|
| |
Not in Front of the Children - Book Review
Michelle Tremmel With the recent controversy over New York’s altering of literary works on state-mandated tests and the Children’s Internet Protection Act of 2000 moving toward the U.S. Supreme Court after being struck down in May by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (See Lace Cassidy’s article in this issue), censorship of educational and other materials, presumably to protect children, has again captured national attention. That being the case, Marjorie Heins’ Not in Front of the Children, published last year and now out in paperback, provides timely reading for those interested in learning more about the historical context of such actions.
Questioning the long-standing “harm-to-minors” rationale for censorship, Heins argues that because of “the overwhelming difficulty in even defining what it is we want to censor, and the significant costs of censorship to society and to youngsters themselves,” we should find other educational ways to “socialize children.” Instead of such approaches as Internet filters and book banning, she advocates “training in media literacy and critical thinking skills, comprehensive sexuality education, literature classes that deal with difficult topics rather than pretending they do not exist, and inclusion of young people in journalism and policy making on this very issue of culture and values.”
In order to make her case, Heins examines in a carefully detailed way the origin of assumptions that have spurred censorship, the validity of the proof behind those assumptions, and the influence they have had on the actions of concerned groups and the courts. Particularly interesting about her examination is that it spans centuries (as far back as the first arguments to protect youth in Plato’s Republic) and cuts across nations and cultures (e.g. England, Europe, India, Japan). Taken as a whole, Heins presents a well- reasoned argumentheavily supported by solid and extensive source materials-- approximately one quarter of the book is notes--that give it a scholarly feel and tone and lend credibility to her claims. Also, the book is impressive in its breadth, covering a wide range of relevant topics like the connection between school and media violence; sex education, teen pregnancy, and AIDS; V-chips, television/movie ratings and Internet filtering; literature and comic books; and parental control and the “ethical and moral development” of children.
Particularly exhaustive in its coverage is Chapter 10, “Media Effects,” in which Heins addresses the draw-backs of “either/or” (“imitation” versus “catharsis”) thinking in relation to the impact of media and other modes of expression on people’s actions. In this chapter, she comprehensively reviews a wide variety of studies beginning in the 1960s that have tried to measure media effects, showing that the relationship between art/entertainment and behavior is far from simple or settled, despite the arguments of censorship proponents.
Overall, in examining the long history of “protecting” children from “indecency,” Not in Front of the Children is a valuable resource in contextualizing the censorship controversies confronting teachers around the country and written about in this and other issues of the SLATE Newsletter. With her many years of experience as a First Amendment lawyer, her current work as director of the Free Expression Policy Project, and her careful scholarship, Heins contributes a knowledgeable and reasonable voice to a dialogue about--not the censorship of--“sensitive” materials and young people in a democratic society. Her book has much to offer us as we confront such issues as the expurgation of literary works on state tests and children’s access to the Internet. In addition, another recent publication by Heins (and Christina Cho), Media Literacy: An Alternative to Censorship, provides another resource on this issue. Available at http://www.fepproject.org/policyreports/medialiteracyfull.html it reports on the status of media literacy programs and argues for finding educational solutions to the concerns that drive censorship groups.
|
