# data[].attributes.headline
Expurgation of Modern Literature and Music 

# data[].attributes.subject
Expurgation of Modern Literature and Music 

# data[].attributes.body
Similar to how books are burned in Fahrenheit 451, literature and music are frequently censored in America today. Censorship of books in the United States typically takes the form of banning, or sometimes even burning, controversial volumes. A major drawback of censorship, which occurs most frequently in schools and public libraries, is that “[w]orks that cover complex issues of race, gender, and sexuality often face book challenges; removing these books from libraries denies students the opportunity to explore these subjects in a meaningful way” (“Book Banning”). While literary works are usually censored with good intentions, banning or burning books keeps large groups of people from having access to them, so would-be readers never get the opportunity to decide for themselves what is acceptable. For example, in 2017, an elementary school in Florida decided to ban students from bringing personal copies of the well-known yet contentious young adult novel 13 Reasons Why onto campus, due to concern that its dark themes were inappropriate for the children (“Elementary”). As one article from Everyday Health points out, “Censorship in schools seems to come from a desire to ensure that our children grow up making the choices and following the beliefs that we desire for them by removing any other options” (“Censorship”). When censorship limits children’s options for reading materials, they are prevented from discovering and appreciating diverse ideas. Furthermore, in the twenty years since the first book was published in America, J. K. Rowling’s wildly popular Harry Potter series has faced many attempts to have it banned or completely destroyed; it placed number one on the American Library Association’s list of most frequently challenged books of the decade for 2000 through 2009, and one church in New Mexico held a burning of the novels in December of 2001 (Peters). People wishing to censor these books likely disagreed with their depiction of magic, so they banned or burned them as a way to object to the author’s creative thinking and keep others from beginning to think in that way, as well. In addition, lyrics of many songs are expurgated, often because they are deemed too violent or sexually suggestive to be appropriate, particularly for young listeners. When musical artists in America are restricted in the way they write and perform their songs, this may infringe upon their First Amendment right to freedom of speech and expression (Nowotarski). Especially in the rap genre of music, explicit lyrics are often played in reverse or covered up by sound effects when broadcast on the radio; in extreme cases, rappers will even rewrite entire lines or verses of their songs to make them acceptable for airplay (Strauss). With all these edits piling up, songs can sometimes “become so bowdlerized that their meaning is no longer even fathomable” (Strauss). Censorship gets in the way of artists voicing the messages they want their songs to convey. Furthermore, censoring questionable lyrics may do more harm than good to young minds by limiting their awareness of the world around them. Inevitably, topics featured in songs reflect reality, so it may be best to allow a child to hear a song and then discuss it with him, rather than avoiding it completely (Nowotarski). This would allow the child to form his own ideas about the topics, instead of remaining ignorant to them. All in all, the banning and destruction of books and censorship of lyrics which conflict with a handful of people’s ideals is one step toward becoming a society which bans individual thinking altogether.

# data[].attributes.body
Just as technology enables censorship in Fahrenheit 451, censorship of the Internet is a prevalent issue in modern American society. Sometimes, it is the American government itself which carries out censorship. People view America as a free country, but as the article “How Internet Censorship Works” points out, “[e]ven the United States has laws that impact the kind of information you can access on the Internet in a school or public library” (Strickland). Also, communications companies recently convinced the Supreme Court to eliminate a concept called net neutrality, which “refers to a level playing ground where Internet service providers (ISPs) allow access to all content without favoring any particular company or Web site” (Strickland). Without net neutrality, ISPs can now charge other companies fees in order to make their websites load faster than those of their competitors, and some people believe that this practice counts as a form of censorship (Strickland). Furthermore, America as a nation has become increasingly concerned about the spread of false information, or “fake news.” To try to curb this issue, the government has sometimes ordered mobile networks and social media platforms to be shut down (Alimonti). Veridiana Alimonti, a Senior Policy Analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, believes this an excessive tactic, and says that forcing websites to take responsibility for what users post leads them to censor content on their own platforms, and keeps groundbreaking ideas from being shared (Alimonti). It is impossible for the American people to make informed decisions -- for example, when it comes time for an election -- if not all of the facts are known. While it is a good thing to prevent falsehoods from spreading, if it causes legitimate information to be censored, as well, then it may do more harm than good. In addition, Facebook, a major social media platform, removed over eight hundred political pages in October of 2018 due to what the site believed was “spamming” - defined as “using fake accounts, sharing the same content between multiple pages, and linking to ad-supported websites it calls ‘ad farms’” (Tynan). However, real people using pen names were operating these accounts in order to voice their political views, sometimes running multiple pages at once to cover several different topics; according to the users who were targeted, these actions are perfectly normal methods for posting on Facebook (Tynan). Although Americans have a First Amendment right to freedom of speech, since Facebook and other social media platforms are run by private companies, they are allowed to censor content as they see fit, meaning that people may not always get to share their thoughts with others on these sites. Lastly, WikiLeaks is a media outlet that publishes classified information and makes it available to the public. This website’s actions have sparked many debates over how to balance the need for government operations to remain secretive with the right which people have to stay in the know about their society (“Say”). As the Electronic Frontier Foundation plainly states, “Shutting down sites like WikiLeaks is a very serious attack on freedom of expression” (“Say”). It is crucial for the public to know how their government is being run, so that they can make any necessary changes by voting differently in the future. If the government is operating in a way which harms the people, but the people are unaware of it, they won’t know that things need to change. If this occurs, then Americans may soon be on their way to living in a society full of censorship and misinformation, much like the one presented in Fahrenheit 451.

# data[].attributes.body
Fahrenheit 451 contains many examples of how technology can be utilized to aid censorship. Near the end of the novel, Montag is chased by the police, but manages to escape. The police give up searching for him, and begin looking for anyone they can use in his place. They hope to keep the truth of Montag’s disappearance from the public, who are watching the events unfold on television. Granger, one of the men who Montag meets in the forest after evading the authorities, explains to him, “‘They’re faking. You threw them off at the river. They can’t admit it. … So they’re sniffing for a scapegoat to end things with a bang’” (Bradbury 141). The government does not want anyone to know that they failed in finding Montag, and they know it will be too difficult (not to mention, boring for viewers) to continue searching for him. Therefore, they are willing to give their audience false information in order to “save face.” The fact that people are only viewing these events through their televisions, rather than in real life, means that the details can easily be edited. Parts of the footage can be cut out so that no one realizes that the authorities lost track of Montag. Soon after changing course, the police find a man walking down the street and begin to pursue him, telling the audience that he is Montag. They release the firemen’s Mechanical Hound, a robotic dog with a needle protruding from its muzzle which can inject large amounts of sedatives into its target, and it chases down and kills the man. The Mechanical Hound represents the strength of the firemen and the government; with tools like the Hound, they have the power to silence anyone who stands in their way of accomplishing their goals. After the Hound attacks the man, a television announcer triumphantly states that Montag is dead, and the audience does not realize that this is untrue, because as Granger points out to Montag, “‘They didn’t show that man’s face in focus. … Even your best friends couldn’t tell if it was you. They scrambled it just enough to let the imagination take over’” (Bradbury 143). Due to the advanced technology available to them, the television producers (likely under the direction of the government) are able to alter the images which members of the public are seeing on television, making the man unrecognizable. This way, the people will be satisfied, thinking that Montag is dead, and the government will look strong. The unknown man who suddenly finds himself being targeted serves as another symbol in the novel. He can represent the society as a whole, and how they are all victims of censorship. This man was particularly unfortunate, and lost his life just because the government wanted to maintain its appearance of calm and control. However, everyone is suffering, since they have no access to important knowledge of the past or to innovative new ideas. Their freedom and imagination are dying at the hands of the government, just like this man.

# data[].attributes.body
One major topic discussed in Fahrenheit 451 is censorship through the burning of books. In this futuristic society, Guy Montag and the other “firemen” burn books, rather than extinguishing blazes. Captain Beatty, the fire chief and Montag’s boss, pays a visit to Montag one day and explains to him the purpose of the firemen. In this scene, Beatty says, “‘Colored people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it’” (Bradbury 57). These books which Beatty mentions are very controversial, even today. Their society has chosen to censor these books in order to avoid offending people. Later in the novel, as Montag speaks with Captain Beatty again, a man named Professor Faber talks to him through an earpiece. Faber hopes to work with Montag in an attempt to eliminate the firemen from society. In an effort to convince Montag to stick to their plan rather than rejoining the firemen, Faber tells him to “‘remember that the Captain belongs to the most dangerous enemy to truth and freedom’” (Bradbury 104). Faber is pointing out that Captain Beatty and all of the firemen act as weapons of the government, ordered to burn books without question. They destroy knowledge and keep the public from learning about anything of which the government does not approve. Therefore, Beatty and the fire crews act as symbols, representing censorship in their society. Furthermore, they can symbolize narrow-minded administrative bodies which promote censorship for the sake of maintaining control, without considering the consequences of erasing information. Fire is another important symbol in the novel; like Beatty, it signifies censorship and the destruction of information. As the Captain tells Montag, “‘Burn all, burn everything. Fire is bright and fire is clean’” (Bradbury 57). The flames, and any type of censorship, can remove everything which the society deems unacceptable and will leave behind a clean slate, so that no memory remains of the illicit material.

# data[].attributes.body
The statement in this image highlights how hypocritical censorship can be. People may want to censor others' ideas and opinions because they disagree, but they are just using their own opinions to determine what is appropriate and what is not. This image asks, why is it that some people's opinions are supreme, and can be used to decide whether other ideas should be suppressed?

# data[].attributes.body
This quote from famous author Mark Twain mocks censorship, showing the flawed reasoning behind it. Twain is saying that the fact that some people may dislike certain content should not mean that everyone is denied access to it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
Parental advisory labels like this one were first introduced in 1990. Musical artists and record labels are expected, though not forced, to place these labels on the outside of albums in order to warn parents that content on the albums may not be suitable for children.

# data[].attributes.body
This very ironic image criticizes censorship by censoring itself. It keeps viewers from knowing what is being said, which is exactly what happens when books, music, the Internet, and other sources of information are censored.

# data[].attributes.body
This image conveys a sort of sarcastic message criticizing censorship. It uses dramatic words like "caution" and "dangerous" to mock peoples' reasoning for why they think content should be censored.

# data[].attributes.body
This image shows what a library or bookstore of the future could look like. If American society continues on its current path, we may soon be stripping books of their unique titles and covers and replacing them with warnings about potentially offensive content. We may start to focus on all of the issues we have with the books rather than the deeper messages they are trying to convey.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sherman Alexie Speaks Out Against Book Banning  

# data[].attributes.subject
Sherman Alexie Speaks Out Against Book Banning  

# data[].attributes.body
Sherman Alexie, an author, grew up on an Indian reservation, where he was very isolated from the outside world. For him, reading books was the only way to become exposed to new ideas. He feels that banning books is really used as a way to limit children's imaginative minds, and to eliminate critical thinking and the questioning of authority.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sherman Alexie: NCAC and books everywhere NEED YOU!

# data[].attributes.body
According to speaker Rebecca MacKinnon, in America and around the globe, private companies are censoring content at the request of governments. She states that these companies' decisions about how to manage their services have a major impact on what information people can and cannot access. The Internet has great potential for empowering people, but this potential is being limited by relationships between social networking companies and governments. MacKinnon believes that people must fight to make sure that the Internet becomes more centered around helping citizens, rather than governments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rebecca MacKinnon: Let's take back the Internet!

# data[].attributes.body
In his science fiction novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury highlighted many key issues in society, and, according to current examinations of American culture, was accurate in his notion that although censorship, as now evident in modern literature, music, and the Internet, may make people feel more content with their lives, it also limits individual thinking.

# data[].attributes.body
Alexa Sitzer
Mrs. Jenkins
English 10-7
9 May 2019