4 ms·

It is called "curation". Libraries are finite, pretending it is some awful act that they remove books is just stupid US culture war nonsense. Libraries regular

It is called "curation". Libraries are finite, pretending it is some awful act that they remove books is just stupid US culture war nonsense. Libraries regularly remove books and buy new ones. It isn't some great evil that they don't include a certain book. There are dozens of stories like this "X book is BANNED" and then it is literally some library not buying it.

kstrauser 3y ago
A library choosing to remove books that don’t meet its criteria is curation. A library having to remove books because someone else told it to is banning.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  >A library having to remove books because someone else told it to is banning. No. A "Ban" means the government legally prohibits circulation. Stop these ridicolous word games.
  - clucas 3y ago
    Would you consider Facebook preventing a user from posting to be "banning" or "censorship"? Even though they can still post on, say, Twitter?
    - constantcrying 3y ago
      Nonsense analogy. The right one is not getting invited to a party and crying about getting banned.
      - clucas 3y ago
        The article indicates that they are actually removing books that are already in libraries. So it's more like I just got kicked out of the party and you're playing ridiculous word games saying I wasn't "banned" because there's a party down the street I can go to. Also, you didn't answer the question: would Facebook removing my ability to post be considered "banning"?
        constantcrying 3y ago
        >The article indicates that they are actually removing books that are already in libraries. Every library removes books. It is the most normal thing, my library has regular book sales where they let books go. If you want to call distributing books for low prices "banning them" I guess I can not help you.
        clucas 3y ago
        Do you see a difference between a library choosing to sell old books to make room for new ones, and being forced to remove books for political reasons? If not, then I guess I cannot help you. Good luck out there buddy.
  - toss1 3y ago
    You are the only one here trying to re-define ban, i.e., playing word games. We are talking about public or school libraries, which are government institutions. When they remove books, based on narrow religious criteria, that is exactly the government prohibiting circulation (your own definition) via those govt-controlled channels of schools and libraries.
    - constantcrying 3y ago
      >that is exactly the government prohibiting circulation Literally not true.
      - dabraham1248 3y ago
        > Literally not true. Some other comment of yours: > Obviously not true. I think the word you're looking for is "inconceivable". And I do not think it means what you think it means.
- bmelton 3y ago
  I generally agree with the argument, but haven't we just swapped the institutional preference? A library curating its inventory is effectively a ban to everyone downstream of that curation who no longer has the book available. The government, by imposing its own list of criteria, is engaging in a form of curation (at least to themselves) In neither case are the books unavailable for purchase to those who want them, and are freely available on the public market.
  - kstrauser 3y ago
    I don't think that's true. In any case, intent has a lot to do with it. If a library wants to update what they can store on their finite shelves, cool. If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship.
    - constantcrying 3y ago
      >If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship. Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them?
      - kstrauser 3y ago
        > Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them? You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" You do see why that's not convincing, don't you? [0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/
        constantcrying 3y ago
        >You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" I don't. I just want you to admit that you also believe in ideological control of libraries. >[0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ I remember when I was twelve or so reading such a list, which included downloads of these books. I was actually quite interested, which twelve year old wouldn't be interested in reading banned books? As it turned out it was obvious fetish material and I felt quite disgusted reading it. Something of a formative experience I guess.
jandrese 3y ago
Seems pretty slippery to "curate" a collection to never include any mention of homosexuality except as a mortal sin. Or to curate away historical texts that happen to mention that chattel slavery was real and also bad.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  Curiously they also didn't include any books glorifying national socialism. Surely those books need to be in their too. Obviously the curation is ideological. All curation has to have a framework of ideas. The alternative is randomly buying book.
TheCoelacanth 3y ago
If it's done by politicians based on their views of what people should read instead of by librarians based on what they think people want to read, then it's a ban.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  Obviously not true.

kstrauser 3y ago

A library choosing to remove books that don’t meet its criteria is curation. A library having to remove books because someone else told it to is banning.

constantcrying 3y ago
>A library having to remove books because someone else told it to is banning. No. A "Ban" means the government legally prohibits circulation. Stop these ridicolous word games.
- clucas 3y ago
  Would you consider Facebook preventing a user from posting to be "banning" or "censorship"? Even though they can still post on, say, Twitter?
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    Nonsense analogy. The right one is not getting invited to a party and crying about getting banned.
    - clucas 3y ago
      The article indicates that they are actually removing books that are already in libraries. So it's more like I just got kicked out of the party and you're playing ridiculous word games saying I wasn't "banned" because there's a party down the street I can go to. Also, you didn't answer the question: would Facebook removing my ability to post be considered "banning"?
      - constantcrying 3y ago
        >The article indicates that they are actually removing books that are already in libraries. Every library removes books. It is the most normal thing, my library has regular book sales where they let books go. If you want to call distributing books for low prices "banning them" I guess I can not help you.
        clucas 3y ago
        Do you see a difference between a library choosing to sell old books to make room for new ones, and being forced to remove books for political reasons? If not, then I guess I cannot help you. Good luck out there buddy.
- toss1 3y ago
  You are the only one here trying to re-define ban, i.e., playing word games. We are talking about public or school libraries, which are government institutions. When they remove books, based on narrow religious criteria, that is exactly the government prohibiting circulation (your own definition) via those govt-controlled channels of schools and libraries.
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    >that is exactly the government prohibiting circulation Literally not true.
    - dabraham1248 3y ago
      > Literally not true. Some other comment of yours: > Obviously not true. I think the word you're looking for is "inconceivable". And I do not think it means what you think it means.
bmelton 3y ago
I generally agree with the argument, but haven't we just swapped the institutional preference? A library curating its inventory is effectively a ban to everyone downstream of that curation who no longer has the book available. The government, by imposing its own list of criteria, is engaging in a form of curation (at least to themselves) In neither case are the books unavailable for purchase to those who want them, and are freely available on the public market.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  I don't think that's true. In any case, intent has a lot to do with it. If a library wants to update what they can store on their finite shelves, cool. If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship.
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    >If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship. Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them?
    - kstrauser 3y ago
      > Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them? You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" You do see why that's not convincing, don't you? [0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/
      - constantcrying 3y ago
        >You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" I don't. I just want you to admit that you also believe in ideological control of libraries. >[0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ I remember when I was twelve or so reading such a list, which included downloads of these books. I was actually quite interested, which twelve year old wouldn't be interested in reading banned books? As it turned out it was obvious fetish material and I felt quite disgusted reading it. Something of a formative experience I guess.

jandrese 3y ago

Seems pretty slippery to "curate" a collection to never include any mention of homosexuality except as a mortal sin. Or to curate away historical texts that happen to mention that chattel slavery was real and also bad.

constantcrying 3y ago
Curiously they also didn't include any books glorifying national socialism. Surely those books need to be in their too. Obviously the curation is ideological. All curation has to have a framework of ideas. The alternative is randomly buying book.

TheCoelacanth 3y ago

If it's done by politicians based on their views of what people should read instead of by librarians based on what they think people want to read, then it's a ban.

constantcrying 3y ago
Obviously not true.