"This book describes spam -- unwanted email messages and
inappropriate news articles..."

This is a problem. On USENET, at least, a critical part of
the spam argument has been to define "spam". Because of the
undesirability of content-based censorship, spam on USENET
is not generally defined as "inappropriate news articles"
but rather as articles which are excessively multiply-
posted, *regardless of content*. (See the FAQs for
news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, among other places.)

To ignore this consensus is unlike O'Reilly.