Feb 16, 2007

Fahrenheit 451: Banned Books: Take the Banned Book Challenge


Fahrenheit 451: Banned Books: Take the Banned Book Challenge

The only good thing to come out of the censorship and book-banning campaign by the anti-gay hate group, the so-called “LOVE” group, is people are reading some quality literature and classic American novels. The books being challenged by the group are hard to come by at the Howell Carnegie District Library and area bookstores.

I ran across an excellent blog on banned books and censorship operated by Pelham Public Library in Fonthill, Ontario, and they have heard of our plight here in Howell. As part of Freedom to Read Week that begins Feb. 26, the blog is urging people to “Take the Banned Book Challenge.”

They are asking people to set a goal to read as many banned or challenged books as you wish between Feb. 26 and June 30, 2007. Readers can visit the Pelham Public Library’s Fahrenheit 451: Banned Book Blog to set your goal and report on your progress with an online form.

With the online form they plan to generate a report, and they will likely do a weekly entry on who is registered using first names only to protect readers. Lot of libraries and school districts visit the blog regularly.

As people read, they can go back to the form and report their progress by giving the title and they can tell what they liked about the book or why they thought it was banned. A final report will be posted at the end of June.

Basically, it’s a global book club for banned and challenged books. The blog owner told me this is the first time they have tried this, so there may be some glitches.

If you don’t know what book to read, the blog lists all of the banned and challenged books.

8 comments:

Kathy said...

Thanks for the link. I forwarded it to my son who teaches high school English in Pennsylvania. He's been in a bit of a tussle with his department head over "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer." They banned the book because of the racial slang/derogatory language Twain uses. My son tried to argue that the language is appropriate for the context and cultural setting of that time period, but they saw it differently. He had to go along with their orders, but it took him by surprise since he taught it before in another district.

I checked out some of the banned book lists from that link and couldn't believe some of the titles I found. Jack London's "Call of the Wild" was a real shocker. I've always loved to read, and so have my children, and I'd wager between all of us we've read a majority of the titles on those lists - without ill effect I might add. I think we're all pretty decent, considerate and kind people!

Communications guru said...

Wow, Tom Sawyer banned. That’s just amazing. I read that book when I was in elementary school, and it was a gift from my grandmother.

I agree it’s amazing what people try to censor. Tell your son to keep up the good fight, and we are pulling for him. Also, tell him to stop in and let us know how it’s going.

Republican Michigander said...

Glad to see you don't like censorship Kevin. Now why are you trying to censor political speech with the so called "Fairness" Doctrine.

Communications guru said...

The fairness doctrine does not censor free speech it encourages it. You know that. It requires both sides of an issue be presented on the free public airwaves. It discourages things like Clear Channel dumping Liberal stations after the results of the last election, and it helps them consider profit over ideology. I also hope it stops this disturbing trend of a few corporations holding all of the media outlets.

By the way, how did you reach that ridiculous conclusion it censors political speech?

Also, what banned books do you plan on reading?

Republican Michigander said...

Free speech means speech (especially political) free from government intrusion and regulation - like the "fairness" doctrine regulating speech.

I'll go a step further than opposing the "fairness doctrine" and say abolish the FCC's content division. They should only make sure that frequencies do not interfere with one another. Thank God for the internet which makes nearly everyone a potential publisher.

As for the books, I don't have much time for reading stuff besides "Contracts", "Torts", and the like, but I'll probably add Slaughterhouse 5 and Black Boy to my future reading list (Fairtax, The Fountainhead, and Tom Clancy's next book) when I get a chance.

Communications guru said...

The Fairness Doctrine does not regulate speech. By your standards I, or anyone else, should be able to use any frequency on the electronic spectrum to say what I want. If I can afford it I should be able to buy a 60,000-watt transmitter and broadcast on AM 760. That’s free speech.

But the government gives the license to a radio station allowing exclusive use of that frequency, and in exchange for that limited public resource they accept certain public interest obligations, such as the Fairness Doctrine. Why do radio and TV stations get to use the free public airwaves when newspapers have to pay for ink and newsprint? That’s an unfair advantage. After the obscene amounts of money TV stations in Michigan made on political commercials in the last election cycle it’s clear we need the fairness doctrine.

According to media watch group FAIR, the Fairness Doctrine simply prohibited stations from broadcasting from a single perspective, day after day, without presenting opposing views. WJR is a perfect example. How they can get away with broadcasting nothing but rightwing extremists day after day in one of the most liberal cities in America from a traditionally blue state is beyond me.

Red Or Dead said...

Guru, your communist view as to what American citizens should be forced to listen to/ view is not with American mainstream values. As the saying goes build a better mousetrap and people will buy it. Liberal talk shows do not attract listener’s period. So why would WJR waste it’s resources on a money loosing venture. As shown below Air America is both morally and now monetarily bankrupt. Franken jumped his own ship to run for what will prove to be a failed attempt at a Senate seat. Remember this is the same person that predicted that Carl Rove would be hanged for treason in the Plame debacle.


A U.S. bankruptcy judge Friday approved the sale of Air America, the politically liberal talk-radio network launched by comedian Al Franken, to an investment group led by New York real estate mogul Stephen L. Green for $4.28 million.

Air America currently produces 19 hours of original programming a day and is heard on 81 radio affiliates covering 54 percent of the United States and reaching 1.9 million listeners a week.

Limbaugh's audience is 1.5 times greater than the combined audience of all three liberal talkers in the top 10 market grouping with Adults 25-54 - and more than 1.5 times greater in the top 25 market grouping.
The latest Arbitron numbers contradict widespread media predictions that liberal radio hosts would eventually begin to eat into Limbaugh's 20 million listener audience base, who hear him on over 600 stations.
How can you venture out of your house every day with the big L on your forehead?

Communications guru said...

Another misinformed, late-night name-calling rant by Mr. Communist. I sure have missed those. Nobody is or will be forced to listen to anything. But, again for the 100th time, in exchange for radio and TV stations to get exclusive use of the free public airwaves they have to provide just a tad of balance.

You’re going to tell me your values are the “American mainstream values?” I don’t believe that for one second. Our values are compassion, fairness, justice, we don’t torture people, lie us into war, commit treason by outing CIA agents or break the law.

What are you basing that ridiculous statement on that “Liberal talk shows do not attract listeners?” That’s simply not true. Liberal talk radio is in its infancy for the most part, but some of the few liberal talk show hosts have been around for a while are doing quite well. Take Ed Schultz, for instance. Sean Haity had the nerve to make the same ridiculous claim that you try to make that the liberal talk format was dead, but in the latest Arbitron ratings Schultz beat Hatey in several large markets, including Portland, Seattle, Denver, San Francisco, Miami and Albuquerque. He even beat Limprag in a few markets, like the 16th ranked market of Minneapolis/St. Paul.

The numbers will be even better in the coming year because Arbitron is going to start taking into account listeners to online streams where most of the liberal listeners are, like me. I have trouble getting the weak WLBY signal, but my online stream is clear as a bell. Mega giants who are flipping liberal formats because they are successful can’t stop online streams. If a wider audience can just get a taste of some of the great liberal hosts, like Stephanie Miller, that are not only entertaining and funny but enlightening, they will quickly build up an audience. But corporations like clear channel, especially after they saw the damage liberal talk shows hosts did during the past election and helped Democrats take both the House and Senate, are flipping liberal formats that are doing well in favor of formats that don’t do as well in the ratings, like high school volleyball.

So why would WJR “waste its resources on a money loosing venture?” First it’s a false statement. Secondly, how could they possibly lose money by giving people what they want in one of the most liberal cities in the country and in a blue state? Thirdly, they have an obligation to do in exchange for the exclusive use of the free public airwaves.

Someone from the right with your track record calling someone else morally bankrupt is a joke. Just two weeks ago the head of the Michigan Federation of Young Republicans was charged with rape. Liberals morally bankrupt, what a joke.

Your crack about Karl Rove is a complete fabrication. Also known as a lie. What Sen. Franken said is Rove would be executed because the punishment for treason is execution. Hell, it was Poppy Bush as head of the CIA that said that. Nowhere did Sen. Franken say anything about hanging. He also said he does not support the death penalty. I’ll even give you a link to a rightwing web site to show you even your side knows your full of crap. http://newsbusters.org/node/2424.

Why is it wrong to move on to bigger better things? Sen. Franken will do much more in Washington, D.C.

“How can you venture out of your house every day with the big L on your forehead?” You’ll have to explain that insult to me.

By the way, what banned books do you plan on reading? After all, that’s what this post is about.