The Media - "Book Bans"

[Bigbrog]

Book bans are accelerating across the country amid right-wing pressure campaign | CNN Business

This article is so ridiculous!  Talk about using emotional terms like "book ban" to get people all riled up about something.  The article provides no details about the "book bans", just blatantly calls them bans.  Not to mention it only mentions the "bans" the R's were behind while never once mentioning the "bans" the D's were behind.  Also, got a kick out of their "source" for number of "bans" and the reason for them.  And why not throw some more emotion onto it by claiming some of the authors of the books were so "hurt" by it and it is adversely affecting their life...that may be the case, but what about the authors of the books the D's wanted "banned" mentioned or how it affected them??  SMH...sad part is a large number of people will "fall for it".

[uncle bernard]

58 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Book bans are accelerating across the country amid right-wing pressure campaign | CNN Business

This article is so ridiculous!  Talk about using emotional terms like "book ban" to get people all riled up about something.  The article provides no details about the "book bans", just blatantly calls them bans.  Not to mention it only mentions the "bans" the R's were behind while never once mentioning the "bans" the D's were behind.  Also, got a kick out of their "source" for number of "bans" and the reason for them.  And why not throw some more emotion onto it by claiming some of the authors of the books were so "hurt" by it and it is adversely affecting their life...that may be the case, but what about the authors of the books the D's wanted "banned" mentioned or how it affected them??  SMH...sad part is a large number of people will "fall for it".

The way the phrase "book ban" is typically used today means removing from schools/libraries. No books are being totally banned, that's for sure.

Which books are D's banning from schools and libraries? I can't find anything online.

[ionel]

11 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

The way the phrase "book ban" is typically used today means removing from schools/libraries. No books are being totally banned, that's for sure.

Which books are D's banning from schools and libraries? I can't find anything online.

 "Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach" by Yunus A. Cengel and Michael A. Boles

has been "banned" from elementary school libraries.

[Danny Deck]

Nothing is good for book sales quite like getting it on the "banned book" table at Barnes & Noble. There are definitely over zealous people calling for the removal of books, but picking which books are in a library will always have to be done because they're ultimately finite spaces. 

It's obviously less fraught because Amazon isn't the government, but I recall people on the left trying to get them to remove Abigail Shrier's Irreversible Damage from the store. Since Amazon controls 75% of the ebook market and 50% of the physical book market, getting them to remove a book is much closer to a ban to me than not having the same book in a middle school library.

[Ohio Elite]

23 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

The way the phrase "book ban" is typically used today means removing from schools/libraries. No books are being totally banned, that's for sure.

Which books are D's banning from schools and libraries? I can't find anything online.

They're more worried about Aunt Jemima and songs like Baby it's cold outside. 

[uncle bernard]

55 minutes ago, Danny Deck said:

Nothing is good for book sales quite like getting it on the "banned book" table at Barnes & Noble. There are definitely over zealous people calling for the removal of books, but picking which books are in a library will always have to be done because they're ultimately finite spaces. 

It's obviously less fraught because Amazon isn't the government, but I recall people on the left trying to get them to remove Abigail Shrier's Irreversible Damage from the store. Since Amazon controls 75% of the ebook market and 50% of the physical book market, getting them to remove a book is much closer to a ban to me than not having the same book in a middle school library.

This is a tad disingenuous when the books they're removing are for political reasons, not space reasons. 

I'm all for voicing opinions on the quality of books, but government entities shouldn't be choosing what's politically correct to have in a library, be it for liberal or conservative reasons.

[Bigbrog]

2 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

This is a tad disingenuous when the books they're removing are for political reasons, not space reasons. 

I'm all for voicing opinions on the quality of books, but government entities shouldn't be choosing what's politically correct to have in a library, be it for liberal or conservative reasons.

I'll agree with this somewhat; however, parents have a say as well as voters who vote those in who make policies and legislation.  I am all for NOT banning books based on the normal/actual definition of the word ban, not the media/liberal new definition of what ban means.  I am however for a parent expressing their concern about what sort of books and their content are available to a young child in the school library.   If they feel that content isn't suitable for children of a certain age, and the school board and/or local legislation decides the books shouldn't be available for the children in a school library I support that 100%.  

Also, what I am 100% against is how the media portrays these types of topics...and people fall for that crap!

[ThreePointTakedown]

If I don't want my child to read something. The best way is to keep it from every child. 

That's never backfired, ever. 

Get a hobby or better relationship with your kids. 

[Scouts Honor]

aren't schools government entities who decide what's in them?

the parents, voicing concerns about sexual content(including graphic illustrations) in the library, rightly, RIGHTLY, questioned the decisions made by these public/government entities.

can you buy the book for your kid? by all means, have at it.

Can it be in a public library? ask your constituents...

in a school? ask the parents...

we already did this.

i nearly got banned for posting what was in the books.

if that doesn't tell that whats in the books is inappropriate for a school library, I Dont' know what does.

 

 

[Ohio Elite]

4 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

i nearly got banned for posting what was in the books.

I remember that! Apparently that's the price for educating the ignorant.

[ThreePointTakedown]

28 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

aren't schools government entities who decide what's in them?

the parents, voicing concerns about sexual content(including graphic illustrations) in the library, rightly, RIGHTLY, questioned the decisions made by these public/government entities.

can you buy the book for your kid? by all means, have at it.

Can it be in a public library? ask your constituents...

in a school? ask the parents...

we already did this.

i nearly got banned for posting what was in the books.

if that doesn't tell that whats in the books is inappropriate for a school library, I Dont' know what does.

 

 

Appealing to the the lowest common denominator is not a great metric in this case. 

What an uniformed and potentially bias electorate thinks is not an effective way to determine if material is harmful. 

How do we define harmful? I'll bet the definition changes from household to household. How do we satisfy every permutation? We can't. 

Or we can offer up a way to keep their kids from being able to check out this material from the library. A system they can sign up for and determine what is appropriate for their own kids and not everyone else's as well.  Is it perfect? No.

[Danny Deck]

2 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

This is a tad disingenuous when the books they're removing are for political reasons, not space reasons. 

I'm all for voicing opinions on the quality of books, but government entities shouldn't be choosing what's politically correct to have in a library, be it for liberal or conservative reasons.

My point is decisions will have to be made. If one of the ways that decision is made is, "the local news won't show the pictures in a book on air." I think that's a fine reason. If one of the reasons is "Catcher in the Rye is hot garbage and we should stop the cycle of abuse that tells kids it's a classic." I think that's also a good reason. 

Each challenge isn't equally meritorious but it's hard to take people seriously when they act like no challenge has merit in the context of school libraries specifically.

Edited April 17 by Danny Deck

[Wrestleknownothing]

4 hours ago, Danny Deck said:

Nothing is good for book sales quite like getting it on the "banned book" table at Barnes & Noble. There are definitely over zealous people calling for the removal of books, but picking which books are in a library will always have to be done because they're ultimately finite spaces. 

It's obviously less fraught because Amazon isn't the government, but I recall people on the left trying to get them to remove Abigail Shrier's Irreversible Damage from the store. Since Amazon controls 75% of the ebook market and 50% of the physical book market, getting them to remove a book is much closer to a ban to me than not having the same book in a middle school library.

The most shocking thing I learned reading this thread is that Barnes & Noble stores still exist.

[ionel]

14 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

The most shocking thing I learned reading this thread is that Barnes & Noble stores still exist.

I thought the same thing just didn't say it out loud ... oh wait ...

[ionel]

3 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

This is a tad disingenuous when the books they're removing are for political reasons, not space reasons. 

Well this is probably the reason Democrats removed Thermodynamics from the elementary school libraries.  Just think if Greta was given a chance to read it back in 3rd grade.

[Danny Deck]

25 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

The most shocking thing I learned reading this thread is that Barnes & Noble stores still exist.

Since Elliott Investments bought it in 2019 it has really turned around. They have even been expanding recently. The CEO is also CEO of Waterstones in the UK and seems to really understand how to sell books. It's a fascinating how they have been able to thrive.

[JimmyBT]

6 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

The way the phrase "book ban" is typically used today means removing from schools/libraries. No books are being totally banned, that's for sure.

Which books are D's banning from schools and libraries? I can't find anything online.

Is Dr Seuss really a racist?  

[Scouts Honor]

4 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Appealing to the the lowest common denominator is not a great metric in this case. 

What an uniformed and potentially bias electorate thinks is not an effective way to determine if material is harmful. 

How do we define harmful? I'll bet the definition changes from household to household. How do we satisfy every permutation? We can't. 

Or we can offer up a way to keep their kids from being able to check out this material from the library. A system they can sign up for and determine what is appropriate for their own kids and not everyone else's as well.  Is it perfect? No.

uninformed?

you mean like the guy who didn't think it was actually happening.. so i posted it for him here on this forum. boy did he get a surprise.

[jross]

11 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

The way the phrase "book ban" is typically used today means removing from schools/libraries. No books are being totally banned, that's for sure.

Which books are D's banning from schools and libraries? I can't find anything online.

We've gone over this before.

https://intermatwrestle.com/forums/topic/2718-book-bans/

Here are some over time

• Of Mice and Men
• Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry
• The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
• The Cay
• To Kill A Mockingbird
• Uncle Tom's Cabin

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/books/story/2020-11-12/burbank-unified-challenges-books-including-to-kill-a-mockingbird 

[uncle bernard]

11 hours ago, jross said:

We've gone over this before.

https://intermatwrestle.com/forums/topic/2718-book-bans/

Here are some over time

• Of Mice and Men
• Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry
• The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
• The Cay
• To Kill A Mockingbird
• Uncle Tom's Cabin

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/books/story/2020-11-12/burbank-unified-challenges-books-including-to-kill-a-mockingbird 

incredibly stupid!

[Bigbrog]

57 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

incredibly stupid!

That they were 'banned"...I agree

[uncle bernard]

45 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

That they were 'banned"...I agree

Yes, that's exactly what I said. 

[mspart]

If you go to the school board meeting and read from one of these good books and are told to stop because of the explicit sexual nature of what you are reading, that is a sign it should not be in the school.   If it is not appropriate to read out loud in a public meeting it is not age appropriate for minors. 

mspart

Edited April 18 by mspart

[ThreePointTakedown]

47 minutes ago, mspart said:

If you go to the school board meeting and read from one of these good books and are told to stop because of the explicit sexual nature of what you are reading, that is a sign it should not be in the school.   If it is not appropriate to read out loud in a public meeting it is not age appropriate for minors. 

mspart

Not necessarily all minors. 

Where and how do we draw the line? 

[mspart]

17 years, 364 days.   That's the line.   And since there are 18 years olds and 17 years olds and young in HS, out of an overabundance of caution, these materials are not age appropriate for High School curriculum or library.   It is an easy line to draw.   Not difficult.   If school board members ears are offended, not age appropriate in school.  

Yes necessarily all minors. 

mspart