Limited access
Separating fact from fiction about ‘book bans.’
According to the 102-year-old organization PEN America, long considered the defender of free expression — particularly regarding literature and its proliferation — we are in a “book ban crisis.” Thousands of books that discuss race, racism, and LGBTQ+ issues are being swept off school library shelves, removing “compassionate, reflective, educational, and entertaining” stories “on the basis of fear, intimidation, or bigotry.”
Or so the narrative goes.
There are many problems to claiming we are in a “book ban crisis” of scandalous proportions, starting with how the word “banned” is being defined. Under the commonly accepted definition, the word “banned” means something is unavailable. Given that there is limited shelf space in a library, every book ever published that is not available on the shelves has been banned. This, of course, is not the meaning here.
Here is PEN America’s definition of a “ban”:
PEN America defines a school book ban as any action taken against a book based on its content and as a result of parent or community challenges, administrative decisions, or in response to direct or threatened action by lawmakers or other government officials, that leads to a previously accessible book being either completely removed from availability to students, or where access to a book is restricted or diminished.
…
School book bans take varied forms, and can include prohibitions on books in libraries or classrooms, as well as a range of other restrictions, some of which may be temporary. [Emphasis added]
Reclassifying a school library book for a more age-appropriate section? Banned, according to PEN America.
Temporarily removing a book from a school’s library shelves for review and then returning it? Banned.
Removing a book from assigned curriculum but it is still available in a school library? Banned.
Under this definition, it is no wonder PEN America records thousands of school library book “bans.” Such classification also makes it hard (if not impossible) to discern whether the “banned” books were ever available in the school library in the first place.
Researchers Jay Greene, Max Eden, and Madison Marino with the Educational Freedom Institute compared PEN America’s 2021-2022 banned books index against online school library card catalogs and found that nearly three quarters (74 percent) of the books that the organization labeled as “banned” were still listed as available in the districts where they were purportedly banned.
Even if all the instances of book “bans” that PEN America counted had resulted in complete removal, that would mean just under one percent of American school districts have banned books. And PEN America’s count is heavily skewed by three outlier districts in Pennsylvania, Texas, and Tennessee, point out Greene, Eden, and Marino. “Thus, 47 percent of PEN’s national figure comes from three school districts serving a total of approximately 75,000 students (.15 percent of America’s 50 million).”
The second problem with the book ban narrative is the idea that books are overwhelmingly being targeted for focusing on themes of race, racism, and LGBTQ+ identities. It has been well documented that the majority of pushback is a reaction to the accessibility of material parents deem pornographic and sexually explicit. In fact, all 10 of the most actually removed books (books that PEN America listed as “banned” that also didn’t appear in library catalogs) “contain sexually explicit, if not outright pornographic, passages that few reasonable people would insist belong in a school library,” write Greene, Eden, and Marino. And it’s not just homosexual relations. Seven of the 10 books most frequently removed feature explicit heterosexual content.
“This is a question of adult judgment,” Eden stated before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce’s sub-committee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education. “Hustler has closeup genital photos; most believe this is not appropriate for school libraries. Romeo and Juliet has lyrical allusions to sex; most believe this is fine for school libraries. A line must be drawn somewhere between those two points.”
Should children be provided material that shows oral sex being performed on a wearable sex toy? What about material that describes 10-year-olds performing sodomy on each other?
America has always tried to protect children from explicit material. Consider, for example, warnings on music, television, and video games, and limited access to movies in theaters.
There is a reason why television stations have blurred the content of these books when shown at press conferences, and school boards have cut off microphones as parents read excerpts during public comment periods because “children are present.”
Nonetheless, PEN America states the “porn in schools” argument is nothing but “hyperbolic rhetoric” to “justify banning books about sexual violence and LGBTQ+ topics.”
In Minnesota, Gov. Tim Walz has repeatedly used the “banned” books canard, often as a tongue-in-cheek reference to Florida, a “red” state that attracted recent media attention for its K-12 legislation and is often used as a contrast to politically “blue” Minnesota. Gov. Walz took a direct jab at the Sunshine State during March 2023 when he staged a Little Free Library outside his office at the State Capitol, filling it with books that he claimed are banned in Florida.
“Let’s be very clear,” Gov. Walz said. “These books are banned in the state of Florida. That’s where freedom goes to die.” The books he named — including Lord of the Flies, Of Mice and Men, and The Handmaid’s Tale — can, actually, be found in Florida school libraries. In fact, Florida’s English Language Arts standards include Lord of the Flies and Of Mice and Men in its sample list of texts for educators to use. Last summer, in a passive-aggressive dig perhaps also aimed at Florida, Gov. Walz tweeted: “They’re banning books from their schools. We’re banishing hunger from ours.” No one in the Minnesota press has challenged him on his banned books claims.
Because of all this (supposed) book banning, Minnesota leaders felt compelled to make a political statement during the 2024 legislative session and pass a book banning prohibition.
“A public library [including public school libraries] must not ban, remove, or otherwise restrict access to a book or other material based solely on its viewpoint or the messages, ideas, or opinions it conveys,” according to the new law. The public library can decline to purchase, lend, or shelve or to remove or restrict access to books or other materials for practical reasons (shelf space limitations, damage, etc.) or “legitimate pedagogical concerns, including but not limited to the appropriateness of potentially sensitive topics for the library’s intended audience…”
How will the state distinguish between “viewpoint” and “potentially sensitive”? As my colleague Bill Walsh has aptly pointed out: “If a pornographic book is found in the middle school library, a librarian can certainly remove it based on the ‘potentially sensitive topic’ criteria, exposing this whole effort as an exercise in politics, not policy. This is not serious lawmaking.”
Additionally, the Minnesota Department of Education will now have to employ a “state school librarian” responsible for supporting public schools “on issues of intellectual freedom, media and digital literacy, and growing lifelong readers” to the tune of up to $130,000 a year.
A third factor often ignored in the book ban debate is that school library bookshelves are prime real estate. There is only so much space for so many books.
What books aren’t on the shelf that could be?
PEN America lambasts objections to sexually explicit content as “an unprecedented effort to extend ideological control over public institutions.” Yet, the argument could be made that public school libraries already reflect ideological control by offering more books in line with progressive orthodoxy.
For example, surveying the available online library catalogs of the Anoka-Hennepin school district — the largest school district in Minnesota — reveals some interesting finds on viewpoint balance. (This was not a scientific, controlled study, but a compelling comparison nonetheless.)
As of May 2024, the district houses numerous books by Ibram X. Kendi, including 56 copies of Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You, 11 copies of Stamped (for kids): Racism, Antiracism, and You, and five copies of How to be an Antiracist. Kendi argues that the “only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.” Not a single copy of a book that challenges Kendi’s “antiracist” ideas, Woke Racism by John McWhorter, is offered. White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo has several available copies, but no copies listed of White Guilt by Shelby Steele.
A search for books in support of transgenderism generates dozens of available books but not any that are critical of trans theory or concerned about the sudden surge in transgender identification among teenagers, such as Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier or Trans by Helen Joyce. The 1619 Project by Nikole Hannah-Jones is available, but 1620: A Critical Response to the 1619 Project by Peter Wood is not. The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx is available, but Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman is not. Or any books by Friedman, for that matter. No Friedrich Hayek. It was heartening to see that Thomas Sowell’s Marxism: Philosophy and Economics is available.
Do school libraries have endless funds to purchase every book? Of course not. School library budgets only stretch so far, and library shelves have limited capacity. But while we are talking about books coming off the shelf, there is something to be said about the books that never make it to the shelf to begin with. The books already in the library build one narrative, perhaps reflective of the community’s values, yet the books that are not there tell an equally compelling story.
Students should be able to access contrasting viewpoints, writes James Fishback for The Free Press. Just because books make ideological arguments (including deeply flawed ones), why is removing them seemingly the only option? Fishback asks. “Leave it on the shelves so long as it’s accompanied by books that offer a contrasting viewpoint. … Should libraries carry books that peddle progressive ideas? Absolutely, but only if they carry books that advocate for conservative ones too, so our young minds can benefit from the full spectrum of opinions.”
I loved my school librarian for this very reason. She represented the de facto gatekeeper of ideas, responsible for the daunting task of selecting and promoting books that represent a wide range of views and perspectives. And responsible for deciding not to purchase a title for a variety of reasons. Librarians must make difficult choices, and there are many amazing librarians who want to positively support a child’s development and respect the parents’ role as primary educator.
At the local level, school leadership should foster a collaborative approach between parents and educators for making instructional content and book decisions and have a process for adjudicating disputes about the educational merit or age-appropriateness of that content.
Under Minn. Stat. § 120B.20, “Parental Curriculum Review,” a school district must have a procedure in place for a parent to review the content of the instructional materials to be provided to their child and, if the parent objects to the content, to “make reasonable arrangements with school personnel for alternative instruction.” If the alternative instruction offered by the school board does not meet the concerns of the parent, the parent can provide alternative instruction.
More specific to media materials (as library books aren’t always assigned or used as instructional materials) is Minn. Stat. § 124D.991, which requires school libraries to have a procedure in place for challenged library materials. The process for filing informal and formal library media material reconsideration requests is often under a district’s library media materials selection policy.
To help with improving instruction and selecting curricula, a school board is required to establish a district advisory committee (Minn. Stat. § 120B.11). Whenever possible, parents and other community residents must comprise at least two-thirds of advisory committee members.
According to the American Library Association, most book challenges fail to remove books from the classroom or library shelves completely. If it is removed, it is likely still available in the local public library and certainly available for purchase. “Books aren’t being banned,” continued Eden in his testimony before the House Committee on Education. “But many parents prefer that school libraries not carry pornographic materials, and some school boards agree that this is reasonable.”
For many kids, the school library is their first foray into independently cultivating their ideas and knowledge. If they are only exposed to one viewpoint, or ideas that lack thought diversity, we, as shepherds and conservators of their education and learning, have failed — just as we would by allowing them to be exposed to inappropriate and explicit material. We can start by being honest about what “banning” entails — the books on the shelf, or those that never make it.