Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Book banning: A red flag behavior

Book banning: A red flag behavior
Getty Images

Steve Corbin is Professor Emeritus of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.

“Just the facts, ma’am,” was the infamous introductory phrase Sgt. Joe Friday would use when interrogating a witness in the whodunit TV series Dragnet. Jack Webb played Sgt. Friday during Dragnet’s 1951-1959 lifespan.


Dragnet’s civil servant show often dealt with complex social issues. Let’s apply Sgt. Friday’s flat and concise “just the facts, ma’am” line to the current book banning craze before offering an opinion.

Fact no. 1: According to Pen America, 2,532 books were banned across 32 states – including all red states -- during the 2021-2022 school year.

Fact no. 2: Over 50 major groups with affiliate groups exceeding 300 are advocates for banning books in school districts and public libraries.

Fact no. 3: Book banning groups, like Moms for Liberty, Parents Defending Education and No Left Turn in Education are linked to Republican mega-donor Charles Koch and GOP donor Leonard Lee, a former VP of the Koch-funded Federalist Society (Adam Gabbatt, The Guardian, Jan. 24, 2022).

Fact no. 4: Under Adolf Hitler’s dictatorial orders, more than 4,000 books were banned and burned in Nazi Germany between 1933 and 1945.

Fact no. 5: A Feb., 2022 CNN Poll found only 12% of Americans believe parents should control which library books are on the shelves.

Fact. no. 6: A CBS News/YouGov survey of Americans found: A) 83% don’t want books banned that criticize US history, B) 85% don’t want books banned that offer different political ideas, C) 87% don’t want books banned that depict slavery and D) 87% don’t want books banned that discuss race.

Fact no. 7: A plethora of research reveals a LGBTQ-inclusive curriculum promotes a positive school environment and student well-being.

Fact no. 8: The predominant advocates of the Nazi-like book banning conspiracy are Republican legislators and GOP governors from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Virginia.

Fact no. 9: The children predominantly affected by the book banning craze are Gen Z (ages 10-26). Pew Research Center notes “Gen Z is more racially and ethnically diverse than previous generations.” Gen Z individuals are independent learners who value diversity and inclusive cultures.

Pat Scales, author of Scales on Censorship (2007) – an ardent First Amendment advocate – notes outright censorship is only one aspect of book banning. Shelving books by keeping them out of readers’ hands is about control, a far-right, Nazi, fascism, authoritarian and totalitarian ideology tactic.

Scales notes “intellectual freedom is about respect.” It appears book banning advocates don’t respect the intellectual freedom and First Amendment rights of Gen Z students who want to become knowledgeable about history and 21st century reality.

For parents who don’t want their child to learn about this diverse world, please do your utmost to shelter your child. First of all, take your child out of school as a certified teacher or peer student may expose your child to knowledge that may be offensive to you.

Next, television, radio, social media and newspapers should become taboo in your household. Of course, all books and the internet will be off limits.

For goodness sake, don’t let your child play outside as they may observe or hear something that is offensive to you. Don’t permit your child to hold a part-time or – Lord be – a full-time job as they may interact with a non-homogenized person.

Growing up and adulthood is dangerous to one’s health. Protect your child and hope that someday s/he will live alone on a small planet.

Politicians’ book banning censorship actions are all about controlling children under the age of consent from the real world, a red flag behavior. Book banners don’t value democracy, they crave authoritarian rule.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less