Amazon Censorship?

 Amazon has given me trouble about publishing my book: Hitler's Big Lie and the COVID-19 Pandemic. The first problem I had was that it was flagged for plagiarism. For those of you not familiar with the book, it contains close to 400 citations that take up about 25% of the book. The number of citations actually proves the book was not plagiarized, but computer software to detect plagiarism is not that smart. 

I argued that all copied content was citations or from my own online blog (or a cited quote), and that as non-fiction that is not a plagiarism issue. The color version of the book passed and I held my breath for the e-book. That also passed. Then I uploaded the Large Print version, and again it was flagged for plagiarism. Again, I contacted them with the information.

But then something strange happened. I uploaded a black and white version that would cost less, but this time I wasn't flagged for plagiarism. I was flagged because Amazon said they were not publishing books about the treatment or prevention of COVID-19 due to the constantly changing recommendations. I argued that my book is not about the treatment or prevention but more of a historical comparison of the way COVID-19 is being handled and received the same canned response: "Due to the rapidly changing nature of information around coronavirus, we are referring customers to official sources for advice about the prevention or treatment of the virus.

We've reviewed your book again and are upholding our previous decision to not offer your book for sale on Amazon. 

Amazon reserves the right to determine what content we offer according to our content 
guidelines.

You can find our content guidelines on the KDP website:
https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/G200672390"

 Say what?!?!? Nowhere in the content guidelines does it talk about not offering a book simply because 

the information was constantly changing. Read them yourself if you don't believe me. In fact, the only 

example it gives as to what is definitely not allowed is offensive material such as "pornography." I 

assure you, there are no pictures of any human in my book--most of my images are graphs, with a few

screenshots of the CDC website and a post I made of Facebook that was censored, too. In fact, the 

guidelines imply they will publish controversial material. 

I mean, these are the people who published a book that only contained the picture of someone's foot: Putting My Foot Down.

The other thing is that Amazon IS publishing COVID-19 books:

Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates (This is a researched book, but Amazon almost didn't publish it--the author, however, has bigger names following him that apparently put pressure on Amazon by tweeting about their free-speech censorship. However, he didn't have trouble with Part 2.)

COVID-19: Lockdowns on Trial

Or this 200 page book with no reference section: Covid-19 : the Natural Approach Which the author seems to be self-publishing with her own publishing company name. 

Not to mention that they have no problems publishing books like this: 

If the guy who wrote it truly is a real MD, it is no wonder he has so much time to write e-book on a variety of topics... PSILOCYBIN CULTIVATION: The Guide to Cultivation, Safe Use and Magic Effects of Psychedelic Mushrooms

And this: How to Live Another 30 Years: The power of purple to dodge dementia, deter diabetes and deny any chance of you kids dumping you in a care home

Oh, and this, which is a 350+ page book with only 2 pages of references: Crystals for Healing: The Complete Reference Guide With Over 200 Remedies for Mind, Heart & Soul 

But apparently a book with 400 researched citations most of them from peer reviewed journals is apparently not acceptable for Amazon's low standards... 

Perhaps these are just ones that have broken through their censors, like my color version did. As I argue in my book, social media censorship (and Amazon censorship) is more harmful than helpful. Instead of allowing people to see and discuss fake news and come to the conclusion it is fake for themselves, it simply blocks it--this makes it more sought after and more dangerous. People are less likely to fact check if something is blocked because they assume it is blocked due to it being true and others not wanting them to know the truth. 

Covid-19, Hitler, and the Hate of the General Public

I have been getting a lot of attacks for my book--Hitler's Big Lie and the Covid-19 Pandemic. It boggles my mind at how many people are willing to throw out their rights and the rights of others as well as throw out everything we have learned about disease and disease control in the past 300 years. They are so closed minded that they accept what the CDC says without actually reading the citations behind it, while at the same time condemning my opinion without even reading my book or any of its citations. 

Because I do reference history and how these ideas (lock downs, masks, etc.) were discredited as methods of controlling pandemics years ago and continue to be discredited today--I was accused  of relying on old medical theories instead of "new" ones. Most of the citations in my book have been written since 2000. The ideas of lock downs as disease control were initially created in the 1300s. 

The irony is that these things came under scrutiny as soon as they were proposed and used for pandemic control. That did not stop them from being used because people "thought" they were effective even when science said they were not. The same experiments have been replicated in different ways throughout history, and they have the same results. When it is all said and done, lock downs and masks do not stop the spread. 

WHO is no longer giving daily situation reports. They seem to be shifting away from allowing people to interpret numbers toward forcing people to accept their interpretations. They also are superimposing daily deaths over the daily new cases--using TWO DIFFERENT SCALES SO DAILY DEATH NUMBERS LOOK GREATER. But look back at the reports from January to June. Every country locked down in March before they had huge numbers--immediately after this lock down, infection numbers around the world spiked up. This means that even if you do not accept ANY scientific data on lock downs prior to COVID-19 and you only use the data collected by WHO during this pandemic, you will see that the lock down did not stop the spread of disease... again. 

If lock downs did not cause severe economic damage, then one could say, "Sure, lets keep trying these because they make some people feel better." But the problem is that lock downs hurt people massively--with no benefit. 

As a freelance writer, I am usually ghostwriting, so I would not get direct attacks for controversial subjects. But I don't write things that I haven't spend a lot of time researching, though, whether I am ghostwriting or writing under my own name. The irony is that I have not written some conspiracy theory book with fake citations. In fact, I can't think of any conspiracy theory books where 1/4 the book is listed citations. I also can't think of a conspiracy theorist who encourages you to go out and do your own research, but I might be wrong because I don't read too much of that. 

If you believe the "new" normal is the best thing to do--fine--but the "new" normal is actually a very OLD normal that people have fought hundreds of years to get rid of because it was harmful and didn't work. You are entitled to your opinion, but I am also entitled to mine. Science says yours (and the CDCs) is wrong.