Category Archives: Censorship

Won’t somebody please think of the children…!?

Leave a reply
Representation of horror culture in children’s media key to their strength, resolve, problem solving, imagination, and character development
“Can you tell us where we can find the Fear Street series?”

By James Johnson

It’s still possible that Halloween may be cancelled this year, as COVID-19 continues to batter us. But that doesn’t mean our kids shouldn’t entertain themselves with festive content this fall. Or does it?

In her 2018 book “Once Upon a Time in a Dark and Scary Book: The Messages of Horror Literature for Children”, K. Shryock Hood has laid out a concerted effort to identify contemporary youth horror fiction as hopeless fare which leaves our children vulnerable, perhaps susceptible, to the horrific realities of this world. That, no matter how hard your parents may try, sometimes there just isn’t anyone coming to rescue you. In fact, she argues that parents actively endorse access to these types of stories for their kids – books with repetitive hopelessness as recurring motif.

But what is hopelessness? Hopeless for whom? The reader? The character? Suppose the author failed to connect the reader to the victim as a result of lack-luster character development. I’m terrible at flushing out characters and my son actively seeks to destroy the NPC’s in our Dungeons & Dragons adventures because they’re just that unrelatable. But when he picks up a Goosebumps book, he gets scared, much like when he watches a movie that has a particularly difficult scene or two. He closes his eyes at the movie or puts the book down when it becomes too much.

Why bother with these books anyways, if they are clearly too much for our kids to handle? Is it traumatizing that I offer these options to our son? He knows I love horror culture. He is aware of the serials I review, and the movies I watch, though he doesn’t read or watch them himself. So why then does the sight of flesh eating zombies and monsters devouring the innocent make him giggle and cheer while a quiet, dark hallway awakens a sinister primal fear within him?

Horror becomes real when we make the horrific event entirely plausible. This is when the real fear creeps into the child’s psyche, when we lend credibility to the impossible. For example, a mask that a child wears for Halloween is haunted and turns them into a demon-monster that attacks their friends. This part of the book isn’t particularly scary, says our 7 year old son. It’s a mask that turns you into a monster. Pretty clearly fantastical.

Fast forward to the second half of the book and the story changes from killer masks to killer pumpkins. But the kicker is these pumpkins come for you when you’re all tucked in and snuggled under your blankets and it’s dark and the night is cold and no one believes you when you tell them the killer pumpkins are trying to kill you. This story freaked him out way more than the haunted mask because the night is endless with possibilities and the warm bed is so familiar.

Children’s horror should be embraced on the grounds that it encourages problem solving, critical thinking, creativity, and ingenuity.

For her work, Dr. Shryock Hood uses examples like the left behind series for children. That’s the Christian series where the rapture leaves behind non-believers. I haven’t read or reviewed the children’s version of these books so whether or not this constitutes horror, or even children’s literature, I’ll leave that up to your discretion; but my thinking on the whole matter is as follows:

If, as a parent, you find yourself curating your child’s collection of books (the beloved children’s bedtime bookshelf is iconic), then it will be entirely up to you as to what you wish to censor, and what you will let them experience. For our home, It has always been our belief as parents that we would be honest and open with any queries our son would have. As a general rule, we follow standardized guidelines like the motion picture rating system, the comics code authority, and the entertainment software rating board (ESRB) to make quick, uneducated decisions when in a pinch. Of course, nothing can replace proper research and parental due diligence, but these guidelines are in place for a reason. This way, we believed we wouldn’t need to hide anything from him for protective purposes so long as we provided context and rationale behind whatever it was he consumed, witnessed, experienced, etc.

In addition to these important discussions and industry rating systems, selection and curation have remained two of the most important functions for successfully managing any potentially stressful or harmful content. So, with that being said, it’s my purview that dangerous, hostile, uncomfortable, and perhaps even deadly scenarios are important to understand and to contextualize. Children’s horror should be embraced on the grounds that it encourages problem solving, critical thinking, creativity, and ingenuity.

The face of incurable trauma.

Of course, I agree that there should be some limitations to what children are subjected to in media. I’m not a complete monster. I also think that happy endings in horror books should be encouraged, so that children with softer resolves can enjoy the genre too. But I honestly encourage storytellers to aim higher, avoid patronizing solutions to pedestrian problems, and make the fear real. Our children are not as delicate as we think and challenging reads should be encouraged in order to diversify their emotional tool kits for when they need to face real world problems, in very real ways.

This season really brings out the frights!

Keep reading and happy horrors, kiddies.

Censorship: Filters and Firewalls; Does Porn Have a Place in Libraries?

Leave a reply

Estimated reading time of article: 4 mins

Photo by Sora Shimazaki on Pexels.com

By James Johnson

This news piece found its way across my desk last week. It describes a potentially disturbing event that can occur (with varying degrees of frequency) in our public libraries. That is to say, what is classified as obscene material under the Canadian Criminal Code of Canada (CCC), accessed through information commons inside the public sphere – porn in the library. Specifically section 163, subsection (2a).

In plain terms – a person is guilty of an offence if they wilfully expose obscene material to public view.

Like most every law in Canada, there is no black and white. It’s all grey. And it’s up to the courts to determine what the definitions are in practicum. But I’m not particularly interested in the determinants of legal proceedings or precedents in the future. I want to know how these policies affect information seekers now.

In the case of Kingston Frontenac Public Library, they have made it clear their policy will remain the same; that is, patrons can use the internet to access pornography on the library computers. There is a recommendation on their policy page to consider that other users sharing the same space with them may not share the same penchant for porn perusing, and this consideration should be exercised prior to viewing such materials. It should also be noted that KFPL is a proponent of Ontario Library Association’s “Statement on Intellectual Freedom” and therefore apply no internet content filters on their networks.

That can’t be entirely true though. All libraries apply firewall and filters to some degree. These assist in blocking malicious software and internal/external unauthorized data collection. And rightly so! All admins and their networks have a right to protected data.

But what about public libraries that have chosen the opposite position? This library has updated its policy to include terms like “refrain from displaying”, and “reasonably considered offensive”. Like a page out of our own Criminal Code! Could the defendant please define “reasonably offensive” and their interpretation of such a claim? Indeed it is another of those grey areas.

But why not add filters that could block obscene materials? If we have filters that are sophisticated enough to stem the flow of malware, surely we can devise one for porn! But what is obscene? Is a video of a nude woman squeezing her bare breasts obscene? Perhaps it is catalogued as an educational clip of home breast cancer inspection techniques for women? Is that obscene? Can an algorithm effectively determine human morality? And is porn considered freedom of speech and expression, where limiting access to such material could be a violation of a person’s rights and freedoms allotted to them through our sacred Charter?  These are the questions we need to be asking.

Cory Doctorow’s excellent piece in The Guardian provides the evidence that filters fail time and time again. He discusses a UK internet filter so terribly inefficient; one which blocks rape-crisis centre websites, and (ironically) sites that help people fight their porn addictions.

Thankfully the library that has added “offensive material” access as prohibitive in their policy has not undertaken any new filter applications. They’re on the side of “if someone complains, we’ll ask the black sheep to knock it off.” My concern is who gets to decide what’s offensive? It’s very grey. And I’m sure before long, after someone undoubtedly gets offended, the issue will resemble a NIMBY-esque sequence of dialogues. Discourse nonetheless.

This is such a difficult issue to write about, especially as a library student and father. Like many issues of great relevance, there will be many opinions. I’m convinced where my opinion lies. I subscribe to a specific western set of moralities that stem from Judeo-Christian values, for which my country was built upon. For better or worse. Certainly without my consent, but entirely to my benefit. A framework for which one can form their own moral base. That is the luxury of my personal freedom, paid for with personal responsibility and generational sacrifice. I will not have this luxury at work and must follow my employers own interpretation of these values. No small feat, but I’m happy to offset that responsibility with a thoughtful, strong policy from the organization.

In their report to Parliament, Casavant and Robertson state:

“The use of new technologies such as the Internet has created unique challenges and problems: computer pornography is an increasing concern, especially because dissemination of such material cannot generally be controlled. There are also issues regarding the potential liability of the owners or managers of computer networks, such as universities. Although criminal charges have been laid regarding the distribution or possession of pornography on the Internet, to date there has been little judicial guidance on the issues involved.”

The issues of intent and dissemination will remain as the figures of contention in the libraries v. patrons battle over pornography’s place in the library, though caution should be considered when choosing a side. Controlling and censoring information, especially controversial information, is a characteristic of despotism not democracy. Indulging perversion in the name of inclusion should not be the alternative.

On a lighter note, Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year.