Parent in the Miami-Dade area has interesting ideas about what IS NOT censorship.

From the Bradenton Herald:

Fed up with the long, bureaucratic process surrounding the removal of two other controversial books about Cuba from school libraries last year, parent Dalila Rodriguez simply checked out the book Discovering Cultures, Cuba from the library at her son's school earlier this month. She said she does not plan to return it.

''If you take it out and don't return it, no kid can read it,'' Rodriguez, who is a member of the Concerned Cuban Parents Committee, said Wednesday. ``It's not censoring; it's protecting our children from lies.''

...

''We're going to take the books and lock them in a box,'' she said.

Wheeeeeee!  I think I'm going to swipe all of the V. C. Andrews books from the library today -- it isn't censorship, it's protecting my patrons from crappy-ass books.

As frustrating as you may find it, there's a process for a reason, lady.

Comments

[Chrissy]

If this groups is this upset about the inaccuracies, has it occurred to them to write their own books, hold community activities to tell their experiences or do ANYTHING about getting correct information out there?

This sounds like a really good opportunity to share information. Instead, they are locking it away.

[Caroline]

Wow. And my mom keeps telling me stealing isn't the answer.

[Andrew Karre]

I find this really interesting to contemplate alongside Scrotumgate. Real large-scale censorship, where books are made generally unavailable to most readers, doesn't really happen anymore. We don't have court cases over whether books can be sold, as we once did. Instead, we wage battles in the media over literally one or two copies of a book (or even of one or two promises not to buy the book, in the case of Scrotumgate), the overall effect of which is to sell more copies of the book.

[Leila]

Back in the 1920s (don't quote me on the decade here -- I didn't double-check), publishers were totally jazzed if their books were banned in Boston because it drove sales up. If a book challenge (or controversy -- when the James Frey thing hit, patrons flocked to the library for AMLP) gets lots of press (like Scrotumgate), then I would assume that the same thing would happen now.

I think Scrotumgate is different from most current book challenges because of the publicity -- usually, the story doesn't make it out of the local news (unless it's a Harry Potter book), if it even makes it that far. It's my understanding that the silent removal of books from library shelves is much more common than a public and loud one. Ick either way, really.

I can't believe I just used the word Scrotumgate.

*And because of the fact that it is librarians saying they aren't going to buy a critically acclaimed, Newbery Award winning book for their library on the basis of one word. Then again, I've heard through the grapevine that at least one of the librarians quoted in the NYT article was horribly misquoted/taken out of context, so the whole thing could possibly be a mountain/molehill situation. But, given the plethora of book complaints I run across, I doubt it.

Phew. Too much thinking too early in the morning.

[Lady S]

I am dying! That is too funny! Cause you know, it would never occur to the librarian to just buy another copy.

I wasn't born during Watergate, I was too young during Whitewatergate, but I love that I living through Scrotumgate!

And hey, I like me some early VC Andrews. Sometimes you just need something kind of crappy to read.

[biaxin]

oxycodone addiction http://www.rodiary.com/plaviraction/ plavix patent

[phentermine]

man health cheap tramadol http://tramadolonli.diaryland.com/ same day delivery tramadol