Google Fund To Pay For 1 Million Copies of Charlie Hebdo 311
BarbaraHudson writes The Register is reporting that money set aside from a deal with France's publishers is going to pay for the printing of 1 million copies of next weeks' Charlie Hebdo, "Eight of the 12 people killed were journalists attending an editorial meeting, however, a senior editor and the magazine's chief executive were in London at the time of the attack. They have vowed to do a massive 1 million copy print run next week – Charlie Hebdo's circulation is normally around 60k. The cash will come from €60m fund (€20m per year over three years) that supports digital publishing innovation. The fund was set up in 2013 following negotiations between Google and the French government as a remedy to demands from European publishers that Google pay for displaying news snippets in its search results.
Availability (Score:2, Interesting)
OK, so how do I get a copy as I'm outside France? Time to prove that the pen is mightier than the AK-47.
Re: Availability (Score:5, Informative)
The shorter than usual survivor edition is being sold internationally next Friday. I heard that Easons will stock it in Ireland. Google to see if your country has a retailer for it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent. (Score:5, Interesting)
I vote for a cartoon of Mohammed and his six-year-old bride Aisha [google.com] on the front cover.
And a few Jesus & Moses gags inside for balance.
Re:Excellent. (Score:5, Funny)
I vote for a cartoon of Mohammed and his six-year-old bride Aisha [google.com] on the front cover.
To be fair, the marriage wasn't actually consummated until Aisha was nine.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's all within the rules of Allah!
Recently, the top religious authority in Saudi Arabia (our ally) informed that there is no age restriction on consuming women as long as they are physically developed enough to withstand the weight of the groom.
http://wunrn.com/news/2009/01_09/01_12_09/011209_saudi.htm
Ah, talk of coincidence, the Captcha word is "violator", lol.
Re: (Score:3)
You should look up thighing. Its not safe for work but given the knowledge of that, what you present doesn't surprise me. Make sure you search youtube for it too. There was a cool video where a female news repirter went off on some guy who was describing it as if it was manly or something.
I've talked with several Arabs and Persions who say they were disgusted at the idea so it should not be assumed they all are like that.
Re: (Score:3)
the top religious authority in Saudi Arabia (our ally) informed that there is no age restriction on consuming women as long as they are physically developed enough
I don't think that even the more extreme versions of Islam allow you to eat women.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, when the Bible speaks of Mary and Joseph as being betrothed [jewishencyclopedia.com], at the time it meant they were married (Erusin [wikipedia.org]), but not yet cohabiting (Nissuin [wikipedia.org]).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Excellent. (Score:5, Funny)
1) Set up website
2) Prophet!
3) Profit?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't Christians believe that God raped Mary when she was around 12 or 13? A prophet acting as was normal for the people of his time is understandable, but an all-knowing immortal god doesn't have the ignorance and culture excuse.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't Christians believe that God raped Mary when she was around 12 or 13?
Which bit of the Virgin Birth don't you get? Anyway, that totally misses the point. Christians believe some crazy stuff, but don't start threatening you if you ask a question like that, or joke about it. Down Brown doesn't get firebombed for writing about Jesus & Mary Magdalene.
BTW, it was the custom for Jewish girls to be betrothed at that age, (ie puberty) and same in Mohammed's time.
His marriage to Aisha at 6 would have been for political reasons, not because he had a preference. None of that is ve
Re: (Score:2)
And no, christians generally don't shoot people for saying bad things about Mr Jesus, even if they do bitch and complain(again their right to bitch and complain).
I think the only other group to follow through with threats in the modern age in the west is probably the Jews, another group that needs to
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Except people dont go round killing in king john of englands name, nor do they venerate or exalt him as some sort of "perfect human being".
10/10 bait would take again
Re:Excellent. (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what? If you want to publish some cartoons denouncing King John as a pedophile, I will totally support your right to do so.
Re: (Score:3)
And, incidentally, John probably didn't consummate that marriage until Isabella was in her late teens.
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't King John I lampooned already thanks to his adversarial association w/ Robin Hood? Who would protest if this was highlighted? Reason it ain't is that he was already hated enough due to this enmity, and bringing up his pedophilic attributes would only serve to gross out kids following the story.
Very different from Mohammed, who is held up by Muzzies as a perfect model of conduct, and whose pedophillic nature is the main reason for child marriage in Muslim countries even today. In Iran, after Khome
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because it doesn't.
Re: Excellent. (Score:2)
I hope people refuse to work for them, myself. Professional antagonists who got what they deserved.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
As far as white supremecists go, their paterns are pretty damn predictable, don't expect them to do anything more than attack some westernized youth for "race mixing", while leaving the more ethnic people alone. The majority of their targets are liberal and socialist white people, especially those incapable of fighti
Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking the same thing. When i first saw the headlines i thought "why in the hell would they do something like this for a company like that?". Then i realized that the only connection to google was that they agreed to pay the french years ago and that money is being used now.
Re:Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Insightful)
Almost but not quite. Anyone that doesn't follow their particular brand of Islam is a target. This includes other Muslims. Perhaps you haven't been paying attention to the news.
The hero of Vincennes is as much of a target as the people he saved.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Insightful)
> You can't excuse what Charlie Hebdo are doing, no more than you can excuse what these people did to them,
Insults aren't the same as murder in any sane or civilized society.
Liberty is a difficult virtue sometimes (like any virtue).
Re:Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Insightful)
Easily the most evil, wrong-headed and vile statement I've seen on the net today, if not this week. You do Islam no favors by blaming the victim like this, sir.
Re:Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Informative)
You can't excuse what Charlie Hebdo are doing, no more than you can excuse what these people did to them, but Charlie Hebdo themselves are responsible for provoking this tragedy.
No, it is people like you that cause problems. You are one of these bigoted fucks. Here's a hint - don't fucking read it if it insults you! Capish?
Blaming Charlie Hedbo is like blaming Jyoti Singh Pandey for being raped and murdered. People that think like this should be rounded up, and shown the great French invention - the guillotine.
So get it through your thick skull. You have a right to be left alone, to believe whatever the fuck you want. But that stops once you stop tolerating each others' speech. Read that again - it says tolerating. And that is defined by the law of the land.
Re: (Score:3)
Simply choose not to be provoked. That's the only solution that works. Your suggestion, trying to not provoke somebody else, doesn't work, because I have no control over what provokes you. Muslims in my country have been provoked by gay couples walking down the street, or by a Jewish man sitting in the park.
Re: Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Insightful)
>I'm left wondering if you and your
>brain-damaged, bigoted,
>hypocritical peers
The only one fitting this description is you.
>will ever wake up and have the
>decency and manners to stop
>insulting moslems and islam.
No. Why should anyone stop doing that? Jews, Christians, Homosexuals, pretty much everyone gets mocked.
Perhaps Muslim countries should stop killing Infidels, LGBTQs, stop degrading women, stop censoring the press and stop being mediaeval theocracies. You know all those reason why Muslims are being mocked.
Oh, I know there are a large number of decent, nice and friendly, tolerant and all around pleasant Muslims. Some of the nicest people I knew are Muslims. Perhaps it's time you stop uniting with the asshole Muslims against the "evil" West. We are not against Muslims. We are against asshole Muslims and their over sensitiveness and their habit to try to enforce their rules elsewhere.
>You don't insult people over their
>bald heads, black skin, or
>overweight body, or their ethnicity,
Wrong. That's being done all the time. And no one gets killed for doing so. If you think it's right to kill or hate because you religion is mocked there is something wrong - with you and your religion.
>so why do you think it's ok to insult
> an entire group of people over
> their religion?
Because it is ok. I couldn't give a flying duck if your religion is being mocked. I couldn't care less.
>You speak of Google becoming a
>"target", but did you ever realize '>that moslem and islams have been
>targets for years, for insults,
>ridicule, taunting, mocking and
>provocation?
So what??? No mocking can ever justify violence. Never ever.
>Moslems disagree over islam,
>moslems have concerns over islam,
>moslems debate islam, and
>moslems criticize islam, so why
>can't you?
Most people are not Muslims?
And Islam is being discussed. But satire are a form of debate. That's what you don't get.
>Why do you and little shit
>magazines like Charlie Hebdo have
>to stoop to the level of small
>children and insult with the only
>intent of provoking an angry
>reaction?
Because we can. Because we don't live in a theocracy. Because the Muslim rules don't apply here. End of story.
>Is that what democracy and
>freedom of speech means to you,
>to be reserved to insult anyone or
>a group of people for anything you
>want, as opposed to sensibly
>debate it?
Yes. To have the possibility to do so if we want. Yes. Next question?
>You can't excuse what Charlie
>Hebdo are doing,
Yes we can. It's called freedom of speech and freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Like in any decent country.
>no more than you can excuse what
>these people did to them,
Cartoons are not equal to mass murder. The end.
>but Charlie Hebdo themselves are
>responsible for provoking this
>tragedy.
Victim blaming at its finest.
Piss off, shut the fuck up, get the fuck out of here and don't come back.
Re: (Score:2)
Charlie Hebdo themselves are responsible for provoking this tragedy
Troll much?
Re:Is google now about to become a target? (Score:5, Insightful)
Charlie Hebdo themselves are responsible for provoking this tragedy
Just like women that get raped are "asking for it" when showing cleavage, right? So, in public they must conceal their body under a burqa, right?
Repeat after me: You cannot tell a journalist what to write just like you cannot tell a woman what to wear.
Re:Is google now about to become a target? (Score:4, Interesting)
You can't excuse what Charlie Hebdo are doing, no more than you can excuse what these people did to them, but Charlie Hebdo themselves are responsible for provoking this tragedy.
Maybe I'm wacko, but it sounds like your saying that Muslims are incapable of resisting impulses and are therefore presenting a clear and credible danger to themselves or others. If that is correct then it follows that Islam is a type of insanity.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't excuse what Charlie Hebdo are doing, no more than you can excuse what these people did to them, but Charlie Hebdo themselves are responsible for provoking this tragedy.
you can't equate insults with murder. End of story. While I disagree with insults against Islam, I agree with their right to say it as long as they aren't provoking violence or any harm against believers.
As long as you feel violence is an acceptable retaliation to insult, no one is going to stop mocking Islam now, until you just accept this. Its in your court.
Is that what democracy and freedom of speech means to you, to be reserved to insult anyone or a group of people for anything you want, as opposed to sensibly debate it?
yes, but you can always insult them back. Which is generally the recommended course of action.
Re: (Score:2)
First, the money google paid into the fund was a business decision - no more extortionate than any other business decision, and negotiated with the French government, which didn't give french publishers what they were asking for.
Second, the problem is that the people backing these terrorists, while fully aware that it's not google funding this, can use the apparent link to target google for some mentally ill nutjob who is open to irrational suggestions.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Will it have a caricature of Muhammad?
That's what needs to happen, millions and millions of Muhammad cartoons all over the World.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.theguardian.com/com... [theguardian.com]
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
On Wednesday, Sia launched the video for her single Elastic Heart. In it, Shia LaBeouf is in skin-colour briefs, play-fighting with a 12-year old dancer and actress by the name of Maddie Ziegler.
Some consider it controversial and claim it is a depiction of child abuse. I have absolutely no doubt that it would have made the headlines had it not been that the Charlie Hebdo attack occurred on the exact same day.
It is my contention that if we weren't now all crying for freedom to offend, we would all instead be crying for the censorship of offensive material. That's the human race now.
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't. You know what the internet would be outraged about right now if this attack had never happened? A pop video featuring a 28 year old man and a 12 year old girl playfighting in their underwear. We would all be incensed about the "pedophilic" content and we'd be calling for it to be banned as gross indecency. The fact that there's no overtly sexual content, and that the two actors in fact represent different facets of a single psyche, would be irrelevant, and we would all be calling for the censoring of offensive imagery. Hypocrisy.
Come off it. Even trying to compare a non-existent video with a series of murders by terrorists - troll much?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Did I imagine this video [youtube.com]? Did I imagine these reactions [take40.com]? As I said, I believe this is what we'd all be outraged about if the CH attacks hadn't occurred the exact same day that the video was released.
From the article: "Watching it, I realised that the intensity (Sia’s “emotional content”) was the reason it was jarring – the mere fact that the video wasn’t carefully benign, cheaply titillating or just plain boring, like so much else in the genre. In Elastic Heart, the grown man and the young girl are alive with feelings for each other, running the gamut from amusement and play through to fury to despair. What isn’t there is sexuality. In fact, it baffles me how anyone
Re: (Score:2)
I don't find it sexual. My point is that I believe, rightly or wrongly, that had this not come out on the same day as the attack happened, the tabloid press would have whipped up a confected outrage, and people would be baying for blood. People who had never watched the video would be demanding that broadcasters refuse to air it, and debate would be stymied by people's refusal to watch the video for themselves because they are already convinced it's paedophilia.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We look lo
Re: (Score:2)
Now if we can just get rid of the anti-stereotype politically correct ads that show men are always the helpless dummies and women are always coming to the rescue ... these are just as corrosive as the previous generation ads where women were dumb blondes and men ruled the roost.
There is humour in playing on the stereotypes. That's why there are so many cop babysitting movies. Kindergarten Cop, The Pacifier, and others. It's funny to put someone in the situation opposite of their stereotype.
You can't eliminate stereotypes. They are genetically wired into every animal. We place things into categories. "safe" "not safe" and many others. Doing so is a requirement of survival. Fighting stereotypes is literally fighting our humanity.
Re: So... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, you're applauding the fact that society now has it's priorities straight?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Just as people have a right to offend, people who are offended have a right to protest what offends them. The difference is that the protests of that video would have consisted of angry posts online and boycotts, not shootings. Declaring you are offended and "fighting back" with words is fine. Fighting back by killing those who offend you isn't fine.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just as people have a right to offend, people who are offended have a right to protest what offends them. The difference is that the protests of that video would have consisted of angry posts online and boycotts, not shootings. Declaring you are offended and "fighting back" with words is fine. Fighting back by killing those who offend you isn't fine.
I agree wholeheartedly, and I never said otherwise. I was responding to koan's post [slashdot.org] and his suggestion that the appropriate response to the killings was to repeatedly publish offensive images. Now that I do disagree with. My point was that we will collectively still call for the banning of material we find offensive while simultaneously standing up for the right to publish material that others find offensive. I fully believe that if the CH attack hadn't happened on the same day as the Sia video launch, we w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I never said I found anything sexual about that video. That you read that into my message says much about you, and nothing else.
My main point was that it really isn't offensive, but that people are decrying it as such. I believe if the tabloid press wasn't occupied with the CH shootings, they would already have manufactured a global scandal out of this.
Re: (Score:2)
Any malware writers out there? (Score:2)
I was wondering if any malware writers would like to help.
Lots of malware will scan the infected computer for E-mail addresses so that it can send out spam.
Suppose someone wrote a virus which scans infected computers for E-mail addresses with common muslim first names [slashdot.org], and sends a randomly selected offensive Mohammed cartoon to that person. One of 10 cartoons that comes bundled with the malware, for instance. (Google has many to choose from.)
This would have the simultaneous effect of trolling (getting other
Re: (Score:3)
You're insulting me. Please stop it.
Not Google - The Government of France (Score:5, Insightful)
Google's giving them $300K, but the government is giving them $1.2M. [mashable.com]
While freedom of speech is a law that needs to be upheld, how many people would be happy with the government (or google?) giving an organization like stormfront a million dollars to publish pictures of Obama with a tail and a banana in one hand?
Re: (Score:2)
This is freedom of speech paired with freedom of religion *and* freedom from persecution rolled in one issue.
Your Obama cartoon is just plain old racism.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They push the buttons of everyone, hence the lack of reaction from Marine Le Pen. The Le Pen family has been the target of their cartoons more than anyone. So has the catholic church (hardly a minority).
Re: (Score:2)
After Obama-worshiping radicals have first murdered several of their executives? A lot, I'd wager.
That's great, but ... (Score:2)
... until everyone is willing to say "yes, it was Islam, and we are done letting more of you into our countries," then all the hashtags and belated "I am {victims}" (they sure weren't Charlie Hedbo before it happened, when it might have mattered) and candlelight vigils and "oh nos, watch out for imaginary backlash" isn't going to do anything to stop this.
This is an evil death cult, and they don't care what we think, except to use an excuse for more murder.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
most of the world is sadly in one death cult or another, be it islam, Christianity, Judaism etc etc. yes the world would be better off without them but that isn't going to happen.
No, it is not Islam, but the old Algerian problem (Score:5, Informative)
Print? (Score:3)
I thought Print was dead...
Re:Wonder who is running Charlie Hebdo now (Score:4, Insightful)
a senior editor and the magazine's chief executive were in London at the time of the attack.
They'll continue on, which is more than most people would have done in their situation. As for the fund, I would think that using some of google's money for this is a good thing (and maybe something they wouldn't have done voluntarily). Charlie Hebdo, like most papers, survives on advertising, and at least some advertisers are going to be relucttant (to say the least) to advertise with them given recent events. I doubt very much that they're "swimming in money."
Re:Wonder who is running Charlie Hebdo now (Score:5, Informative)
They didn't run any ads. Freedom is difficult when you depend of large companies.
Re:Wonder who is running Charlie Hebdo now (Score:5, Informative)
Charlie Hebdo, like most papers, survives on advertising
Wrong. Charlie Hebdo is one of the rare newspapers in France (another example is le Canard Enchaîné) with zero ads, and which survive only from their readership.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And a publishing group that subsidizes them.
None that its Wikipedia page knows of, and this page is the object of much updating right now, both from goodwill and less good will editors, so any reliable source about outside financing would certainly be mentioned right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:My 2 pence (Score:5, Informative)
the gist of it:
Q: These guys were not trying not to offend, and that’s what an American media-conditioned mind cannot understand. The idea that yes, you offend those who abuse power.
A: [Laughs.] No, they can’t.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
See here... http://www.quora.com/What-was-... [quora.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OMG, lame lame lame. Typical Islamist conspiracy theory. Of course, if you're just an idiotic Western leftist, then I apologize for calling you an Islamist. The correct term should have been whore for the Islamists.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Google isn't trying to do anything. The money comes from France's publishers fund, and it's irrelevant to mention the source of that money. Using the source of the source of the money you'd get the headline "AdWords customers To Pay For...", and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is this insightful ? The magazine isn't racist, and Google does not want to support it.
Re: (Score:2)
OED defines race as "A group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.
So, if somebody says something bad about Nazis, they are racist ?
Re: (Score:2)
If they say nazis are bad because they gassed millions of people, then that's both factual and there is no further context to the statement
Actually, most Nazi party members and supporters were not personally involved in the genocide, so that would not be factual. By the way, holocaust denial is a pretty big thing in the Muslim community. And even after the Paris attacks, I've heard a surprisingly large number of Muslims claim that the Jews were behind it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google did not support anything in this case. The only reason the name is brought up is because it is attached to a fund Google agree to create years ago to escape legal problems in france. Google has no say in how it is used or the present use.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Questionable (Score:2)
The rallies and cartoons at least let ISIS know that their Stone Age crackpot faith and those who promote it are no longer welcome in Europe. Send them back to their hellholes of origin before the next attack.
Re: (Score:2)