Zondervan would be wise to bail out of Murdoch’s empire as fast as it can. Or, it’s going to sink along with it. This doesn’t mean people will no longer have access to good books or the Bible. The Bible will prevail against any empire, just as it did against another one some1600 years ago.

I do not envy those in the shoes of folks like Shane Claiborne or the leadership at Zondervan (a close friend of mine works there). Clearly the grey areas can become black holes very quickly.

I agree with Greg Dill that a wise choice for Zondervan would be to bail on Murdoch’s empire… as should the Church of England. If society does not hold corporate empires accountable by voting with our feet and investment, then we tacitly support all of the corporation’s misdeeds. Foresight cannot always be perfect… but hindsight is 20/20. Now Zondervan, the Pope, and The Church of England know darn well what Murdoch and his empire are capable of… and if they don’t bail, then they make a clear and informed choice to lay in bed with the devil. It was a grey area before, now it is clearly a black hole.

It’s scary how easily consumerism and the pursuit of money can infiltrate the church in such a mass way. This should be a wake-up call. This should be a tipping point. Folks like Shane have been advocating the path that leads away from corporate and political empire for years. It is time we read his books, then send him a note saying, “I’ll pay twice as much for the next one if you publish it through a small ethical publisher.” …and then we need to do it.

I’ll have the opportunity to chat in-person with Brian Mclaren in just a few weeks. I’ll be sure to get his opinion on this subject matter as well. I’ll publish my findings if the conversation works out.

First I fail to see how Zondervan can possibly bail on Murdoch when he actually owns it.
Second the bible makes it very clear in several places that God uses all sorts of people, not just Christians, to do His will. In the OT we have King Cyrus of Persia being used to set free the exiles. In the New Testament we have Roman soldiers and Pharisees used by God to progress His desires for this world. Whether we like it or not God can and will use people like Murdoch.

I think this article points out some of the difficulties to striving to be totally ethical when we encounter the economic and capitalist structures of society. It is such a muttled area to deal with, because Zondervan may have no other misgivings except for their ties of ownership to a man like Murdoch and the acts of his other companies. 

In a practical sense, I think this is a perfect time for author’s like Shane Claiborne to pull away from Zondervan and show disapproval. I think it would be effective and powerful for him and other’s like him who have the readership and popularity to move to a small and ethical publisher, even if the books cost more to the reader. I think his reader’s would follow.

It’s incredibly hard to act totally ethical, moral, in today’s society, to not support any unethical companies or people or politicians… As a young white male, who grew up in upper-middleclass-suburbia, AND someone with a deep desire to live an ethical, moral life that is truly loving of my neighbor’s, caring or the poor, needy, sick, homeless, and the rich, those who I would call me friend and those I’d call my enemy… I’m learning every day that there are things that I do that are truly informed by my faith in Christ’s ways, and there are things that I take for granted and that are still informed by the world I live in and came from… I think the key is to continue learning, striving towards a life that is informed by the way’s of Christ in this broken world… keep learning and keep ‘fighting’ to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth and the wonderfulness of right relationship with God and with all of creation.

Here in the UK we are witnessing the clash of the titans: the Murdoch empire and a so-called ‘supreme’, democratically elected, Parliament. It is unknown who will blink first.  The issue being dealt with is that of the great power of the media – the communication and distribution of knowledge, information and opinion – and its monopolization by one company, essentially one man, in a democratic nation.  For anyone who has lived for any length of time in the UK, you will understand how oppressive a media monopoly can become in a free market economy.  When a nation regularly witnesses political cowardice, as politicians bow to or cower from a non-elected media mogul, a sense of political freedom is lost.  In some respects, the monopolization of British media has contributed to the feeling that the UK has lost the power to determine its destiny in the wider world.  Whether that is true or not is a matter of debate.  

My point is that where there is monopoly, there is always a loss of freedom.  Some monopolies are a public good (arguably such as the monopolization of healthcare services by a National Health Service (NHS) which provides free care at point of access, or free state education).  However, other monopolies may not serve the common good.  A monopolization of the media of an entire nation by one corporation is not good, whether that monopoly is the BBC or News International, or Egyptian state television.

So, what about a monopoly on Bible publishing?  Is there such a monopoly?  And, if there is, is it for good or ill?  

Firstly, is there a monopoly of ownership of Bible translation?  Well, yes.  This is because each original translation of the Bible is copyright protected.  In other words, the same intellectual property laws which protect Harry Potter novels as literary works are the same laws which protect the various mass published versions of the Bible.  Copyright essentially gives the author or rights holder (eg publisher) a time limited monopoly over their work, whether that be an original book or song.  

In the case of Harry Potter, this limited monopoly has enabled JK Rowling and her publishers to deservedly make money from the fictional creations of Rowling’s own genius.  Without copyright protection Rowling and her publishers could not have prevented other publishers from copying and selling the content of the Harry Potter novels (notwithstanding other intellectual property actions, such as passing off or trademark protection).  In this case, the monopoly of ownership of these works can be described as a good, because Harry Potter was imagined, devised and written according to the creative talents of Rowling.   She did not translate Harry Potter.  He and his world is Rowling’s literary creation.  A product of her mind.  A projection of her superb imagination.
However, the anglo-american model of copyright protection grants Bible publishers the same economic monopoly over their translations or versions of the Bible.  Yet, they did not write the Bible.  Jesus is not their literary creation.  The letters of St Paul did not end with (c) AD 40 – 60.  John did not write that in the beginning was the Word, and that Word was the sole author of all things, thus permission of the Word must be sought to copy anything, including DNA or the words of the Word himself.  Were these writings, regardless of how they are interpreted, ever meant to be owned and monopolized by one person or group?  Were the red letters of Jesus, however they are accurately translated, ever meant to be owned by one person or one group, for the purpose of profit and power?The more wealthy and the more powerful a Bible publisher is, the more able it is to assert its copyright monopoly over ‘its’ particular translation in the courts (if it so wishes to do so).  Arguably, this monopoly therefore curtails freedom – perhaps even religious freedom.  It means that smaller translators and Bible publishers, or even ‘open source’ Bible publications, need to be ever cautious of violating the copyright monopoly of one of the major publishers.  The end game is that, with every new copyrighted version of the Bible, comes the expansion of monopoly and dominance. Thus, if a major Bible publisher owns a huge percentage of the market, they essentially own and control numerous translations of the ‘word of God’.  Is that not the very same problem the UK currently faces with respect to its media at large?Like the UK government and Parliament is questioning the monopolization of its media, perhaps we as Red Letter Christians need to seriously question whether the copyright monopoly of scripture by any one individual or organisation is for good or ill.  Maybe this will lead us to also question the dominance of intellectual property law (of which copyright law is one manifestation) per se on all aspects of the expression of the kingdom of God. For instance, patent laws (another manifestation of intellectual property law) grants pharmaceutical companies exclusive monopolies over retroviral drugs that they have created, which could save the lives of millions of HIV sufferers, but are priced so high that the poorest people and governments cannot afford them.  Intellectual property law prevents cheaper copies being made.  Consequently, people die.  Is this what Jesus wanted?

There is a battle on at an international level between human rights and intellectual property. Perhaps we need to start thinking about which will trump which.  Will the human rights of freedom of expression and freedom of religion trump the intellectual property monopolies of major publishers of the Bible, or will we opt for the status quo?  Will the human rights to life trump the intellectual property monopolies of the pharmaceutical companies?  How will this work?  

An intelligent response is needed.  To quote Brian McClaren: everything must change.