Amazon Was Caught Selling Holocaust Denial Books, And Other Lies of Omission

There’s a story going around this weekend that Amazon is selling Holocaust denial books on its website, but that is not the entire story.

The story was originally reported in the Sunday Times, but their story is behind a paywall. You can find a version of this story from the Daily Mail, and here’s what the Independent had to say:

Several books with titles such as The Myth of Extermination of the Jews and Holocaust: The Greatest Lie Ever Told are available to buy on the online retailer, with some receiving four star reviews.

Several editions are available, in paperback and on Kindle, of the notorious 1974 pamphlet Did Six Million Really Die? by a member of the British National Front.

And another book, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction? by Peter Winter, was available for sale via Amazon Germany, where Holocaust denial is a crime.

The titles were also available for sale in Italy and France, where penalties are imposed for denying the genocide that killed more than six million Jewish people during the Second World War.

Other anti-Semitic texts, such as a book claiming the German Weimar Republic, which preceded the rise of the Nazis, was controlled by Jewish people and another comparing them to devil worshippers, are also available on the site.

The problem isn’t that the story got its facts wrong so much as what was left out of the story.

Yes, you can find Holocaust denial books on Amazon, but what the Independent and the Daily Mail didn’t tell you was that you can find those same stories in other bookstores as well.

It took me about 20 minutes to find similar titles on Barnes & Noble and on the Books-a-Million website, and I even found a Holocaust denial book on Kobo.

Did Amazon have a greater selection? I think so, but that is not the point.

When the press reports on Amazon selling Holocaust denial books, and then leaves out the detail that similar books can be found in other bookstores, they are not telling the complete story.

By leaving out important context, the media is lying by omission, and is creating the impression that Amazon is uniquely terrible when in fact the retailer is one of several guilty parties.

And that is the real story here.

image by Mike Roberts NYC

Nate Hoffelder

View posts by Nate Hoffelder
Nate Hoffelder is the founder and editor of The Digital Reader. He has been blogging about indie authors since 2010 while learning new tech skills weekly. He fixes author sites, and shares what he learns on The Digital Reader's blog. In his spare time, he fosters dogs for A Forever Home, a local rescue group.


  1. Raleigh Dave13 February, 2017

    I take your point, and it’s a good one. A different point that I am not hearing is: A vendor (in this case, a book vendor) can and should to sell ideas across the spectrum. “Caught Selling …” implies a duty to restrict.

    In the US, we have the famous First Amendment to the Constitution that guarantees the right to free speech. This weekend I heard the American Civil Liberties Union remind an indignant Public Radio that free speech is not just for speech we agree with. That’s where we are.

    1. Nate Hoffelder13 February, 2017

      This is true.

      I tried to make this point, but it kept sounding like I meant that the denials didn’t matter or were okay. So I went for a simpler conclusion.

    2. Will Entrekin13 February, 2017

      Can? Perhaps. Should? Murkier. Amazon is a business and can choose both its terms and what it allows to be sold on its site. With regard to these specific books, in certain locations, Amazon would, in fact, have a duty to restrict, because in certain locations, books like these are illegal. Amazon’s KDP terms prohibit pornography, offensive content, and illegal or infringing content, for example.

      The First Amendement ensures Congress will make no law abridging freedom of speech — not private companies. Amazon’s refusal to sell those books wouldn’t violate the first amendment, because Amazon can’t really violate the first amendment, given it’s not a government agency. Further, even if it were, freedom of expression has some exceptions, including obscenity and spreading false and misleading information.

    3. Peter Winkler13 February, 2017

      Amazon is a private business that is not in violation of the First Amendment if it refuses to sell certain books. It has no obligation to sell them. The The First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech is only intended to protect speech from government restraints.

  2. fahirsch13 February, 2017

    Does a real person, employed by Amazon, read the books that Amazon sells? Or read the comments left by clients? I guess not.
    Doesn’t the Streisand Effect also work in these cases? Have you ever tried to convince a fanatic (of whatever) that he/she is wrong in his/her facts? Many decades ago I stopped.

  3. Frank13 February, 2017

    Even though I know the Holocaust really happened (I have been to a camp), I think it is acceptable to sell denial books.

  4. William D O'Neil14 February, 2017

    Do we want to leave it to private entities to do our filtering for us? If we take that as legitimate we can expect Amazon and other booksellers to come under pressure to ban pro-choice titles, or LGBTQ books. Even though I don’t read any of them, I’m not comfortable with Amazon or anyone else limiting my information sources.

    Now I would agree that Holocaust-denial is a symptom of a very real and virulent evil, and I would have no objection to a society-wide decision to ban it, like Germany’s and Austria’s. But I observe that in reality, neo-Nazism is alive and sick in both of those counties, their laws not to the contrary, and I would bet that it would not take me long to find someplace in either nation where I could buy some truly disgusting Nazi filth. At best, outlawing gross symptoms of illness does limited good in curing it and stopping its spread.

  5. […] has chosen an extreme response to last month's furor over it being one of many booksellers that carry Holocaust denial […]

  6. Mike14 March, 2017

    Have you ever read any of the revisionist texts? The claims regarding gas chambers appear to have been War Propaganda – on a par with gassing claims made in WWI. Both by forensic evidence following the war & that from British Intelligence at the time suggest they died of typhus.

    The camps became death camps due to typhus outbreaks and towards the end of the war when supply lines were bombed and food ran out.

    1. It was initially claimed that people were killed by gassing in Germany.

    2. Paul Rassinier, an inmate at Buchenwald, pointed out that wasn’t correct.

    3. Dr Charles Larson, US Pathologist, noted that there were no cases of deaths by gas in Germany. Larson couldn’t inspect the camps in Poland as they were under Soviet Control.

    4. From 1960 onwards it has been accepted that the claim about gassing in Germany was false (similarly claims about skin being used for lampshades have also been accepted as completely false).

    5. British Intelligence intercepted German communications from 1942 onwards. They noted that in relation to Auschwitz there were never any references to gas. There was however references to death due to typhus outbreaks – which was also a major problem in WWI (3 million died from typhus) and in Germany during WWII.

    6. Over 3000 children were safely born in the camp.

    7. During the week prisoners of war were employed at labour camps but on Sunday allowed to play football. Games would take place on a field outside the camp with armed German guards watching. The Red Cross provided the teams with four sets of shirts – English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh. Ron Jones was held in E715:

    “‘There was the humiliation and the lack of food but on the whole life wasn’t too bad.’

    ‘The Germans, contrary to what a lot of people think, were pretty good to us on the whole.’

    8. There was a camp cinema – where every week different, mainly cultural and non-political films were shown.

    9. There was also a swimming pool which inmates could use.

    10. Maria van Herwaarden was in Auschwitz-Birkenau from December 1942 to January 1945. In her time there she saw no evidence of mass murder. People did however die from disease.

    11. The admissions from German officiers, such as Auschwitz Commander Hoess, were extracted after days of torture. US Judge van Roden wrote an article about this ‘American Atrocities in Germany’. See also, R. Butler, Legions of Death, Hamlyn, (London, 1983), p.237.

    12. The Red Cross inspection team visited Auschwitz and other camps during the war.

    13. People who have died from cyanide or carbon monoxide poisoning leave pink or cherry-red corpse. That doesn’t match the descriptions.

    14. Chemical tests of the areas where the homicidal gas chambers are claimed to be reveal no cyanide residue. In contrast, there IS, significant cynanide residue in the delousing rooms (clothes were deloused to stop the outbreak of typhus). It certainly raises questions which many seem reluctant to address.

  7. John-Paul Leonard14 March, 2017

    You can argue that under the 14th amendment, private companies and even individuals have to give equal access to services.
    It’s only equitable.

  8. me9 September, 2017

    Let’s make this really simple – the Holocaust is more lie than truth.

    The fact the Jews want any discussion banned should tell you something if you have a brain.

    The fact that you go to jail for questioning a group of people should really clue you in to who is running things.

    You should be really pissed off that anyone goes to jail for having thoughts.

    And what other group sends you to jail for having thoughts? NONE

    Now, if you deny that the Jews are behind this you are either Jewish or a fool.

  9. […] when everyone was scandalized that Amazon (and actually, a bunch of other retailers) was selling Holocaust denial […]


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to top