Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ban book bans: Say no to racist silencing of Black and Brown voices

Ban book bans: Say no to racist silencing of Black and Brown voices
Getty Images

Kizzy Albritton, PhD, is a Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project at the University of Texas at Austin and an Associate Professor of School Psychology in the Department of Educational Psychology.

Silencing Black and brown voices is not new, but it must not succeed in America today.


A county in Texas recently decided to have its library system remain open after proposing a shutdown to avoid an order from a federal judge requiring 17 previously banned books be returned to library shelves.

Lawmakers in Missouri are seeking to essentially defund public libraries in a proposal that would withhold state funding. And textbook publishers are looking to rewrite Black history in response to Florida’s Stop Woke act.

Over the last two years, there has been a growing list of book bans within publicly funded educational spaces and books written by Black and Brown authors have been targeted repeatedly.

While proponents of these book bans argue that the goal is to protect “innocent children” from sensitive topics, these acts are the latest form of educational oppression and an attempt to silence and exclude the voices and contributions of Black and Brown individuals.

According to PEN America, 1,648 books were banned between July 2021 and June 2022. Of those 1,648 books, 40% included protagonists or prominent secondary characters of color, 21% focused on issues of race and racism, 10% were related to rights and activism, and 4% included characters or stories highlighting religion of individuals from ethnically minority backgrounds.

Currently 32 states have banned books and Texas leads all states with approximately 800 banned titles across 22 school districts.

While most banned titles are books written for young adults, literature for younger children is being targeted also with picture books and chapter books representing approximately 30% of banned titles.

For example, “This is Your Time,” a children’s book by civil rights activist Ruby Bridges, has been banned in many classrooms across the country. The banning of books written by Bridges is significant as she was the first Black child to bravely integrate an all-white public school in Louisiana at just six years of age.

So not only do some want to rewrite Black history, they also want to ban books written by Black icons in American history. It is essential to remember that Black history is also American history.

Historically, silencing and exclusion of Black voices included the use of anti-literacy laws to prevent enslaved Black individuals from learning to read and write. The targeting of books written by, and about Black individuals is just a modern-day version of that law.

Banning books is harmful to all students but disproportionately impacts Black and Brown children in several ways, particularly given the continued fight for equitable public education.

Although Black and Brown students bring tremendous strengths to the classroom, they continue to experience academic disparities due to ongoing systemic and structural barriers.

Banning books by Black authors or ones that center on the voices of Black and Brown children is yet another barrier that Black students are forced to overcome. This only further perpetuates racism and anti-Blackness and tells Black students that individuals who share their lived experiences are not valued.

Books provide a unique opportunity to explore worldviews and perspectives that might diverge from their traditional ways of thinking. Banning books eliminates this opportunity and further silences voices that have been traditionally marginalized and underrepresented.

To be sure, many books written by Black and Brown authors do not appear on the growing list of banned books. However, the most recent dispute in Texas illustrates that the fight over book bans is far from over.

As educators it is critical not to remain silent as books are a core foundation of the learning process. Many school districts have adopted “community review committees” to determine whether a book should be banned.

Ironically, most committees do not include educators who hold expertise regarding books, such as librarians. It is also unclear to what extent Black and Brown voices are represented on these committees across the country.

Black individuals-- particularly Black parents-- and educators are members of the community too, and our membership should be reflected on these review committees. Black and Brown children need to be protected too.

Read More

Connecticut: Democracy, Innovation, and Economic Resilience

The 50: Connecticut

Credit: Hugo Balta

Connecticut: Democracy, Innovation, and Economic Resilience

The 50 is a four-year multimedia project in which the Fulcrum visits different communities across all 50 states to learn what motivated them to vote in the 2024 presidential election and see how the Donald Trump administration is meeting those concerns and hopes.

Hartford, Connecticut, stands as a living testament to American democracy, ingenuity, and resilience. As the state’s capital, it’s home to cultural landmarks like the Mark Twain House & Museum, where Twain penned The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, embodying the spirit of self-governance and creative daring that defines the region.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Fox News’ Selective Silence: How Trump’s Worst Moments Vanish From Coverage
Why Fox News’ settlement with Dominion Voting Systems is good news for all media outlets
Getty Images

Fox News’ Selective Silence: How Trump’s Worst Moments Vanish From Coverage

Last week, the ultraconservative news outlet, NewsMax, reached a $73 million settlement with the voting machine company, Dominion, in essence, admitting that they lied in their reporting about the use of their voting machines to “rig” or distort the 2020 presidential election. Not exactly shocking news, since five years later, there is no credible evidence to suggest any malfeasance regarding the 2020 election. To viewers of conservative media, such as Fox News, this might have shaken a fully embraced conspiracy theory. Except it didn’t, because those viewers haven’t seen it.

Many people have a hard time understanding why Trump enjoys so much support, given his outrageous statements and damaging public policy pursuits. Part of the answer is due to Fox News’ apparent censoring of stories that might be deemed negative to Trump. During the past five years, I’ve tracked dozens of examples of news stories that cast Donald Trump in a negative light, including statements by Trump himself, which would make a rational person cringe. Yet, Fox News has methodically censored these stories, only conveying rosy news that draws its top ratings.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Flag / artificial intelligence / technology / congress / ai

The age of AI warrants asking if the means still further the ends—specifically, individual liberty and collective prosperity.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

Liberty and the General Welfare in the Age of AI

If the means justify the ends, we’d still be operating under the Articles of Confederation. The Founders understood that the means—the governmental structure itself—must always serve the ends of liberty and prosperity. When the means no longer served those ends, they experimented with yet another design for their government—they did expect it to be the last.

The age of AI warrants asking if the means still further the ends—specifically, individual liberty and collective prosperity. Both of those goals were top of mind for early Americans. They demanded the Bill of Rights to protect the former, and they identified the latter—namely, the general welfare—as the animating purpose for the government. Both of those goals are being challenged by constitutional doctrines that do not align with AI development or even undermine it. A full review of those doctrines could fill a book (and perhaps one day it will). For now, however, I’m just going to raise two.

Keep ReadingShow less