zlacker

[parent] [thread] 24 comments
1. consum+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-02-19 01:38:35
This Dahl situation seems ridiculous and deserving of derision.

I would also like to bring your attention to the Florida school book ban which applies not just to new editions of one author, but to an entire state's education system.

> Among the titles that have been removed and banned in the course of the vetting in her school district are Toni Morrison’s ‘The Bluest Eye,’ ‘The Kite Runner’ by Khaled Hosseini, ‘The Stranger’ by Albert Camus, ‘Revolting Rhymes’ by Roald Dahl, and a skateboarding magazine called ‘Thrasher’.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/florida-bo...

replies(7): >>pessim+w3 >>wyager+M4 >>remote+i7 >>lxm+w8 >>kbutle+o9 >>hackin+Qa >>mjrpes+Yb
2. pessim+w3[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:04:58
>>consum+(OP)
Justifying censorship with other censorship is a spiral of doom.
replies(2): >>consum+54 >>dragon+Y8
◧◩
3. consum+54[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:09:24
>>pessim+w3
I'm sorry, maybe I don't understand your reply. Did you read my comment as some sort of justification of either the Dahl estate's rewriting of Dahl's work or the state sponsored censorship in happening in Florida?
replies(2): >>pessim+o8 >>112358+L8
4. wyager+M4[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:15:00
>>consum+(OP)
Last time I looked at claims about Florida "book bans", they were actually just hysterical overreactions to removing books from the mandatory public school curriculum - is this more of the same?

I don't really care that much about what's in school libraries, to be honest - almost no one actually gets books from there anymore. What's much more significant, at a societal level, is what publishers choose to (not) put out.

replies(2): >>smaude+67 >>Waterl+b7
◧◩
5. smaude+67[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:34:40
>>wyager+M4
> they were actually just hysterical overreactions to removing books from the mandatory public school curriculum

"Approved on March 25 by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, HB 1467 gives parents and members of the public increased access to the process of selecting and removing school library books and instructional materials."

So you would be absolutely incorrect. This was absolutely about banning books from schools, not just the curriculum - an unashamed "you will not say these things in school", grab for power.

> I don't really care that much about what's in school libraries, to be honest

Yeah and I don't super care for schools either, but unfortunately they are a mandatory way to brain wash young people unable to completely think for themselves...

◧◩
6. Waterl+b7[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:35:10
>>wyager+M4
The law makes it a felony for a teacher to make books available that are not approved by a specially trained librarian.

This isn’t about what’s on a curriculum, it’s about what a teacher is allowed to have on their book shelf.

You can read the bill here if you have any questions. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1467/BillText/er/...

7. remote+i7[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:35:46
>>consum+(OP)
Any type of censorship is stupid. We, the regular people, are getting attacked by both sides and I’m getting so sick of it.

Before censorship used to be the bedrock of conservatives but now more and more it’s both sides that think it’s okay. To a GenX liberal, I’m sickened by the current state of politics these days.

◧◩◪
8. pessim+o8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:43:01
>>consum+54
I read it as, "we're complaining about Democrats when we should really be complaining about Republicans." I apologize if that was unfair.

edit: even though you've made a careful distinction between "rewriting" and censorship here that a lot of people who support censorship make. I'm probably projecting this upon you, but it goes along with the diabolical "It's not censorship unless the government does it, and when the government does it, it's fighting hate and misinformation."

replies(1): >>consum+Na
9. lxm+w8[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:43:49
>>consum+(OP)
This just seems to relate to school libraries, but the books presumably would be available through public libraries or Amazon? School libraries by design have a pretty limited selection, generally confined to the topics covered by the curriculum.

Or am I wrong in understanding the nature of the ban?

replies(2): >>jrm4+Qb >>Wobert+Wg
◧◩◪
10. 112358+L8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:45:16
>>consum+54
It read to me as if you think there isn’t sufficient standing to criticize these edits as long as another problem exists. The “I would also like to bring to your attention…” makes the denouncement in the previous sentence seem sarcastic. Replied in good faith to what I hope was an earnest question.
replies(1): >>consum+xp
◧◩
11. dragon+Y8[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:47:04
>>pessim+w3
Revisions by the rights-owner are “censorship”, now?
replies(1): >>pessim+z9
12. kbutle+o9[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:50:16
>>consum+(OP)
...the vetting in her school district...

These are actually specific to the Duval school district, which was pulling books before the recent law, not to the "entire state's education system".

https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ - 176 books removed from classrooms in Duval County, Florida, in January 2022 for “review.”

Local governments across the spectrum have always exercised the right to make choices appropriate for their communities, sometimes to great derision of opposing parties - e.g., left-leaning districts banning Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird.

Removing them from the school library (but having them available in many other venues) seems like a much smaller problem than attempts to rewrite existing works to fit the current atmosphere.

◧◩◪
13. pessim+z9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 02:52:16
>>dragon+Y8
Yes, they are censorship by the rights owner of the author's work. Clearly and uncontroversially.

edit: also, a "rights owner" is what we call someone who has a government-granted monopoly on the right to publish a work. Granting or transferring exclusive publishing rights to entities that would be willing to censor a work would be a government end-run around prior restraint.

replies(1): >>dragon+ub
◧◩◪◨
14. consum+Na[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 03:05:43
>>pessim+o8
The burning of books is referenced in my username.

I think both things are bad.

One of the joys of being politically indie is that I can feel disgust at actions originating from across the political spectrum.

15. hackin+Qa[view] [source] 2023-02-19 03:06:04
>>consum+(OP)
>the Florida school book ban which applies not just to new editions of one author, but to an entire state's education system.

I see no problem with the government determining what information can and can't be made available to children at public school. This isn't the government making certain information verboten universally, it's ensuring that other people cannot indoctrinate your children with information you find objectionable. Children's minds have become the new front-line of the culture war, and this is an entirely reasonable reaction.

replies(1): >>oska+Pf
◧◩◪◨
16. dragon+ub[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 03:12:28
>>pessim+z9
> Yes, they are censorship by the rights owner of the author's work.

Is that true when the rights owner (as is often the case) is the author? If it is not (or if it is but it is not problematic) in that case, why would it be if the rights owner is the author's heir, or an entity to whom the author or their heir has voluntarily, whether for value or other reasons, transferred the rights?

> also, a “rights owner” is what we call someone who has a government-granted monopoly on the right to publish a work.

Yes, under our copyright system that is, with very rare exceptions, the author, their heirs, or people to who such rights have been transferred by one or the other (and, in the case of transfers by authors, there is even a one-time take-back privilege with a specific time window.)

replies(1): >>clayto+pc
◧◩
17. jrm4+Qb[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 03:17:54
>>lxm+w8
Completely wrong, it's a pretty naked power play by the governor.
18. mjrpes+Yb[view] [source] 2023-02-19 03:18:39
>>consum+(OP)
Strange how Camus and Morrison books are banned, but they are authors who are covered on Florida's now preferred Classic/Christian Learning Test: https://www.cltexam.com/tests/authors/

How are students supposed to study for the test if the authors are banned? :)

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2023/02/17/de...

◧◩◪◨⬒
19. clayto+pc[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 03:22:00
>>dragon+ub
Self-censorship is arguably the most insidious and pernicious of all forms of speech suppression.
◧◩
20. oska+Pf[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 03:52:32
>>hackin+Qa
I see it as a totalitarian measure, rather than leaving it to school librarians to make those choices, while listening to the expressed feedback and requests from the students and their parents at that school.
replies(1): >>hackin+bh
◧◩
21. Wobert+Wg[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 04:03:13
>>lxm+w8
This was not my experience at all. School libraries provided a wide variety of content, books spanning many genres, time periods, etc. I read a little bit of everything and am grateful to have been able to experience that, instead of being constrained to whatever some adults may have thought would have been "good for me".

It's true that I had access to public libraries with this same variety, so what happens when those are the next target? I couldn't afford to buy books on Amazon. Would I just have been forced to read e.g whatever religious or political media that's been approved for my consumption?

◧◩◪
22. hackin+bh[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 04:05:07
>>oska+Pf
That's fine until librarians or teachers consistently get it wrong. A school librarian's discretionary power isn't intrinsic, it is granted conditional on its proper use. I'm sure there are many topics that if a teacher or librarian presented to your children you would move to remove their discretionary power. The debate is merely on what topics cross that line.
replies(1): >>oska+yi
◧◩◪◨
23. oska+yi[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 04:17:49
>>hackin+bh
> I'm sure there are many topics that if a teacher or librarian presented to your children you would move to remove their discretionary power

I would first consult with them, and, if necessary, go to the school board if I thought they were being unnecessarily intransigent (or too ideological). In other words, I much prefer working from the bottom up, i.e. from the local community level, rather than having prescriptions imposed from the top down.

◧◩◪◨
24. consum+xp[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 05:25:16
>>112358+L8
That was not my intention at all.

I thought clearly stating that I thought TFA was a messed up situation made that clear.

I think both things are not good.

replies(1): >>112358+uc1
◧◩◪◨⬒
25. 112358+uc1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 14:26:10
>>consum+xp
I get it. I understand your meaning.
[go to top]