I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, The Harry Potter series.

This group of novels is not merely just a list of some of the greatest books ever written, rather it is a list of some of the most frequently banned books in American schools during the past decade alone.

The rise of political correctness is undoubtedly impacting the flow of literature in the American education system; however, it is evident over the course of our history that books have been banned for many reasons. While what we define as political correctness today is a large cause of the modern banning of these books, ultimately the censorship of books comes down to suppressing ideologies and ceasing immoral language.

Over the course of American history, Mark Twains novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (in addition to some of his other works) has garnered calls for its banning from many different angles. Originally, the 1884 novel was banned throughout the southern United States for what was considered pro-African rhetoric. Ironically, the book would later become a place of controversy from the Civil Rights Movement onward for the use of its racial slurs and derogatory depictions of African Americans.

This contradiction of why the book should be banned accurately shows how culture has evolved. At the time it was written, Twain took a very liberal approach to the situation of slavery, condemning it (along with other ideas such as religious traditions) and questioning the entire basis that Jim was not intellectually comparable with Huck. While much of Jims characterization, from his dialect to his interactions with other counterparts, can be attributed to exaggeration and satirizing the archaic ways of thinking that Twains peers believed, the novel itself still contains very offensive racial slurs that are not easy to read.

This scenario exemplifies my belief in anti-censorship because even though the novel is insensitive and offensive, I believe it is crucial for children to learn about how we have changed as a society. It is important for us as a people to realistically understand the places we have come from and the places we dont want to go back to, and that is why I think that banning books like these is wrong.

Another trend in book banning campaigns is the basis that what the book describes is too dangerous or that it goes against strongly held cultural beliefs. This is seen predominantly in the reasons for banning books based on anti-capitalism or general anti-American doctrine. The Invisible Man and Death of a Salesman are just two examples of books condemned as anti-American, especially in the McCarthyism era.

In examples like these I believe it is beneficial for us as an American society to be aware of different thought processes and ideologies. While we dont have to agree with what is said in these books, we should learn about how and why critiques of our society arise; this in turn can only lead us to become more educated and better equipped at answering these criticisms, which will only make our cultural values stronger.

Trigger books are now one of the biggest reasons that books are banned today. The trigger is described as a word or idea that propels, or triggers, someone to do something, usually a very negative action. This is not necessarily a new phenomenon; however, the rise of trigger words on college campuses seems to coincide with this rise in trigger books.

Common examples of trigger books are The Perks of Being a Wallflower, The Catcher in the Rye, and The Color Purple. The themes of most trigger books involve suicide, depression, rape, homosexuality, and school shootings.

These topics are very difficult to talk about and should not be dismissed lightly; with that being said, I believe it is good to normalize these topics and allow discourse to be had about them instead of blanketing them as taboo.

Furthermore, books are often banned for being too obscene or immature. By now Im sure that you know what my opinion is on the banning of these books as well.

One of the most ironically banned books is Fahrenheit 451. The book was banned for its anti-television undertones and criticism of Christianity and the Bible (which in and of itself is a widely banned book). The irony of the situation is that the entire plot of the book revolves around the quest to stop the burning of books, which metaphorically represents censorship itself.

Though many books have been banned over our history, it seems we may be taking strides in the right direction. There is now a national banned books week which encourages students to read books which have historically been censored. I believe it is through this engagement of uncomfortable discussions that will allow our society to fully grow and develop into its highest potential.

Link:

Censorship in Society - Pennsylvania State University

Censorship is something that takes place in every country all around the world. Not all countries share the same forms of censorship or the same amounts of censorship, but in one way or another, all societies are affected by it. In a general sense censorship is the supervision and control of the information and ideas that are circulated among the people within a society. There are many different ways that censorship is implemented though. In the United States we are used to curse words being blocked out along with nudity which is most of the censorship we experience. In Poland and Ukraine however it is different. Censorship in those two countries is more like prevention by official government action of the circulation of messages. In Poland and Ukraine, the censorship that they experience has more of an effect on the societies, because they are not always exposed to the whole truth.

Media censorship can really hinder a society if it is bad enough. Because media is such a large part of peoples lives today and it is the source of basically all information, if the information is not being given in full or truthfully then the society is left uneducated. Both Poland and Ukraine experience this type of censorship but Ukraine experiences it more now because they are in a state of crisis. This type of censorship in these two countries is a setback in todays world. International communication and globalization are such major advances in our world, but if the information that is being given to these societies is one sided and only what the government wants them to hear, then they cannot fully understand and accept other countries and cultures.

Censorship is probably the number one way to lower peoples right to freedom of speech. When a journalist has to report on only what the government wants people to know, they do not have the freedom to express what they really want to. In the countries of Poland and Ukraine people have to be careful of the information they are putting out there because, although they are supposed to have the right to freedom of speech, there can be some serious consequences for their words and actions.

References:

http://www.worldissues360.com/index.php/how-censorship-affects-society-580/

http://www.targetgdpi.com/2014/03/media-censorship-good-or-bad.html

Read more from the original source:

Censorship Effects on Society | World Wide Women

Threats both old and new seek to thwart independent journalists around the world

For the cover of its annual Attacks on the Press report, the editors of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) chose an image that encapsulates the hostility often shown toward American media during the 2016 presidential campaign. The photo, which went viral during election season, shows a man at a Donald Trump rally wearing a t-shirt that reads, Rope. Tree. Journalist. Some Assembly Required. Ugly threats are nothing new for journalists in many parts of the world. But todays challenges have moved beyond traditional censorship techniques, CPJ says in its 2017 edition of Attacks on the Press released on Tuesday.

In his introduction, CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon writes that while new technology allows for the free flow of information, it can also be manipulated by repressive governments to stifle free expression. New information technologies -- the global, interconnected internet; ubiquitous social media platforms; smartphones with cameras -- were supposed to make censorship obsolete, writes Simon. Instead, they have just made it more complicated.

This years edition of CPJs Attacks on the Press features essays from journalists around the world who are grappling with the complex nature of censorship in this digital age. A few of the journalists navigating this new media landscape spoke at a panel on Tuesday evening at Columbia Journalism School, co-hosted by CPJ and the schools international program, #CJSGlobal.

In Syria, Censorship is not the exception, censorship is something we grew up with for all our lives, said panelist Loubna Mrie, who joined the Syrian uprising in 2011 and then went to work for Reuters as a photojournalist, reporting in rebel-held areas of the country. Growing up in a police state, you grow up to believe that the walls have ears and anything you might say might lead you to jail, said Mrie, who considers herself both journalist and anti-Assad activist.

Government censorship and oppression are also longstanding traditions in Ethiopia, said blogger Zelalem Kibret. State-controlled media dominate the flow of information, a monopoly that Kibret and others sought to break by using the Internet to create an alternative: the Zone 9 blogger collective. But the government lashed back at their innovative run around censorship, by shutting down the Zone 9 bloggers and jailing them. Were experiencing this multi-layered type of censorship, said Kibret. New technologies are not much help against the dictatorial government controls in North Korea, where The Associated Press opened a bureau in 2012. The odds are sort of stacked against the journalists, said panelist John Daniszweski, AP editor-at-large for standards. The access is totally controlled. They have a minder with you everywhere. Interviews are granted rarely and only after lots of letters and meetings.

Compared with their colleagues in Syria, Ethiopia, North Korea and other repressive states, journalists in the U.S. have far more access and greater protection to do their jobs. That has made American journalism the city on a hill, a beacon of hope for others working around the world, noted Alan Huffman, a freelance journalist and editor of the CPJ book. But in the wake of the 2016 election campaign, and now faced with a president who tweets frequently about fake news, U.S. journalists today feel more susceptible to censorship, he noted.

To suddenly feel [censorship] seeping into your own environment gives you a different perspective, and you realize theres always a fine line, wherever you are...between being censored and not being censored. When you start to feel it creeping into your own world it really does open your eyes, said Huffman.

In his essay in Attacks on the Press, Huffman spoke with Bill Minor, a journalist who covered the 1960s civil rights movement in the Deep South, when reporters were jailed, sued for libel, and physically attacked for what they wrote. Minor told Huffman he was concerned by a rebirth of an old animosity against the press today. Its a message to be taken seriously, said Huffman. All the things we see happening in the world happened in Mississippi during the civil rights era, he told the Columbia audience.

Despite the sense of renewed threat under the Trump administration, the American journalists on the panel said they felt optimistic about the direction of journalism here.

In some ways its a good time because its a moment when the population of the United States is really engaged in these issues and is thinking a lot about press freedom and civic engagement and what is so-called fake news, said Daniszweski.

Its rejuvenating journalism in a way, because there are some really good things happening and people are really seriously thinking about what they need to find out, said Huffman. Most journalists, when they are confronted with the threat of censorship, have a visceral reaction, and they will try to find a way to work around it.

Courtney Glenn Vinopal is a full-time M.S. '17 student.

Follow this link:

Censorship in the Digital Age | Columbia Journalism School

How important is censorship in todays world?Essay outline

Topic sentences for each and every paragraph and corresponding development (in point form) for every topic sentence For. Protect the younger generation

Assumed that the younger generation is unable to differentiate what to and not to view. Parental control (computers), ratings of movies pornography, violence unsuitable for them, their development might be adversely affected. Stability of country political censorship to prevent political uproar in the country due to spread of information which destabilises the government (no matter objective/subjective) religious censorship, particularly important in the case of multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore racial riots in the 1960s Curb social ills gambling, alcohol, cigarettes censor advertisements promoting them and at the same time promote advertisements discouraging them responsibility of the government for the welfare of the people

Prevent unnecessary panic among public spread of certain information, be it true or false, may evoke fear and uncertainty among the people Eg. After the Japanese Fukushima disaster last year, the rumour of radioactive rain had fallen on the land of Singapore and could cause cancer spread rapidly. The message indeed caused some tension in the local society but in the end it turned out that it was only a rumour spreading from Philippines.

Hence, media censorship is pivotal in terms of controlling the spread of reliable information and preventing unnecessary panic. Against Freedom of speech everyone has the right to voice his or her opinions broadens perspective on a single issue and evokes thinking but people may abuse this right. Not possible for full censorship. When information is blocked in one country, one can travel to another country to access that information facebook/booksEg: In response to the question To what extent are games a better alternative to books and lectures?Topic sentence: Games allow interactivity that help students acquire skills more easily

Development:

Definition of terms:

Censorship: the examining of media and suppress parts deemed to be objectionable on moral, political or other grounds.

Thesis: There are many proponents of censorship that hail censorship as a panacea for social ills in todays world. However, these optimists fail to realise that censorship today is becoming inefficient and irrelevant, failing to produce noticeable results despite the large amounts of resources pumped into it. In fact, censorship can harm society such as by causing ideas to stagnate.

Introduction: Censorship is the act of examining material and suppressing those that are deemed to be objectionable on moral, political or other grounds. It is perceived to be in direct contradiction to the freedom of expressing ourselves. Thus, many are now questioning the importance of this practice in todays society, where liberty and freedom are our basic rights, and where there exist media like the internet which is near impossible to censor. There are many proponents of censorship that hail censorship as a panacea for social ills in todays world. However, these optimists fail to realise that censorship today is becoming inefficient and irrelevant, failing to produce noticeable results despite the resources pumped into it. In fact, censorship can harm society such as by causing ideas to stagnate.

Body Paragraph 1: (Proposition) Censorship against violence. The idea of censorship has its attractions, especially when it is aimed against violence in media. Censorship is seen to be the only firewall guarding teens from the adverse influences in the media. Violence is one of the most prevalent themes in media today. This is because it appeals to our animal instincts, and is hence the most successful in attracting audience. However, there is much fear amongst the population that violence will cast negative influences on teens. Numerous studies done in the US appear to point to the strong link between consumption of violent media and teenage violence. By comparing behaviour of teens that consume violent media regularly and teens who do not, these studies show that teens that do consume violent media tend to behave more violently, such as fighting more in schools. The mode of action of violent media in promoting teenage violence is thought to be as follows.

Consumption of violent media such as watching violent films or playing violent computer games increases the exposure of teens to violence. As teens may not be mature enough to differentiate clearly between right and wrong, they may gradually began to perceive such acts to be normal. The teens are thus desensitized to violence. These teens then carry out violent acts in real life, believing these acts to part of normal behaviour. The most obvious solution to this problem is censorship. By censoring out the violent elements in films or computer games, optimists hope that teens will be less exposed to violence and thus will not be desensitized to violence. As a result, the overall idea is that censorship will reduce violence from teens. Arguments (Paragraph 1): (Step-by-step in numerical order)

Body paragraph 2: (Proposition) Censorship against racist commentsBesides violence, governments also often use censorship to suppress certain material that may spread discord throughout the population and this helps to maintain the harmony and unity of the society as a whole. An example is racist messages. In any multi-racial society, despite the best efforts of governments, there exist certain individuals that do not care about the well-being of the community. These individuals often post messages on the internet or other platforms that can be offensive to members of other races. This causes disharmony between different races and may even tear apart the social fabric of the community. By censoring such material, the government can prevent the offensive message from reaching the population and thus resolve the situation before it worsens. Thus, censorship is important in todays world to maintain the harmony and unity in multi-racial societies such as Singapore. Arguments (Paragraph 2):

Body Paragraph 3: (Opposition 1) Censorship is largely ineffective due to other factors besides media. Despite the well-meaning rationales behind censorship, censorship today has produced little results. For example, one of the core functions of censorship is to suppress the violent elements in films and video games, thereby supposedly reducing teenage violence.

However, despite ever-increasing levels of censorship in media, such as the recent introduction of the PG13 rating for films in Singapore, teen violence remains a problem in society today. This is due to the presence of other factors that are more important than media, and the presence of these other factors render the mere application of censorship ineffective. Such factors include poor parenting, aggressive parents, bullies in schools and other environmental factors that culminate to induce a violent tendency on the teenager. Controlling and managing these factors, though harder, are actually much more important in reducing violent behaviour of teens.

What about the clear relationship between consumption of violent media and violent behaviour? Although such a relationship has been proven, this does not prove that the violent media cause the violent behaviour. It is reasonable to argue that both the consumption of violent media and the violent behaviour are caused by the same reason, the violent predisposition of the teen due to other environmental factors as discussed above. Thus, it is not violent films that make teens violent, but rather already violent teens prefer to watch violent films. It is then obvious that just censoring the violent films is not enough to reduce teen violence.

Body paragraph 4: (Opposition 1) Censorship ineffective due to technological advances. Censorship may also be ineffective due to advances in technology. An example is the internet. The internet is notorious for its openness. It allows people everywhere to upload files and data; and allow everyone else to see it. Within these files or information uploaded, there will be a certain portion that is coarse and objectionable, however with the internet; there is no way to censor this material. The internet is a cyber world; it evolves and changes far quicker than the real world. Thus, as current methods of censorship are applied, within seconds, someone in another part of the world will have found a way to get past these methods and objectionable material will continue to be posted. It is common knowledge that the Internet and the cyber community at large interprets censorship or blocking as damage and makes effort to route around it. So, how do you censor something that is intrinsically designed to prevent and circumvent blocking?

The answer is that you cannot. Arguments (Paragraph 4):

Body paragraph 5: (Opposition 2) Censorship harms society by causing ideas to stagnate. Censorship refers to suppressing of material deemed to be objectionable. Admittedly, not all ideas are good. Offensive, degrading ideas do exist. However, the best way to deal with negative ideas is not to censor them, but to counter them with good ideas. In a heterogeneous soup of ideas, the only way to differentiate good ideas from the bad is to allow all the ideas to compete freely in a marketplace.

The good ideas will stand out and the negative ideas will be rejected. Some good ideas, such as womens rights, were initially perceived to be bad. Some bad ideas such the right to own slaves was once perceived to be good. Only through debate and competition amongst ideas did the better ideas prevail and the bad ones disappear. Censorship threatens not only to mistakenly block good ideas that appear bad at first sight but also to freeze all ideas in place. It is not by chance that dictatorial and authoritarian societies practice heavy censorship. These regimes know that if they allowed these ideas to proliferate, they will be outcompeted. An example is the Arab Spring Revolution. Many had attributed its occurrence to the spread of internet service in these countries, allowing the people to get ideas from outside world, uncensored by the government, thus allowing ideas like democracy to take root, compete, and eventually prevail in terms of popularity. This leads us to many questions we want to ask about censorship. How can the best ideas emerge when there is no debate? How can evil ideas ever be defeated is they cannot be challenged? How can society progress if that happens? Arguments (Paragraph 5):

See original here:

The Importance of Censorship in Todays World: [Essay Example ...

Communities, school boards, religious offices, local libraries, the US Post Office, the Customs Service, and other instruments of authority in the United States have practiced censorship over articles, songs, films, television productions, plays and especially books since the earliest days of the Plymouth Colony in what is now Massachusetts. There, Governor William Bradford learned of some verses written by Thomas Morton of the nearby Merrymount Colony. Merrymount had been established by dissidents tired of the strict Puritan rules over what constituted permissive behavior and had started their own colony, which celebrated the tradition of erecting and dancing around a Maypole, the singing of songs other than those suitable for worship, and the writing of the aforesaid verses, which Governor Bradford found offensivesome tending to lasciviousness.

After Bradford and his Puritan flock arrived at Boston in 1630 he dispatched a military force to break up the Merrymount Colony and the area was absorbed into Boston, later becoming what is todays Quincy, Massachusetts. Morton was deported. It was the first act of direct censorship in what became the United States. It would not be the last and throughout Americas history of censorship Boston which calls itself the Cradle of American Liberty as well as the Athens of America has been at the forefront of many acts of censorship. Walt Whitmans Leaves of Grass was withdrawn from publication in Boston after the District Attorney threatened to sue the publisher over explicit language, for instance.

Here are examples of censored or banned books or other materials in America throughout history.

Most Americans are aware of relatively recent censorship of Twains recounting of a boy and a runaway slaves journey down the Mississippi River. They believe that the censorship of Twains story is centered on the frequent use of what now is euphemistically referred to as the n-word, and the behaviors and dialect of characters now considered racial stereotypes. And they are correct to some degree. What is less well known is the book, which was published in the United Kingdom in 1884 and in the United States in February of 1885, was banned outright in the Massachusetts town of Concord, which called it suitable only for the slums.

Huckleberry Finn is one of the most attacked and censored books in all of history. During Twains lifetime, the book was referred to as insensitive, particularly to women, but contemporary critic William Dean Howells of Cambridge Massachusetts found nothing within the pages of the book which should be removed. Several libraries disagreed and refused to place the book on their shelves, or were soon removing it due to complaints within the communities they served. Another contemporary writer, Louisa May Alcott, suggested that if Twain was unable to find a better subject on which to base a book hed be better off to stop writing.

The Brooklyn Public library removed the book from its shelves in 1905, complaining of Twains poor choice of words. The library also cited the fact that Huck was coarse, and when it was recounted in the story that Huck scratched himself when he felt an itch the text was crossing the line of what was considered to be obscene. The book was thus harmful to young minds, justifying its removal from the library. Twain responded by saying that he had written the book solely to be read by adults, though his response was sarcastic, to say the least.

For years the book and its sometime companion The Adventures of Tom Sawyer were taught in the standard curricula of English classes in American schools. By the 1980s and in some cases even earlier, it was being assailed as deliberately provocative and racist by many school boards or those petitioning the school boards for its removal. This ignored the fact that the dialect and vocabulary were written to reflect its day, rather than a later day. A version in which all uses of the n-word were replaced with the word slave was produced in the 21st century; it also dropped the use of the word Injun.

The book remains controversial and is periodically reported to have been again dropped from public libraries, school libraries, bookstores, and book clubs. It is likely destined to remain so forever. In the United Kingdom, where it was first published, The Guardian placed it at number 23 in its list of the 100 Greatest Novels of All Time, writing in their review in 2014, this great novel remains vulnerable to the censoring attentions of provincial reactionaries and classroom bigots

More here:

US Censorship: 10 Appalling Examples of Censorship in the ...

More than 700 miles from where I sit in Mississippis capital city, oncethe power center of U.S. white-supremacist strategy, white people in Kansas dont want young adults to learn about the origins of the Ku Klux Klan. In Goddard, Kan., a 90%-plus white western suburb of Wichita, leaders just decided that the award-winning nonfiction book They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group must be pulled from library shelves in the Goddard School District.

Young adults reading a book that explains the origins of the Klan in Pulaski, Tenn., and how it becamea white-terrorist Invisible Empire under Nathan Bedford Forrest,is unacceptable in white suburbs in Kansas, we learn. They dont think teenagers can handle the truth about past white terrorist and vigilante groups burning schools and killing and beating teachers here in Mississippi and beyond to stop Black advancement,as I wrote about recently.

And Im quite sure they dont want students today to understand the purposeful roots of current inequities, division and (re)segregated schools in a nation where so many educational institutions are overwhelmingly one race or another, with the majority-white ones typically drawing the most resources.

Goddard is also censoring books by Margaret Atwood, Toni Morrison and Mississippis very own Angie Thomas (who is onour advisory board), andeven plays by August Wilson. Like thewell-funded and -planned censorship wavesweeping the nation,the Goddard white purgeis yet another supposed anti-CRT salvo to stop Americans from learning about and from our own race history, warts and all.

Its yet another campaign to rewrite our history and censor the difficult parts out of classrooms, just asfirst Mississippi State University President Stephen D. Lee helped leadmore than a century ago. Lees censorship efforts targeted books and educators to solidify widespread mythology about the Confederacy and the lost cause into place, as well as supported Jim Crow discrimination laws to limit Black education, voting and advancement for decades.

These 21st-century book-banners seem to think minors, even those in their teens, arent old enough to handle historic truth about the systemic racism, homophobia, xenophobia and misogyny that have kept power centered largely in a small percentage of wealthy, white male hands of various political persuasions.

They ignore that young people have experienced the effects of these bigotries and adult power plays from very early ages. Think of men and women spitting on6-year-old Ruby Bridgesand calling her and her mother the n-word after she enrolled in a public elementary school61 years ago yesterday in New Orleans.

When exactly is too young to start thinking about ways to change these deplorable old habits and beliefs in our society?

Read the original:

The Hate They Censor: Burying Lessons of History - History News Network (HNN)

Update: Based on information from the news agency TASS, Meduza originally reported that Roskomnadzor seeks a court order to block The Insider. TASS later corrected its story to reflect that Roskomnadzor seeks only a noncompliance fine.

Russias censorship agency (Roskomnadzor) has appealed to a Moscow court to fine the investigative outlet The Insider over its failure to include foreign agent disclaimers on its website, reports state news agency TASS.

As first reported by Mediazona, citing the official website of the Moscow courts, administrative charges were brought against The Insider for violating the law on foreign agents (under Russian Administrative Code Article 19.34.1, section 1). The Tagansky District Court registered the case on Wednesday.

The Insider is best known as Bellingcats investigative partner in Russia. The two groups have jointly published multiple bombshell investigations about Russian intelligence operations at home and around the world.

The Russian Justice Ministry blacklisted The Insider as foreign agent on July 23, 2021. In turn, The Insiders editor-in-chief Roman Dobrokhotov stated that the publication would continue to operate as normal and would not comply with Russian law, as it is based in Latvia.

We wont give up Because youre with us

Here is the original post:

UPDATED: Russian federal censor asks Moscow court to fine investigative outlet The Insider for refusing to carry foreign agent disclosure - Meduza

Removing books from library shelves is not what America is supposed to be about.

Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are two of our countrys core ideals. Writers are free to express themselves as they so desire. Readers are free to read a book, or not.

Yet every year, we read or hear the news that parents or citizens somewhere earlier this week, in west suburban Downers Grove are clamoring to have a book they deem offensive taken off the shelves of their childs school library or their local public library.

It happens scores of times every year, when words or stories make people uncomfortable and Americas culture wars flare up. The American Library Association publishes an annual list of the top 10 Most Challenged Books those most likely to be condemned and targeted for removal. In 2020, 273 books were targeted and among the top 10 were three acknowledged literary classics: John Steinbecks Of Mice and Men, Harper Lees To Kill a Mockingbird and Toni Morrisons The Bluest Eye.

In case readers are not aware: Morrison and Steinbeck both won the Nobel Prize for literature. To Kill a Mockingbird won the Pulitzer Prize in 1961.

On Monday, as the Sun-Times Nader Issa reported, the issue flared up in Downers Grove when about 200 people packed a school auditorium to demand that the book Gender Queer: A Memoir be removed from the libraries at Downers Grove North and Downers Grove South high schools. According to protesters, the book exposes children to homoerotic or pornographic content.

The book is the story of author Maia Kobabes journey of gender identity and sexuality as a teenager and young adult. A few pages include illustrations of sex acts, but the books publisher says it is appropriate for high school-aged students.

Gender Queer: A Memoir has come under fire elsewhere too. Virginias largest school district removed it from its high school libraries earlier this fall while it considers parents concerns. A Florida district banned it altogether. Schools in New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Washington have had the book challenged. South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster told the states education department to investigate the book, which he considers sexually explicit and pornographic.

Its worth noting that Gender Queer is not mandatory reading at either Downers Grove high school. In fact, theres only one copy available for students to check out at each schools library at Downers North and Downers South high schools.

Lauren Pierret, a senior at Downers Grove North, said at the meeting that she didnt even know Gender Queer existed until last week.

This isnt being forced upon your kids, Pierret said, but it gives kids who would be interested in this story a choice to read it.

It is not the job of this editorial board to judge whether a book is too sexually explicit, profane, violent or otherwise unfit for a child, teenager or another adult to read.

Nor is it the job of conservative culture warriors or anyone else.

Some of the past attacks on Of Mice and Men and To Kill a Mockingbird, it should be noted, came from people who were bothered by racial stereotypes and slurs they said would have a negative impact on students, according to the ALA.

Good literature can sometimes make us uncomfortable, for any number of reasons. Censorship is never the right response.

Besides, once it starts, where does it end?

Consider the case of Texas Rep. Matt Krause, who is running for attorney general in his state and made headlines when he compiled a list of about 850 books that might make students feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex, as the Texas Tribune first reported. Most of the books on his list were written by women, people of color and LGBTQ authors.

Weve got to ask: Did Krause bother to read all 850 books? Or is his list just for political theater?

Books in our schools and libraries must be protected. Even when we dont approve of them.

Send letters to letters@suntimes.com.

Read the original post:

We need to protect books at our schools and libraries | Editorial - Chicago Sun-Times

WHITE RIVER JUNCTION, Vermont -- Toni Morrisons novel Beloved is in trouble in Virginia.

It contains scenes of sexual violence and it also contains images of slavery in America. Its a hot potato. A big term like critical race theory is being thrown around by parents and politicians.

The candidate who won the Virginia governors race supports a parent who wants a law passed that parents must be notified in advance if their kids are assigned a book like Beloved that contains explicit sexual scenes. The law in question would have required parents to be offered a tamer novel for their kids to read if they objected to one with explicit scenes or racial realities.

The other gubernatorial candidate, the one who lost, says parents shouldnt tell teachers what to teach. Period.

This is a rerun of my life as an English teacher in a Vermont high school from 1988 to 2012.

But it wasnt a Morrison novel that got me into trouble.

It was The Color Purple by Pulitzer-Prize winner Alice Walker, another distinguished African American writer.

It was the very first page which landed me in the principals office explaining my choice of books.

A mother had complained to my principal about a vulgar word a character in The Color Purple uses for a womans most private body part.

And that word isnt buried on page 200. Its on Page 1 of the novel. The vulgar term is used by a 14-year-old uneducated Black girl writing a Dear God letter because her father who had raped her had ordered: You better not never tell nobody but God. Itd kill your mommy.

The vulgar word the mother was objecting to her teenage daughter having to read in my 11th-grade Advanced English class was the same vulgar word which 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump would use in a notorious Access Hollywood taped conversation with Billy Bush.

That word nearly wrecked Trumps campaign weeks before that 2016 election. It had also threatened to wreck my fledgling teaching career in 1990.

The principal wanted to know why I was using that novel and if I could defend the vulgarity. I explained that the novel is written in vernacular and is true to the realities of southern uneducated people in the early 1900s.

Further, it builds toward an important scene about female genital mutilation, a brutal practice by males in other cultures designed to control women by reducing the pleasure they experience in sex.

I was earnest and the principal said he would support me if I wanted to continue teaching it.

I thought for a long moment.

Paul Keane, who attended graduate school at Kent State University, is a retired English teacher in Vermont

Did I want the problem, as a white male, of venturing to defend a literary work involving womens private body parts, even a literary work written by a Pulitzer Prize winner?

No.

I told the principal I would drop The Color Purple from my reading list rather than battle a students mother.

I had caved .

These words from an Ohio judge should have spoken to my Color Purple timidity as a new teacher in 1990 -- as they should speak to the fear among school boards and politicians in 2021.

This is what U.S. District Judge William K. Thomas of the Northern District of Ohio wrote in 1971, in ordering that the report of a Portage County grand jury be expunged and physically destroyed after the 1970 Kent State University massacre:

The Report is dulling classroom discussion and is upsetting the teaching atmosphere. This effect was described by other faculty witnesses. When thought is controlled, or appears to be controlled, when pedagogues and pupils shrink from free inquiry at a state university because of a report of a resident Grand Jury, then academic freedom of expression is impermissibly impaired. This will curb conditions essential to fulfillment of the universitys learning purposes ....

I never taught The Color Purple again. Although I didnt know Judge Thomas eloquent words at the time, to this day, I suspect that I impaired that academic freedom of expression in my Vermont teaching career -- all because I was afraid of a mother armed with a five-letter word.

Paul Keane, who attended graduate school at Kent State University, is a retired Vermont English teacher.

Have something to say about this topic?

* Send a letter to the editor, which will be considered for print publication.

* Email general questions about our editorial board or comments or corrections on this opinion column to Elizabeth Sullivan, director of opinion, at esullivan@cleveland.com.

Visit link:

The powerful censorship of a parent wielding a five-letter word: Paul Keane - cleveland.com

A desire to stop the spread of COVID-19 misinformation has fueled increasingly intense efforts to restrict speech on social media platforms. Major news outlets, communications researchers, and even some public health experts have jumped on this bandwagon, calling for a variety of policies designed to stem the proliferation of anti-vaccine messaging and other scientifically dubious content.

Perhaps the most alarming aspect of this campaign is its propensity to silence trustworthy sources of information right alongside nonsense pushers like Joe Mercola and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The British Medical Journal has documented multiple occurrences of this friendly fire throughout the pandemic. I also highlighted a particularly ridiculousexample in this story: Social Media Censorship: Scientist Corrects Anti-GMO Silliness, Facebook Threatens To Ban Him.

But the most egregious case of social media giants silencing credible voices occurred lastweek when Instagram prohibited users from tagging the Cochrane Collaboration because the organization repeatedly posted content that goes against our community guidelines on false content about COVID-19 or vaccines, the platform wrote in a notification to users.

If you don't appreciate how absurd Instagram's decision was, consider that the Cochrane Collaboration is an international network of some 30,000 scientific experts that publishes high-quality reviews of the evidence on a variety of medical topics. To date, it has published more than 7,500 systematic reviews. The Canadian Medical Association has called Cochranethe best single resource of its kind. The World Health Organization maintains a partnership with the nonprofit because it contributes significantly to the advancement of public health. In sum, this is the equivalent of censoring the March of Dimesfor spreading misinformation about birth defectsit's preposterous.

Why censor Cochrane?

It's not clear why Instagram would punish such a reputable organization. The group speculated on Twitter that its July 2021 review of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment could have triggered the controversy. If so, Instagram has some 'splaining to do. Here's the review's conclusion:

Based on the current very low to lowcertainty evidence, we are uncertain about the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID19. The completed studies are small and few are considered high quality. Several studies are underway that may produce clearer answers in review updates. Overall, the reliable evidence available does not support the use of ivermectin for treatment or prevention of COVID19 outside of welldesigned randomized trials. [my emphasis]

Cochrane also published a review in November 2020 documenting the limited efficacy of masking against respiratory viruses. Other reputable publications have reached the same conclusion, so there's nothing especially egregious about that November review. Nonetheless, it's possible that Instagram takes the simple-minded stance that universal masking is the right position and thus targeted Cochrane's article as misinformation.

In either case, we're talking about a scientific dispute based on limited evidence. Cochrane summarized the available data for experts and the general public; they didn't endorse the use of ivermectinfor COVID-19 norreject the use of masks. Neither of these examples provides a logical basis for any censorship.

The usual objection

Perhaps this was just an oversight, someonewill inevitably respond.Thedecision was probably automated; nobody at Instagram was dim enough to make this mistake in real-time. Maybe that's the case, but how is that a satisfying answer? It means that some programmer at Instagram wrote an algorithm that can't distinguish between Cochrane onthe one hand and, say, Children's Health Defense, a virulent anti-vaccine group, on the other. More importantly, the intention of a policycensor disreputable voicesis no excuse for its indefensible resultsoops, we flagged a premiermedical organization with a 30-year history.

I think the better explanation is this: social media platforms are poor judges of what constitutes good science, especially as it relates to a novel virus that we're learning more about almost constantly. Their community standards related to misinformation are influenced by current political trends and contain loopholes big enoughWe recognize that words mean different things or affect people differentlyto justify any policy the companies want to pursue.

With those considerations in mind, it's clear that no amount of algorithmic fine-tuning will solve the problem. Social media platforms needto quit moderating content they know nothing about.

Read more:

COVID Misinformation Blunder: Instagram Censors Widely Respected Cochrane Collaboration - American Council on Science and Health