Argument for book banning . . . or at least a forewarning of content
safelibraries.blogspot.com points to tulsaworld.com where a Brigham Young University freshman (she's also an AP literature student with a kick-butt ACT reading score) is shocked and offended she had to read "Beloved" and "Catch-22". She's not not advocating censorship, she would just prefer compelling literature without the public-pleasing passages that "elevate" the book to best-selling status. Or maybe just some form of warning, a label, a rating or even hint on the outside of literature
In every other entertainment industry, producers are required to rate their product so the public can make an informed decision. Which is the greater travesty? Depriving the reader of information, judgment and free choice and calling it freedom of speech, or risking the buzzword "censorship" to facilitate knowledge and choice?