zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. sangno+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-05-29 05:49:06
Curation =/= banning. Telling curators (librarians) "You can't have any book on this list even if you want them, or you'll go to jail" is banning books.
replies(1): >>tomp+g2
2. tomp+g2[view] [source] 2023-05-29 06:14:28
>>sangno+(OP)
What’s the practical difference though?

Someone still decides the book is not gonna be there, mostly for ideological reasons.

I guess if you agree with those reasons, it’s “curation”, if you don’t, it’s “banning”.

replies(2): >>lelant+j5 >>sangno+Zj
◧◩
3. lelant+j5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-29 06:48:10
>>tomp+g2
> What’s the practical difference though?

The practical difference is that, in one case, the taxpayers collectively decide what's appropriate for their children and what is not. In the other case, a single (or a few) individuals decide what is appropriate for all the taxpayers children.

I don't understand why some people think it's better to ignore the wishes of the voters.

◧◩
4. sangno+Zj[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-05-29 09:42:24
>>tomp+g2
> I guess if you agree with those reasons, it’s “curation”, if you don’t, it’s “banning”.

Curation is part of the job for librarians, and it's a specialized skill. I don't have to agree with an ideology to accept what they do is curation - a Librarian in a Taliban library still curates their collection regardless of my endorsement of Sharia. If they are instructed by Kabul to remove specific texts, then it's a ban.

Someone decides what music gets played on radio and what the TV lineup looks like and calling that selection "banning" is reaching IMO . When the legislature is coming up with a blacklist, then it's blatantly "banning" to me

[go to top]