizement, for good taste, for cowardism, and for the protection of those who might be harmed. It’s the road taken and all the roads not taken. It’s called POV---point of view. Why, over a decade after the murders, did Simpson contact Judy Regan, head of ReganBooks, with his proposal? The answer can only be speculation. Regan explained she accepted the proposal hoping to squeeze a confession from him. She’d then have “a small victory for herself and other women who have been physically abused by men. “I didn’t know what to expect when I got the call that the killer wanted to confess,” she wrote. “I didn’t know what would happen. But I knew one thing. I wanted the confession for my own selfish reasons and for the symbolism of that act.” (1) In a seemingly unprecedented publishing sleight of hand, the book is being touted as a work of fiction. However, Regan told the AP that “this is a historic case and I consider this his confession.” (5) Fox made a decision that caused the public to rear its head. Objections came from numerous quarters. Advertisers opposed the Fox interviews a thousand-to-one, partly due to a perception Simpson was providing an infomercial for his book. (4) Media executives condemned the book and interviews as “revolting and exploitive.” (2) A station manager wouldn’t air the special due to a concern over Simpson’s guilt. He also considered it morally objectionable to profit from the murders. (3) An industry trade publication, Broadcasting and Cable, published an editorial opposing the interviews, calling them an “evil sweeps stunt.” (3) (They were being aired during sweeps month.) Families of the victims and American citizens lashed out against the book and interviews. In spite of the objections, “If I Did It” initially placed in the top 20 on Amazon.com’s list last weekend. It fell to No. 50 when the interviews were cancelled. (3) Booksellers objected actively by returning about 70,000 copies of the book to the publisher. Murdoch said “accounts were treating the book as if it were pornography.” (4) Other booksellers expressed intentions to donate profits from sales to charity. (3) But what does the future hold? Is Simpson’s book so “good,” “so sensational,” it won’t be held back? Should readers be allowed to choose whether or not the book will be read? Or is this the duty of the publishers and booksellers? Where is censorship in this issue? A book recalled by a publisher can be sold to another publisher. Television interviews can also be sold (however, at least two networks, ABC and NBC say they turned it down before Fox accepted it). (4) Ultimately, OJ could self-publish the book, and perhaps recoup some of his financial gain. Sensationalism sells. Written Nov. 24: Continuing comments on the censorship issue: An AP-article out of Los Angeles published in our local paper Nov. 24 discusses OJ's victims family's concerns that "eBay is slow to react" in yanking auctions of "If I Did It." eBay spoksman Hani Durzy said the auction house has been removing offers to sell purported copies of the book from the site. "In one case, bids had topped $1 million." A Nov. 23 ditty out of Los Angeles published in the local paper,claims OJ said he wrote the book "for only one reason---personal profit, acknowledging that any financial gain was 'blood money.'" "This was an opportunity fo rmy kids to get their financial legacy" he said in interviews followoing the publisher's abandoning the book. "It's no different than any of the other writers who did books on this case." A Nov. 17 Reuters article: "Free speech is one of our base values, but I have to say that this book deals with some other values of mine which are in conflict with that," said Russ Lawrence, head of the American Booksellers Association and part-owner of Chapter One Bookstore in Hamilton, Montana. and..."If I Did It" should find itself alongside other new hard-cover releases at front tables in Borders Group Inc. bookstores, company spokeswoman Ann Binkley said. "On this title, we've got to be honest. The consumer is going to decide if there's an interest there," she said. "The book will be available for sale at all Borders and Waldenbooks stores because we believe it is the right of customers to decide what they read and what to buy, but we will not discount the title or promote it," Binkley said.
References are from articles published on the Internet November 21, 2006. ---1. DeWayne Wickham, USA Today writer ---2 AP Article from Los Angeles, CA ---3 AP Article by David Bauder ---4 Under pressure, Murdoch’s firm scraps ‘If I Did It,’ Lisa De Moraes and Bob Thompson ---5 ABC News Article by Chris Francescane, Ellen Davis, Lauren Pearle, ABC News Law and Justice Unit Carolyn | 
