Followers

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Mind Policing in America

In spite of the Constitutionally protected freedom of speech, mind policing in America has been going on for a long time. This week, we celebrate Banned Books week. Each year libraries remind us that even today there are those who are vigilant in exercising their discretionary view of what you and I should be able to read.

Who are these mind police? Often they are simply mothers and other busybodies who for the most part are afraid of what might happen if one of their children, or God forbid, you or I happen to read something they disapprove of. Some of the books they target for reasons that seem quite silly on the surface. Still, their assault on this protected liberty (freedom of expression) is not silly at all. Here is a statical overview between 2000 - 2005.


In another stroke of irony, it's the 50th anniversary of the legal action surrounding poet Allen Ginsberg's "Howl." The publisher of Ginsberg's poet was put on trial contending the work contained obscene language, but a San Francisco Municipal Court judge ruled that Allen Ginsberg's Beat-era poem was not obscene. Still, half a century later, a New York listener-supported radio station WBAI decided not to air the poem because program director Bernard White fears that the FCC will fine the station $325,000 for every one of Ginsberg's dirty-word bombs. This concern was based upon recent actions by the FCC in numerous other imposition of fines to broadcast outlets. Instead, WBAI will include a reading of the poem in a special online-only program called "Howl Against Censorship." It will be posted on www.pacifica.org, the Internet home of the Berkeley-based Pacifica Foundation, because online sites do not fall under the FCC's purview.


Half a century later and the battle over such censorship continues in America. In fact, in many ways the issue is even greater today and the Government has sought library records of individuals under the Patriots Act to see what we are reading, so they can make subjective decisions if we might be terrorists or who knows whatever else they may fear we are?

2 comments:

Lucindyl said...

"mothers and other busybodies" What is THIS, Mr. Wells?!

In all seriousness, I do understand what you're saying. As a confirmed mother and busybody, I've found that the best way to "police" what my children are reading is to read it, too, and then have conversations with them. In short, to teach them to think. Novel approach, that.

I noted that Harry Potter is at the top of the list of Most Challenged Books--another blog entry I've been intending to write since seeing the 5th movie and reading the 7th book this summer in simultaneous entertainment and analytical modes.

As for the government looking through library circulation records...tempts one to develop unorthodox interests for the sake of their amusement, doesn't it? :::grim smile:::

Michael A. Wells said...

Okay, let's put it this way... 1824 parents initiated challenges out of 3,019 total between 2000 & 2005 according to the Office of Intellectual Freedom. While it is true I don't know how many of those were lodged by mothers, from our own school district and reports I have read over the past few years in news clips, they have all been women. It may be that I am missing the reports of men, but while I cannot prove it, I suspect at least the vast majorty are mothers. However, I am willing to modify my statement to indicate that parents are the biggest source of such complaints.

What is interesting in some of the local incidents over the past two years in our own school district; what happens is one mother gets upset and calls another and another and the next thing you know they go to the school board and then the local paper and ultimately it becomes obvious that many of them that are up in arms have not even read the book in question. That was the situation with the last go around here against The Giver.

I realize that not all parents are proactive enough with their children to have dialogue with them about things that may arise in some reading material. Still, in the instances where parental interaction is lacking, I firmly believe that exposure to books and information is preferable to restriction. What is worse then bad information is no information at all.