4 ms·

The article is lacking in substance because it does not actually tell you what material in the math books was so egregious that the book deserved to be banned o

by Bhilai 4y ago

The article is lacking in substance because it does not actually tell you what material in the math books was so egregious that the book deserved to be banned or may be state of Florida did not publish this information. Banning books seems to be the new battle ground for politicians, sigh.

croes 4y ago
>The names of the rejected books were not included. So what else could they do? Don't write about it?
dariusj18 4y ago
> Banning books seems to be the new battle ground for politicians This is not a new battle ground
beezle 4y ago
IIRC they said that the state of Florida did not actually provide a list of the rejected titles so no way to verify the state claims. Knowing past history of these types of things in other states I doubt there is much to hang a hat on.
JaimeThompson 4y ago
It's lacking in substance because those in Florida making the decisions aren't releasing their reasoning or even a list of the books they aren't accepting. Some Florida politicians have asked for the info and the media has filed FOIA or the Florida equivalent for the details.
namelessoracle 4y ago
"Banning" = "Not buying" now? The books can still be bought and sold, they just wont be with public dollars. Is Harry Potter "banned" now by most of Twitter too?
car_analogy 4y ago
> state of Florida did not publish this information. Correct. DeSantis is using the journalistic practice of branding something as some flavor of offensive, without citing any examples. This is the first time I see journalists complain about it and demand specifics.
slowhand09 4y ago
"Banning books seems to be the new battle ground for politicians, sigh." Writing textbooks for core subject areas, with material stirring controversy seems to be the new battleground for educators. Ever notice how someone can create a hostile environment without doing anything hostile? Or someone can push right to edge, then back off, claiming "not my intent". There is an analogous concept in physical therapy. You move a body part as far as you can, to test range of motion and limits. Then try it again, except the therapist assists you to move it farther, even supporting it while you rest a moment. Then you repeat the test, almost always going significantly farther. You move the bar, the limit, the acceptable range of motion, or speech, or teaching social justice under the guise of core math.

by Bhilai 4y ago

croes 4y ago

>The names of the rejected books were not included. So what else could they do? Don't write about it?

dariusj18 4y ago

> Banning books seems to be the new battle ground for politicians This is not a new battle ground

beezle 4y ago

IIRC they said that the state of Florida did not actually provide a list of the rejected titles so no way to verify the state claims. Knowing past history of these types of things in other states I doubt there is much to hang a hat on.

JaimeThompson 4y ago

It's lacking in substance because those in Florida making the decisions aren't releasing their reasoning or even a list of the books they aren't accepting. Some Florida politicians have asked for the info and the media has filed FOIA or the Florida equivalent for the details.

namelessoracle 4y ago

"Banning" = "Not buying" now? The books can still be bought and sold, they just wont be with public dollars. Is Harry Potter "banned" now by most of Twitter too?

car_analogy 4y ago

> state of Florida did not publish this information. Correct. DeSantis is using the journalistic practice of branding something as some flavor of offensive, without citing any examples. This is the first time I see journalists complain about it and demand specifics.

slowhand09 4y ago

"Banning books seems to be the new battle ground for politicians, sigh." Writing textbooks for core subject areas, with material stirring controversy seems to be the new battleground for educators. Ever notice how someone can create a hostile environment without doing anything hostile? Or someone can push right to edge, then back off, claiming "not my intent". There is an analogous concept in physical therapy. You move a body part as far as you can, to test range of motion and limits. Then try it again, except the therapist assists you to move it farther, even supporting it while you rest a moment. Then you repeat the test, almost always going significantly farther. You move the bar, the limit, the acceptable range of motion, or speech, or teaching social justice under the guise of core math.