Stephen King is often a welcome and witty voice in the Twitterverse. But he missed the mark this week when he decided give us his two cents on the controversy surrounding Hachette Book Group and Woody Allen.

The Hachette decision to drop the Woody Allen book makes me very uneasy. It's not him; I don't give a damn about Mr. Allen. It's who gets muzzled next that worries me. — Stephen King (@StephenKing) March 6, 2020

Last week, Ronan Farrow called out Hachette Book Group, who published his bestselling takedown of Harvey Weinstein (among others) Catch and Kill, after it was announced that HBG would be publishing the memoirs of his estranged father Woody Allen.

It was an announcement that felt especially hypocritical, to publish the autobiography of an accused sexual predator while still enjoying the critical and commercial success of Farrow’s bombshell exposé. And HBG’s employees agreed when they staged a walkout to protest Allen’s book. Thanks to the protest and the online discourse, HBG has reversed course and canceled the book.

But now, many folks on Twitter are playing devil’s advocate and equating Allen’s book cancellation with censorship. It’s a bizarre case of false equivalency, and one that was shared by author Joyce Carol Oates.

"protest works…" to what end? https://t.co/5Zg1c02ZyI — Joyce Carol Oates (@JoyceCarolOates) March 7, 2020

To what end? To the end that serial rapists and abusers not be given truckloads of money to tell their stories? The idea that there’s a slippery slope regarding the treatment those accused of sexual abuse is truly puzzling. Like, is this really the hill you’re going to die on? Allen is going to be FINE. He is a millionaire and an internationally celebrated filmmaker. And he will likely continue to be until his death.

The loss of a lucrative book deal is not akin to censorship. It’s nowhere near close. And in a world where “cancel culture” sees predators welcomed back into society on a regular basis, forgive me if I don’t bemoan Allen losing a publishing deal. King even doubled down on his statement.

The deal was made. Hachette reneged. — Stephen King (@StephenKing) March 7, 2020

King later clarified his viewpoint, saying that if people don’t like Allen, they can simply not pay to see/hear/read him. But that’s not how celebrity works, sir.

If you think he's a pedophile, don't buy the book. Don't go to his movies. Don't go listen to him play jazz at the Carlyle. Vote with your wallet…by withholding it. In America, that's how we do. https://t.co/znGZu0wJEF — Stephen King (@StephenKing) March 7, 2020

Let me add that it was fucking tone-deaf of Hachette to want to publish Woody Allen’s book after publishing Ronan Farrow’s. — Stephen King (@StephenKing) March 7, 2020

Many people called out King on Twitter, and the entire bad faith argument that canceling a book deal is somehow an attack on alleged sexual predators. And even if it was … that’s not a bad thing. The world will keep on spinning with one less book by Woody Allen.

"we were like hmm, do we support a child molester, or not? we really weighed the options and decided "like probably not, but also kind of yes? but also like ehhh people will be mad, but also like, money????" ugh it was tough!" — Lane Moore (@hellolanemoore) March 7, 2020

But what if people didn’t have to fight and risk their jobs and give up whole days of work just to get a publisher to the right thing — Daniel José Older (@djolder) March 6, 2020

I really don’t understand (& I’m not asking you to explain thanks) the argument that deplatforming genuine monsters will lead to everyone being silenced. This is what happens when you refuse to acknowledge there is right and wrong in this world and not just “two sides” — claribel a. ortega (@Claribel_Ortega) March 6, 2020

Welp, it's official. You've had too many book deals & too few struggles with the publishing industry. No one's OWED a book deal. Or wait, if we are, can you call all editors & tell them I'm being muzzled pls because they're not buying my current submission and it's making me sad. — Sara Hammel (@sarawriting) March 7, 2020

Is this really the hill you want to die on? — Steven Ray Morris (@StevenRayMorris) March 7, 2020

Right? If a man who molested his adopted daughter and then groomed and began a sexual relationship with his girlfriend’s teenage daughter faces some sort of social consequence, WHO COULD BE NEXT?!? pic.twitter.com/jbFJaK7Efy — Laura Danger (@thatdarnchat) March 7, 2020

Come on my dude stop JK Rowlinging — Kate Leth (@kateleth) March 7, 2020

I'll just leave this here: pic.twitter.com/UNHdpONC1r — Claire Connelly (@_ClaireConnelly) March 6, 2020

He can say whatever he wants. They are not required to spend their money or resources on distributing it. — John Legend (@johnlegend) March 7, 2020

Not getting paid millions doesn't equal a muzzle and it's offensive to pretend it does. — Victoria Helen Stone / Dahl (@VictoriaDahl) March 6, 2020

Stephen King: Zombie pets? Murderous clowns? That’s child’s play. Haha. Also Stephen King: Privileged men facing consequences for their actions? Terrifying!! The stuff of ABSOLUTE nightmares!!! We must do something!! — A. H. (@a_h_reaume) March 7, 2020

Stephen King’s tweets are just like his books, there’s too many of them and they’re full of whiteness — words of prey (@oh_hey_sarah) March 7, 2020

King also came under fire recently for his comments about diversity and the 2020 Oscars. At the end of the day, King’s perspective is skewed thanks to his privilege as a straight cis white man of a certain generation, and as a bestselling multi-millionaire. It’s endlessly frustrating to see King, clearly a smart man, repeatedly tweet things like this. He should know and do better.

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—

Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com