Musing on the News - Book Bans

 

              Time published an article on 4/20 titled “New Report Finds That Book Bans Have Reached Their Highest Levels Yet.” As an avid reader I am immediately bothered by this, but I think it is worth explaining why.

              First, over half the country is functionally illiterate, and even more don’t like to read, so who are we banning books for, anyway? It’s not like online ads that subliminally change your thinking. If you want to read a book, you have to physically get it, let someone else know what you’re reading (checking it out of a library or buying it in a store), and spend hours reading the material, depending on how fast you read. Reading is also self-selecting, as you can figure out by the book cover and back if you want to spend the time to decipher its contents. Reading social media and news is anonymous (except for the data points being collected on your online behavior), short, and based on what will keep you online, not what will enrich your life. Oh yeah, and it’s not vetted by anybody.

              One reason I know this idea of banning books is bad is historical. No movement that restricted access to books ever signaled anything positive. Another reason I know it is bad is because it doesn’t impact most people, so any good they are intending to do is lost on most Americans. I know this because I have worked for several schools in the Bay Area, including those that can be considered “elite,” and do you know what I learned? Most high school students don’t read the books, and this has been true for over a decade. So who are we protecting? The books are too advanced for young kids, and the older ones don’t read anyway. If they did, their targeted ads will give them something they will want to read. Oh wait, the targeted ads don’t advertise books; they advertise games, make-up, vaping, and clothing. So why are we banning books?

              Have any of these people even read any of these books, or are they just afraid of the content? We fear what we don’t understand, so it may be worth reading those book after all.

I am sure that anyone who is advocating banning books has not read Fahrenheit 451. If they did, they completely missed the point. The only thing Bradbury got wrong was the nuclear end: it’s psychological manipulation on our digital platforms that will be our demise. To read a book is to commit to learning what someone else has taken hours, months, and sometimes years to present to the public. They have been read, edited, and vetted by other people. The ads and social media posts that people choose to look at have not been. This is more chaotic, less regulated, and more dangerous than a book could ever be. So I ask again: why are we banning books?