Freedom to read is freedom indeed

Sunday is the last day of this year's Banned Book Week. If you have not taken advantage of learning what this is about, you have one more opportunity this afternoon with an encore performance of “Bad Books,” a marvelous play that will be performed at Story & Song at 3 p.m. There is a modest fee to attend.

Why do we need a week about banned books? Last week, I talked about the importance of libraries. Book banning relates mostly to school libraries, but when you see the play, you will see how local libraries and librarians are affected. Learning about book banning is relevant because Florida is second only to Texas in banning books. In the 2025-2026 school year, 12,000 bans were in place, covering over 7,000 different titles by 4,000 different authors, the highest number since PEN America began keeping statistics in 2021.

Criteria for banning books vary greatly from one school district to another and from one state to another. In some regions, anyone can challenge a book’s content and appropriateness. Elsewhere, you must have a child in the school system to register a challenge. Challenges happen even though districts like ours offer many options for parents or guardians to register their preferences about what their child can access. An interesting and ironic note is that more than 90% of parents do not exercise these options, here in our county and elsewhere.

Who wants to see books banned? Various groups, political and otherwise, like Moms for Liberty for example, have been involved in challenging books. The category of books most often challenged is Young Adult fiction. The challengers disagree with the presentation of life issues that teens face, calling them pornographic, dangerous and morally inferior.

There are several life sayings that come to my mind when presented with this issue. One is from a beloved college professor who taught, “You can’t legislate morality.” Oh my, how some people try! The problem is whose morality do you legislate? The effort to legislate morality contradicts each person’s freedom and personal responsibility as the Constitution outlines. Each parent has the right to decide what their children read. The problem enters when they try to restrict what everyone else's children read.

Two more sayings come from a wise organizational consultant who always said, “Do not let the naysayers command.” Healthy organizations, governmental or otherwise, do not bend to the verbal abuse and pressure that come from negative minorities. We see the consequences of not adhering to this word of wisdom EVERYWHERE today. Secondly, he said, “Institutions are like plants. Light and air are good for living things.” Many on social media repeat the observation that history has taught that book banners have not been “the good guys.” Trying to keep young people in the dark about important life issues results in hostility, lack of trust, and curiosity about those issues. Peers and the internet become their sources of information.

A September 23 directive from the recently appointed Florida commissioner of Education, Dr. Henry Mack, complicated the book-banning landscape and added to the burden of work for school district personnel. It is not enough for the district to respond to requests for reviews. They are now required to proactively inspect the content of classroom and school libraries for objectionable content as described by the Department of Education. They were given 90 days from the receipt of the memo to enact this directive. The consequences for failing to implement the directive by the stated timeline are punitive and threaten to withhold funds. You can read the commissioner’s 7-page memo here.

Critics note that the memo is causing a rush to judgment and limiting thorough investigation of the books’ suitability. Staff are using quick AI summaries of books, not fully reviewing content. Objectors are taking sections out of context and calling for removal. Districts are pre-emptively removing books without review to avoid legal ramifications.

In addition, districts are required to first review any books banned elsewhere in the state.

This is a top-heavy approach that removes local boards' and staff’s autonomy and decision-making.

All this comes from a state commissioner appointed by a governor within a few short months of the end of his term and weeks before the state conducts midterm elections. Irony is more prevalent than coincidence.

The experts from PEN America asked readers an important question in the conclusion of their report on book banning in 2026. I leave it with you:

During a pivotal time in the United States, the ongoing disempowerment of historically marginalized communities, the distrust in public schools and expertise, and the normalization of book bans and educational censorship illustrate conditions long associated with the rise of authoritarianism. At what point do we decide that the erasure of literature, stories, and histories and the disdain for expertise have hit a breaking point?

Freedom to read is freedom indeed.