Mediaboss Marketing

Whether it is the Records Department spitting out fiction in Oceania, the Afsana Department in Yoknapotawaha creating stories in less than three minutes, or Guy Montag burning piles of books every single night, dystopia had had a connection with words, books, and literature.

Why does Ingsoc keep shrinking the Newspeak dictionary? Why does Alex rip the copy of A Clockwork Orange apart without even caring to give its contents a malenky glance? Why does the mere possession of a book become the cause of a death sentence in Bradburys world?It wont be wrong to say that the political and social atmosphere had a deep impact on the thoughts of many creative geniuses, resulting in the enrichment of the twentieth-century dystopian literature.

Fascist regimes and two great wars, followed by the cold-war period and the power politics in every region, left a significant mark on fiction. However, the worlds most of the writers created were even more dangerous than the one they were living in. Ironically, a majority of the books criticizing the status quo themselves got banned.

Authorities always found one way or the other, from the use of offensive language to lack of patriotism and from blasphemy to obscenity, to restrict the distribution of books. The causes could always be twisted to meet the needs of those in power. Whatever the reason for the bans, one thing is for sure that even the mighty emperors with invincible armies were afraid of mere words.

Read More: 75% of Pakistanis dont read books: Gallup survey

The (unhealthy) relationship between censorship and literature goes way back in time. When Hitler burned over 25,000 books for being unGerman, he was, by no means, the first to wage war on words.

Under the Qin dynasty (3rd Century BC), hundreds of Confucian scholars were buried alive, and numerous historical records were destroyed, so as to wipe the slate of history clean only the wipes were soaked in the blood of ideas. Looking back at such instances, one is bound to think that Darwin, Voltaire, Hugo, and Twain were among the lucky ones: they got to live and their books survived.

The strategy to attain and exercise power by silencing disagreeable voices was not just restricted to fascist regimes. The practice has been used, and abused, by democracies, monarchies, and autocracies alike.

The US-South acted quickly to ban Uncle Toms Cabin; Zamyatins We was published in its original language (Russian) half a century after the authors death; Manto was persecuted both under the British rule and in the independent state of Pakistan; and Orwells Animal Farm got banned in the UAE in the twenty-first century.

This book-banning ritual has little to do with the form of the government as compared to the stakes and narratives of those in power.

Read More: Islam is not threatened by TikTok and books, Fawad Chaudhry

When a government bans a book, it is not just banning words, it is banning an idea an idea that can engender change, massive change. More importantly, it is a collection of such ideas which then forces the people to think and to ask questions. The very fear of the truth being ugly or not favorable for the ones calling the shots, leads to censorship.

In the words of Zahid Hussain (writing for Dawn), these bans are a manifestation of a culture that is afraid to face the truth.

The answer is evident from the current book-banning spree in Pakistan, where fiction, nonfiction, and even textbooks have borne the brunt alike. When Maktaba-e-Danyal was raided and the Urdu translations of A Case of Exploding Mangoes were confiscated by some Intelligence Personnel, that was just the beginning. Next came the ban on Hazletons two bestsellers for allegedly containing blasphemous content, followed by dozens of textbooks banned for a variety of reasons.

And quite recently, a collection of columns by Sohail Warraich vanished from the shelves because the authorities were offended by the cover the cover that was a mere cartoon.

Read More: No more Nazi propaganda books on Amazon

In the current state of affairs with muffled voices and chained ideas, how can there be any discord in thoughts? The very same discord that, according to Harari, compels us to think, re-evaluate, and criticize. The absence of this freedom, the freedom to be able to disagree, leads to consistency, and consistency is the playground of dull minds. It is this rigged game with no concept of a level playing field that the people in power love to exploit.

When words are restrained and pens are allowed to scribble only in praise of Big Brother, how long can ideas survive? Sometimes, I fail to draw a line between reality and dystopias.

Khawar Latif Khan is a Fulbright Scholar and a Communications Specialist with a graduate degree in Technical and Professional Communication. He has previously worked as a Sub-Editor at Global Village Space. He tweets at @khawarlatifkhan.The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.

Read this article:
Banned books: The unhealthy relationship between censorship and literature - Global Village space

CRITICS have been panned over the years as experts on skills they do not possess. For the arts, theyre doubtless a necessary evil, while still arousing a vague sense of distaste. Theyre the fatties on the football terraces who shout at the players; the weirdos who get a bigger thrill from watching other people have sex.

But constructive criticism is doubtless valid, and many authors prefer it to being ignored. There are authors who eke out their earnings by criticising other authors (but not usually as harshly as non-authors do).

Most critics are responsible and helpful. Additionally, they are the voice of the consumer, as it were, rather than the producer. Some criticism, such as of television and radio programmes, also allows for fine writing and observations about wider society and culture.

This is all well and good. These critics are professionals, bought and paid for, so to say, and proven in their field.

The advent of the internet changed all this, widening the franchise to encompass the barely sentient. This is an excellent development if you are a fan of democracy, not so much if you abhor the mob. On balance, I guess it must be a good thing, even if a bit smelly.

The new enfranchisement of critics by and large involves products, but also newspaper journalism and books. Of the former, Ive little to say, as Ive never understood it.

We timorous hellboys of hackdom go where the mob goes. Sometimes, we lead them. Sometimes, we follow them. We stir them up. We stamp them down. The mob is our milieu. So, we must expect to hear their voices, below the line and elsewhere.

For those of us who labour in the muddy fields of opinion, in particular, this is all right and proper. Its more problematic where genuinely professional news reporters are slammed for a lack of objectivity just because a truth theyre reporting harms the complainers cause.

In some ways, we opinion mongers and light essayists are exposed to the same jaundice: something is a good piece of writing if it contains opinions the critic agrees with, and bad where its the opposite. The quality of the prose has nothing to do with it.

For proper writers, who who write books and that, Amazon is where they get it in the neck or, alternatively, whatever part of the anatomy is associated with praise.

Here, critics have a wide sphere of expertise, coming fresh from praising a food blender to assessing your ten-part history of the Peloponnesian War. Its a weird world where the more product reviews one reads the more lost one becomes. It cuts grass really well. It cant cut long grass. Its heavy. Its light. Easy to construct. Impossible to assemble.

Then there are the fake reviews, notoriously Chinese, where the language often gives them away: This clock is the best I ever eaten.

Fake reviews have been less prevalent, but are an increasing problem, particularly for weel kent authors who attract malicious reviews from trolls.

As with newspaper comment, this is nothing to do with the writing or story, but scabrous sabotage occasioned by the work containing an opposing opinion or by the authors wider views.

Now, campaigners are reportedly proposing to Amazon that authors and product-makers have the right to delete up to 10 per cent of online reviews. This runs the risk of genuine one-star reviews being deleted, but gives authors and others a chance to fight back against maliciously motivated trolls.

Its censorship, Jim, but not as we know it. Its censorship of the fake. You want to know where I stand on this. However, as a professional journalist of many years standing, I will wait to see what the ignorant mob thinks. Then Ill follow along after them.

Joker in the package

THE modern area may be defined as one that makes the formerly simple far more difficult. Adjusting the brightness on your television, once achieved by turning a knob, is now more or less impossible.

Rather than try to adjust the brightness, many people just go out and buy a new television.

Another problem area is packaging. It would be interesting to see the number of strokes suffered by people trying to open a packet of biscuits.

Then theres the amount of unnecessary packaging: wee wrappers on every item or sweetie; daft bags; a wee box for your toothpaste tube. Its worse where this cant be recycled, and now consumer group Which? has identified Pringles, the notoriously moreish crisps, as a prime offender here.

To be fair, its not so much the amount of packaging they dont individually wrap each crisp but the type. All the same, many manufacturers are learning that, for environmentally aware customers today, less is moreish.

Five things weve learned this week

Now theyre talking of jellyfish and chips. The ghastly gelatinous invertebrates are the latest weird creatures touted as a substitute for species that traditionally make up our suppers. These ideas never come to pass. Its haddock or nothing, Im afraid.

Spiders are a thundering nuisance that should be banned. In the absence of legislation, experts advise that we leave oranges aboot the place, as the wee satanic swine dislike fruit. Its their unbalanced, meat-only diet that makes them so horrible.

More awfulness from the dreadful world of nature: British gin is under threat from a bug which attacks juniper trees. The fungus-like pathogen invades the roots, starving them of nutrients. One worried mid-market paper branded the news grim and chronic.

NASA is plugging commercial brands to fund the International Space Station. First up will be Este Lauders Advanced Night Repair serum, which astronauts will pose with as they bob aboot. Probably not the job they envisaged when signing up for space.

Soon, folk will be wearing tiny wind turbines on their wrists. The nanogenerators will charge our mobiles as we swing our arms while walking. Not much use, however, to those who slouch along with their hands in their pockets.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.

Read more from the original source:
Opinion: Robert McNeil: Benign censorship on the horizon as reviews reach critical condition - HeraldScotland

University staff have criticised New South Wales police for being undemocratic and suppressing freedom of speech by repeatedly arresting protestors, even as people gathered in larger numbers at sporting events, cafes and classrooms.

An open letter, signed by over 100 staff at the University of Sydney, accused police of political censorship in breaking up multiple protests against the federal governments changes to higher education.

Universities exist to foster the free and open debate of ideas, the letter said. The University of Sydney campus should be a place where the right of students and staff to express their views is respected without fear of police intimidation or reprisal.

Last Wednesday, students and staff were arrested and fined for protesting in groups of fewer than 20 people, even as classes of 30 to 40 people went ahead elsewhere on campus.

One academic, Dr Rob Boncardo, told Guardian Australia that at one point, a police sergeant told them that people eating lunch were allowed to stay, but protestors would be arrested.

Demonstrators were protesting against the federal governments changes to university fees, which would see the cost of some degrees double, and job cuts at universities that have now totalled more than 11,000 this year.

Organisers said attendees on Wednesday wore masks, were never allowed to be in groups larger than 19 and were all spaced between 50 to 200 metres apart.

Meanwhile, contact sports, shopping malls, public transport are all up and running, with the public encouraged, but not required, to wear face masks, the letter said. At the University of Sydney, we are now allowing face-to-face, indoor tutorials of up to 30 students at a time.

Boncardo, who teaches English and European studies, said some attendees were threatened with arrest during the protest outdoors, but then had to teach in classrooms of up to 40 people indoors.

He said police told him the small groups of fewer than 20 people were illegal because they were organised for a common purpose.

The quite absurd scene we saw was of a large sergeant with a loudspeaker on the law buildings lawns saying: If you are here to have lunch, you can stay, if you are here to protest, you have to move on.

The open letter from staff said this unambiguously constitutes political censorship in how it targeted protestors.

There are relatively large numbers of people gathering to eat indoors [on campus]. The way the virus transmits, being outdoors is very low on the risk scale and being indoors is higher, Boncardo said.

Dr Nick Riemer, another academic, said police were creating a threatening environment on campus, where students feared being fined or arrested for expressing their views.

The university cant be a location for the open debate of ideas if it is constantly subjected to large numbers of police whenever students try and express a political opinion, he said.

They are expressing views about their education, their own future [and] the message they are getting is that if they do that, they risk getting arrested and fined. But they can congregate to watch football, in cafes and in classrooms.

The minute they dare to express a political view, they face the full repressive force of the NSW police. It should be a very grave concern to anyone who is committed to a democratic society.

Boncardo, who is a member of the Usyd Casuals Network and the National Tertiary Education Union, said growing class sizes also meant that the university has not hesitated to put 35 to 40 people in a single classroom or tutorial.

I have colleagues who were moved on by police, who had to double back and go sit in a classroom with 30 to 35 students, enclosed. A whole bunch of the people involved were moved on from a socially distanced outdoors activity, and have to perform their job in a tiny odd room with 30 odd students.

Originally posted here:
NSW police accused of 'political censorship' over university protest arrests - The Guardian

Sunny Hostin detailed claims of racism from ABC in her new book and shared how the network attempted to have the narrative removed.

Read More: Maryland congressional candidate Kim Klacik accuses The Views Joy Behar of wearing blackface

In the forward for her new memoir, I Am These Truths, the lawyer opened up on the experiences at the network including a racist incident that resulted in the firing of an executive. In June, Huffpost published a report claiming Barbara Fedida, an ABC News executive in charge of talent, made multiple insensitive remarks toward Black network talent such as Robin Roberts, and was the subject of over a dozen human resource complaints.

The Los Angeles Times reported Fedida allegedly used the term low rentto describe Hostin. After an investigation, the executive lost her job, however, the damage was already done. The View co-host used her platform on the show to describe the feeling of being targeted by racist comments.

It was a tough weekend for me, and I was really disappointed and saddened and hurt when I learned about the racist comments that were made, allegedly, about me, my colleagues, and my dear friends, Hostin said. Because, if true, to reference Robin Roberts, who is one of the most respected and beloved journalists in our country, as picking cotton, to reference me, someone whos been very open about having grown up in public housing, as being low rent tells me that systemic racism touches everything and everyone in our society regardless of social stature.

Read More: Sherri Shepherd says The View was the most painful experience Ive ever gone through

Hostin expanded on these feelings in her books forward. Entertainment Tonight reports at the time of the expose, her memoir had already gone to the publisher. She called her agent and decided to add her reality deliberately to the books forward.

Ive got a book coming out. And the book had already gone to the publisher. And I called my agent and I said, Ive got to write about this and I want it to be at the very beginning of the book. Because this is my truth as I sit here today Because this is the truth that Im living right now. And if thats gonna help any woman, help anybody thats going through this during this time in our country, I gotta do it. And he said, You better do it. And I literally wrote that foreword in about 15 to 20 minutes, she said to the outlet.

According to The Daily Beast, she penned claims that she made less than her White counterparts, and initially had a dressing room on a different floor from therest of the cast.

Her proclaimed truth was not told without pushback. Hostin sought legal aid when ABC pushed back against segments of her book.

I was surprised that what was asked of me was to change the truth, to change my story, Hostin remarked on Andy Cohen Live on Monday.

I think its one thing if I got something wrong and, to be clear, they caught things that were wrong. Timing things, and direct quotes that should have been checked more closely. And I appreciated those things, but then they wanted me to change, things like things that I experienced. Discriminatory things, and I just felt that that wasnt fair because the title of the book is I Am These Truths, she continued.

Hostin revealed the racist sentiments in ABCs alleged attempted censorship in the forward.

My television agent and my book agent emailed me to express confusion that a news organization would try to censor a Puerto Rican, African American womans story while they were covering global demonstrations demanding racial equity, the forward stated.

One of them even calculated the percentages of people of color on the executive boards at Disney, ABC Entertainment, and ABC Newsaccording to him those figures ranged from 7 to 12 percent. I asked my attorneys to intervene and thankfully ABC relented. I didnt want to believe that racism played a part in their revision requestswe were just dotting some is and crossing some ts, right?

Beyond the ABC saga, I Am These Truths explores her Puerto Rican and Black upbringing in the Bronx, and her professional journey as a federal prosecutor and journalist. Hostin shared with Bustle she was nervous to pen a memoir and received encouragement from Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

When I had [the memoir] in front of me, I constantly had these moments when I realized, Wow, this experience was not great. That was a failure, but I turned that failure into a lesson, which is an important tool, she said to the outlet.

Have you subscribed totheGrios podcastDear Culture? Download our newest episodes now!

Read more from the original source:
The View co-host Sunny Hostin accuses ABC of racist censorship - TheGrio

Mark Twain, John Steinbeck and Harper Lee might be three of Americas most beloved authors, but they have all made it on to a list of the countrys 100 most frequently banned and challenged books of the last decade.

Marking the start of Banned Books Week, the American Libraries Association (ALA) has reviewed all of the censorship reports it has received over the last 10 years to come up with the 100 books that readers and parents have most frequently tried to have removed from libraries and schools in the US.

The list is topped by Sherman Alexies The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, which won the Native American author the National Book Award in 2007. About a boy who leaves his school on the Spokane Indian Reservation to attend an all-white high school, Alexies young adult novel has been attacked for reasons including sexual references, profanity, violence, gambling, and underage drinking, and for its religious viewpoint.

EL Jamess Fifty Shades of Grey series, Toni Morrisons The Bluest Eye, Dav Pilkeys Captain Underpants series and Justin Richardson and Peter Parnells picture book about two male penguins raising a chick together, And Tango Makes Three, also make the top 10.

Lees To Kill a Mockingbird is in 15th place, Steinbecks Of Mice and Men 28th, and Twains The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn 33rd. Lees Pulitzer prize-winning novel was challenged over the violence it contains and its use of the N-word; Of Mice and Men drew protests over offensive language, racism [and] violence, and Twains story has long been criticised over its use of racial slurs.

Alison Bechdels Fun Home is in 31st place. The acclaimed graphic memoir about the authors coming out has recently been removed from a Nevada high schools reading list, with free-speech organisations currently calling for it to be reinstated.

The ALA said that the list included books challenged for reasons such as LGBTQ+ content, sexual references, religious viewpoints, content that addresses racism and police brutality, and profanity.

Although the reasons differ, the censorship of literature in libraries shares a common result: the violation of our first amendment rights, said the organisation, whose Office for Intellectual Freedom has been documenting attempts to ban books in libraries and schools for the last 30 years. The OIF estimates that about 82-97% of challenges remain unreported, meaning the list only provides a snapshot of book challenges.

Banned Books Week was launched in the US in 1982, with libraries and bookshops holding a series of events celebrating the right to read mostly virtually this year over the next seven days. Events are also being held in the UK, from a British Library discussion featuring authors including Elif Shafak and Jacqueline Woodson taking on what freedom means in the culture of traditional publishing, and how writers today can change the future of literature, to a Royal Society of Literature look at whose voices are still being censored today.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie

Captain Underpants (series) by Dav Pilkey

Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher

Looking for Alaska by John Green

George by Alex Gino

And Tango Makes Three by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell

Drama by Raina Telgemeier

Fifty Shades of Grey by EL James

Internet Girls (series) by Lauren Myracle

The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison

The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini

Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

I Am Jazz by Jazz Jennings and Jessica Herthel

The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Bone (series) by Jeff Smith

The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls

Two Boys Kissing by David Levithan

A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo by Jill Twiss

Sex Is a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg

Read the original:
American classics among most challenged books of the decade in US - The Guardian