New Zealand has just banned "Into The River", it's first book banning in 22 years

[jgaiser]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainm...ectid=11509128

New Zealand author Ted Dawes has had his award winning YA book Into the River banned for sale within New Zealand. Apparently all media (movies and books) can/must have a rating. A conservative Christian group, Family First, made a complaint due to language, sex and violence and the book's R14 rating was removed. Completely unavailable until at least the end of the month (well, except for Amazon).

[chitrodhar]

Is it this book btw?
http://www.amazon.com/Into-River-Ted.../dp/B00FKE3XUU

I am gonna buy it. I am always intrigued to read banned books

[eschwartz]

So... New Zealand has state-mandated filters?

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

So... New Zealand has state-mandated filters?

And a filter with teeth. $3000 for an individual supplying the book and $10000 for a business. New Zealand is serious about their book banning.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by chitrodhar

Is it this book btw?
http://www.amazon.com/Into-River-Ted.../dp/B00FKE3XUU

I am gonna buy it. I am always intrigued to read banned books

I agree. And, believe it or not, I believe there is a theory going around that many teenagers and even children feel the same. And, believe it or not, it is also said that some teenagers are actually good with computers. Evenm many of the not so good ones know about proxies and VPN's. And there is this technology you may have heard of. I think it's called file sharing. It's fortunate indeed that the New Zealand government rules the world and its ban applies to all bookstores world wide. What? It doesn't?

So how can we help the New Zealand puritans keep this evil book from corrupting the pure, innocent minds of their young? Uh, we can't! Please, nobody tell the politicians this. The world needs its luddites in positions of power!

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

So... New Zealand has state-mandated filters?

Web? I don't think so. Also, it would be a singular filter:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-0...-novel/6755780

A spokesman confirmed that no book had been subject to such a ban since current legislation was introduced in 1993.

The book is only banned until a decision is made as to the minimum age for sale to children is determined. A permanent all-ages ban is not one of the options, as noted in the next-to-last sentence here.

Here what the supposed villain of the piece is saying:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainm...ectid=11509627

"We're not calling for it to be banned and we never have," Family First national director Bob McCoskrie told Radio New Zealand. We'd just like an age restriction in the same way that a movie has an R16 or R18.

I don't think setting up such an age restriction system for narrative fiction is a worthwhile use of adult time.

The mini-scandal here isn't characteristic of New Zealand. It sounds like it's a malfunction of their legal system that will be remedied. It certainly makes no sense that, right now, it can't be bought in New Zealand, in paper, by an individual of any age, even though everyone agrees it's OK for older teens. It also doesn't make sense that it's unavailable from a local eBook seller, since such sales have to go through an adult credit card:

http://www.fishpond.co.nz/t/Into+The...ry=New+Zealand

It's also banned at the library:

http://www.wcl.govt.nz/carlweb/jsp/F...Number=1089345

Not good, but, folks, this isn't like China or Russia.

[AnotherCat]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

So... New Zealand has state-mandated filters?

I take your post has the meaning that it can, of course, just be downloaded but for the sake of clarity the answer is that it does not have state mandated filters. However, using an NZ IP address I cannot see the book on either of Amazon or Kobo (but other Ted Dawes books are listed) so it may be they are not serving the book to NZ IPs? (EDIT#2 Note: am referring to eBooks, can see paperback on Amazon with NZ IP and even look inside it , dunno if they would ship it tho' )

-------------------------------------------------

Moving on with some general comment that is my take on the situation.

NZ does not have a habit of banning things, in fact quite the opposite. This situation with this book is just part of an ongoing battle between Family First NZ and the book's classification (Family First is an activist conservative Christian Group regarded by many as being puritanical busybodies; they are strongly anti gay and the book covers gay behaviour in teens as well as bullying, etc.). It should be noted that the book has not been banned but is just subject to an interim restriction order on sale and sharing while part of this game plays out.

In NZ books, films, etc. are classified by the Classification Office but over arching this members of the community can request a review of its decisions by the Film and Literature Board of Review, which is made up of Gov't appointed relevantly qualified members nominated by the public.

This prize winning book ("The Book of the Year" and the "Young Adult Fiction" winner in the 2013 NZ Childrens' book awards) was originally classified as unrestricted (with warnings) by the Classification Office, but as a result of an application to the Board of Review by Family First it was reclassified to R14. This reclassification was contrary to the beliefs of the Library community (including school libraries) and, as far as I can see, also of most involved with childrens' literature.

Apart from the general belief that the book depicted life as it was, and so did not warrant the removal of the unrestricted classification, it was a concern that the R14 classification was limiting the book's availability to those 14 years and over entitled to read it (it could not go on open library shelves, nor be displayed in shops as they only have R18 restriction shelves) and because while the book also speaks to under 14 year old teens they were denied access to it. So the Auckland Public Library (with, as I understand it, the support of the Library community and others) made an application to the Review Board for the book to be reclassified again and it was just recently reclassified to unrestricted again (as it originally was).

So back to the Review Board go Family First to get that overturned again and the President of the Review Board placed, at the request of Family First, the current interim restriction order on it, as he can do until a full hearing of the Board if he thinks it is in the public interest to do so (as an aside, his known personal beliefs are being questioned as to whether they influenced his decision).

As far as I know there have been some moves organising an application (yet another one) to the Review Board to get the interim restriction removed but that these are generally leading to the conclusion that as the Review Board is going to have to meet very soon and the book likely to be reclassified back to unrestricted, it can just be left to run its course.

As a final comment I think it is important to understand that this is not a banning of books adventure (also, the interim restriction means that one can still possess it) but rather that it is just a play by an activist group taking advantage of the law such that the classification can be revisited. As far as I am aware even Family First do not overtly claim to want the book banned as they have stated that they were happy with the recently overturned R14 classification. There are other NZ teen books of similar content, "Into the River" as a prize winning book is likely just being picked on first by them in the hope that a precedent will flow into reclassifying these others. Instead it is resulting in much interest in many now wanting to get and read the book in order to assess it for themselves.

[eschwartz]

@SteveEisenberg, @AnotherCat,

I did indeed understand that it isn't permanently banned.


That is why I didn't mention the ban at all, I only made reference to the filter.
Reminds me of that stupid app we discussed a while back, except government mandated.

Why the ____ is there a "Classification Office", and why are they telling people what books they can buy at what age?
Isn't this a matter of How To Raise Your Children?

If people want to know which books are appropriate for which ages, go make some community-maintained non-profit non-gov't group to give ratings.

[AnotherCat]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

@SteveEisenberg, @AnotherCat,

I did indeed understand that it isn't permanently banned.


That is why I didn't mention the ban at all, I only made reference to the filter...

Yes, with respect to you I was just referring to the filter, nothing about the ban. The rest under the line of hyphens and the "Moving on....etc." was for general consumption (well, assuming anyone wanted to consume it )-I was just too lazy to start another post for that bit.

[AnotherCat]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Why the ____ is there a "Classification Office", and why are they telling people what books they can buy at what age?
Isn't this a matter of How To Raise Your Children?

Interesting developments now in that the Government is making its view clear. The NZ Attorney General (the head of Justice, similar to that with same title in the USA except that he is an elected politician being a government Member of Parliament in the House of Representatives, rather than a Presidential nomination from the law) has come out and said along the lines of that banning books was not the sort of thing done in NZ, that the interim restriction seems an extreme step, and that it may be time for the legislation that allowed it to be looked at .

[meeera]

Sounds like all Family First has achieved is to create a situation where the author is laughing all the way to the bank. Which is a pretty excellent outcome for book challenges to have.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Why the ____ is there a "Classification Office", and why are they telling people what books they can buy at what age?
Isn't this a matter of How To Raise Your Children?

Presumably for the same reason the U.S. has a "Classifications and Ratings Administration", which is "to provide parents information concerning the content of those motion pictures, to aid them in determining the suitability of individual motion pictures for viewing by their children."

Although books aren't rated in the UK, there seems to be no particular contradiction between a desire to classify films and books.

[eschwartz]

I guess I just don't understand why either one is the job of the gov't.

But at least no one is legally obligated to abide by the age restrictions set down by the Classifications and Ratings Administration, are they.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

But at least no one is legally obligated to abide by the age restrictions set down by the Classifications and Ratings Administration, are they.

NZ law is probably closer to British law. In the UK, age classifications assigned to films by our equivalent body, the "British Board of Film Classification" are legally binding. It's a criminal offence in the UK to sell someone a DVD or a video game (video games also have age ratings) who is younger than the rating assigned to the film or game.

[eschwartz]

Incidentally, looking at CARA's website and Wiki article, I didn't see any indication that they are anything other than a private project by the MPAA.