Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Challenging ...

... the American Library Association: Celebrate "Banned" Books Week! (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)

... they have to alter and restrict the definition of censorship deliberately to exclude cases of the government restraining a book's publication. That's because if they go by this common definition of censorship, they have absolutely no cases to discuss. Since there is no actual book censorship in the United States, there's not much need for a group crying out against it.

1 comment:

  1. I am always suspicious of the American Library Association's outrage with respect to banned books. The secular liberal tendencies of the ALA have been commented upon in the past by a number of observers, so I need not cover the same ground again in this context. But, to make my point more directly, I cannot get too interested in ALA's concerns, especially when you examine their biases with respect to which books are worth supporting (usually those opposed by the Christian right) and which books are not supported (usually those books that would be embraced by the Christian right). That kind of polarization makes their crusade questionable.