Responding to complaints by a Muslim creationist that “its contents were defamatory and blasphemous,” a Turkish court has banned Internet users from viewing Richard Dawkins’ website. Meanwhile, here in North America, Scholastic has pulled all Bratz books from its lineup, the culmination of a campaign by a Boston-based group charging that the series, designed for reluctant readers and based on a popular line of dolls, encouraged “precocious sexuality.”
While the context for each case is vastly different, both are examples of a small group of people imposing their values on a much larger group. However, one case is portrayed as the victory of a small-minded zealot over freedom of speech (in The Guardian), while the other is the triumph of grassroots activism over crass commercialism (as reported by the National Post).
Have you ever read a Bratz book? How do you know they are designed to encourage “reluctant readers”? Have you seen any studies that reading Bratz books leads “reluctant readers” to go to read other books? Maybe these books are just designed to promote the Bratz brand.
Why should Scholastic be allowed to promote a line of dolls in schools? Do we let Toys-R-Us come into schools and sell dolls?
And finally, what makes you so sure that a much larger group wants Scholastic to promote the Bratz in schools?
Circle your calendars. The National Post backed grassroots activism over crass commercialism.
[...] Bratz brand from their school offerings. I have to say , though, that I’m taken aback by all of th epeople likening Scholastic’sdecision to[...]