If one reviews a book -especially in the negative- it is at least ethical to read the book, not merely recap another reviewer's point of view, agreeing with that negative review whole-heartedly and emphatically.
Sadly, this is what PZ Myers has done to Alain de Botton's book for the second time, targeting de Botton's second book this year. de Botton and his work, somewhat polarizing in the Atheist community, are not the subject of this blog post.
The first time Myers took aim in such a blatantly unethical manner was during de Botton's press tour for "Religion for Atheists: A Non-Beliver's Guide to the Uses of Religion," in February on this year. de Botton released an 11-minute TED Conference speech he had presented (which inspired his book) alongside a highly edited version of the first three pages of the book for CNN.com, who edited that even further. Based on this highly censored and edited clip of "Religion for Atheists," much of the Freethought Blogs -run by Myers and Ed Brayton- rushed to judge de Botton's entire 300-page tome.
After his initial post about the CNN article (dressed as a negative book review), Myers took the dinner conversation opinions of a friend and published them to justify his own criticism of de Botton's book. JT Eberhard of the Secular Student Alliance contributed almost 2700 words to slicing up de Botton's book and premise on his Freethought Blog; Greta Christina focused on one of the first sentences in the CNN article, concluding at the end of her Freethought Blog, "I don’t have to pay attention to a damn thing you say after that"; an incredibly poorly researched Martin Wagner added "I have no idea where this Alain de Botton guy sprung from, but he can spring right back"; and the usually reliable Freethought Blogger Crommunist also reviewed the book based solely on the released CNN article and video...all without actually reading the book.
"Religion for Atheists" hadn't even been released for U.S. publication by the time this all went down. Every single one of these ("reviews"? Sure, why not, let's keep calling them "reviews") every single review relied heavily on only three things:
- an edited CNN article that was a word-for-word rephrasing of the first three pages of de Botton's book,
- de Botton's 11-minute TED conference video,
- other people's published blogs.
It is no surprise to me, then, when yesterday, I read that Myers published a scathing review of de Botton's newest book, "How to Think More About Sex"...by not publishing an actual review. What Myers published is a blatant recap of another reviewer's article (from an LA website called "Sex and the 405"). And to make sure he wasn't biased...he didn't publish any other reviews, nor has Myers actually published his own proper review...making me wonder if he's actually read the book. When I posted my concerns and complaint about this unethical attitude to my Facebook Atheism page, one of my own page readers had trouble distinguishing if Myers was quoting a reviewer or de Botton's book! Very cleverly done, Mr. Myers. Also, very transparent.
All of this "Freethought Blogger" unbridled loyalty and dogmatism to each other and to Myers' vision is not good. The recent flim-flam of vlogger thunderf00t's invitation and removal from Freethought Blogs only reinforces the recent attitude found among its writers and editors: dogmatic, loyalist, noncontrarian. It has even spawned a hashtag on Twitter: #FTBullies. And, most sadly (as always), there are Atheists who will follow dogmatically along, without considering the sources or the ramifications.
Myers is plainly welcome to dislike and disagree fully with de Botton's work. But if one presents repeated book reviews, it
is at least ethical to have assurances that you or your reviewers have read the book, not merely recap another
reviewer's point of view, agreeing with that negative review
whole-heartedly and emphatically. PZ Myers has failed to do this, multiple times with multiple books, using Alain de Botton as his target. For one who condemns Alain de Botton's "Religion for Atheists" so vehemently, it is rather ironic.
To quote from JT Eberhard's review of that book:
"When people get fanatical about atheism, they write blogs and tell people they’re wrong."
Mr. Myers: stop running your blog like a fanatic. Those among us who read, we who don't merely trust opinions based on some perceived 'celebrity' status or based on populism, we who are freethinkers and who hold a modicum of memory, we can see: you are allowing your blog to become a propaganda machine for your own opinions.
And Freethought Blogs has potential to do better.
