It is still Banned Books Week, so I am still talking about it. Today, I am passing on the full text of an article from EveryLibrary focused on how to respond and message and deal with a challenge when it happens.
It is hard in so many ways to message against book bans as they are happening, but since EveryLibrary has been fighting this fight on the front lines for the last 4 years, they have a lot of data about what works best.
I normally send you to the source to read an entire piece-- that link is here-- but this is too important. I want this information front and center and searchable in its entirety here on the blog.
Please read it. You may think you don't need this information at your library, but we all need it. Whether or not you have to use it at your specific place of work, you will be called on top speak out and act on this issue at some point. I get asked about the current state of book banning at just about every social situation I find myself in. Be ready with the right messaging.
Also, use this time to find libraries you need your help and support. I have and will continue to show up at the board meetings of other libraries-- in person and by sending comments in as well. We all can and should do this.
If nothing else comes out of Banned Books Week for you, my reader, it should be that it is past time for you to find a way to act, beyond shaking your head in disappointment and frustration.
How to Effectively Message Against Book Bans
by P.C. Sweeney
For the past four years, EveryLibrary has been working to fight the book-banning movement. A large part of that fight is developing effective messaging against book bans, as well as conducting extensive message testing, surveys, and focus groups to understand the impact of messaging and determine which messages perform best.
THIS IS NOT A GOOD-FAITH DISCUSSION
The first thing we need to understand when we’re messaging about book bans is that we are not operating in a good-faith discussion, and we need to stop acting as if we were. In a good-faith discussion, both parties agree to an honest, respectful dialogue with the willingness to change their view if facts and data are presented. However, book banners are neither acting honestly nor respectfully. They will not consume new information and change their minds once educated on the issue. The individuals and organizations banning books are not looking to be educated. They don’t care about learning about the Miller Test for pornography, they are not interested in reading the books to put their propagandist images of a handful of pages into proper context, and they aren’t going to change their minds about books being banned. We have to stop acting as they will do any of these things.
We also need to understand that the messaging used by the book banners to engage with the public is pure propaganda. The books in question are not pornography, and in every case where the Miller test has been applied or the books have been read by the review board to put them in context, they are not removed from school or public libraries. We also know that these books are not tools for grooming and the books being removed often teach children how not to be groomed, about body autonomy, that it's okay to say no, and how to report someone acting inappropriately toward them. That’s the opposite of grooming.
Pro–book banning messaging and propaganda is used as a tool to build political power and influence for people and organizations to elect or appoint individuals to positions that allow them to govern and control Americans. We’re seeing school board candidates, gubernatorial candidates, and state and federal legislators run with book bans as part of their platform.
Political power only comes from two places: people and money. If you have either of those on your side, you have the power to influence politics. While it would be nice if legislators supported things because they were good for America, they support things with political power and influence over their own issues.
PEOPLE POWER
People can drive politics, and whoever has the most strategic access to American voters has the power to influence political outcomes. For example, the reason we can’t discuss First Amendment rights in the United States is because the National Rifle Association (NRA) can immediately send an email to a million voters in a legislator’s district and create an incentive for that legislator to support the NRA’s agenda. If the legislator says something against the NRA, they risk losing the next election, thanks to an NRA email. Conversely, if the legislator says something in favor of the NRA’s agenda, they have the benefit of winning the next election.
One of the scariest aspects of people power is that a movement for change does not require that most people favor the change. In fact, research by Erica Chenowith found that no movement has ever failed that activated just 3.5 percent of the community . So if the individuals who are seeking to regulate American’s access to books can engage with just 3.5 percent of the public in a meaningful way, they will have the political power they need for lasting change.
FINANCIAL POWER
The other side of building political power is through money. For example, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a lobbying group that uses corporate money to lobby on behalf of corporate interests. Since a large portion of their agenda would not be palatable to the American public, and because they have access to a vast network of corporate money, they are using corporate funding to push their agenda. They use this money to make candidate contributions and partisan donations, and have a number of legal ways to move money to individuals in positions of power in government. These monetary incentives give them more opportunities to persuade legislators to make decisions that favor ALEC’s agenda. If a legislator comes out against their agenda, they can withhold money, and if a legislator supports their agenda, the legislator can gain access to those financial resources.
Unfortunately, there are not any organizations within the library space that have the financial resources to create and use political power through the use of money. In fact, EveryLibrary is one of the only organizations in the industry that has the legal structure, as a 501c4, to spend money in such a way that it can be used to influence politics, and EveryLibrary would need tens of millions of dollars annually to be effective.
THE BAD NEWS
The bad news is that the book banners understand political power. They are using their messaging as an opportunity to raise money and identify supporters and build influence. They have a major financial incentive to fundraise off the false narrative that they’re banning books about pornography in order to protect children. They can send an email to their supporters that claims they “protected children from pornography, so please make a $5 donation today,” raising millions of dollars by banning books. They are also building audiences, identifying supporters, and engaging communities by creating state and local chapters. This means that they are building political power and influence through both money and people. As an industry we need to understand this if we want to push back.
THE GOOD NEWS
The good news is that, by far, the majority of Americans are on our side. In survey after survey, between 70 and 80 percent of Americans on both sides of the aisle oppose book bans . However, we don’t know who those people are. That means we have the opportunity to win, but only if we understand that we need to use our messaging to identify individuals on our side and cultivate them into action to build a national network of Americans who are willing to take a stand against censorship. The way that most political organizations identify their supporters is through petitions, email campaigns, and events. These are the same tools that EveryLibrary uses to identify library supporters and build a national voter file of library supporters.
WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE
How do we effectively message in this environment? In 2022, EveryLibrary conducted political polls with the national firm Embold Research. This research included focus groups with message testing and message testing within the polling itself. Throughout the previous four years, we also conducted internal A/B testing of various messages for virality, engagement, and persuasion. Through this internal and external research, we were able to identify a number of highly effective messages against book bans.
One of the things we found throughout this testing is that the most effective messages are ones that use the fewest words or need the least amount of explanation. The reason that book banners are gaining traction is because “protecting children from porn” (even though that’s not what they’re doing) is an effective message that doesn’t require explanation. Understandably, the majority of the public is against exposing children to porn and immediately understands that message without explanation. However, our response has often been to explain the Miller Test in detail, long discussions about how it’s not pornography, the Pico ruling , how collection development policies work, and academic writings on the benefits of comprehensive sexual education. These messages are far too long, complex, and academic to be effective with the general public.
We also found that messages that reinforce the language of the book challengers allow them to control the message. The more often we repeat their language and messages, the more we solidify their messages in the minds of the public. Messages that don’t repeat the false narrative about pornography in libraries are the most effective ones.
The messages I present below are clear and concise and, according to our data, are effective at engaging 70 to 80 percent of the public and moving them into favorable action for libraries.
GOVERNMENT REGULATION
To be clear, the book-banning movement is leading to real outcomes in state legislatures across the country. Many states are creating government legislation that would regulate what Americans are allowed to read. When we tested the message “don’t let the government regulate your reading,” we found significant support from both Republicans and Democrats. Americans generally do not want the government making decisions for them about what books they are allowed to choose for themselves and their families.
We also found that messages around the legislation being enacted in dozens of states that would allow for the incarceration of library workers are very effective. Americans do not want to see librarians dragged to prison just because a legislator decided a book was inappropriate. Americans seem to understand that countries that begin arresting librarians and educators are on the path to dictatorship and fascism. Therefore, messages like “liberty and freedom have never begun by arresting librarians” are effective at inciting people to action.
RIDICULING THE MOVEMENT
I often fear that we take the book banners more seriously than necessary. Facing them head-on often just repeats and reinforces their messages with the public. The public is taking their messages seriously, mainly because libraries are.
While there are real damaging outcomes stemming from this movement, it is still not a serious movement among people who are truly concerned about the welfare of children. Their hyperbolic and ludicrous messaging that librarians are groomers and pedophiles does not deserve our serious attention. When we tested messages that lampooned the book banners, made them look weird and strange, and cast them as out-of-touch outsiders, we found that those messages were extremely effective at disarming them. If we can make a joke at the expense of the censors or otherwise make them appear inept, corrupt, or silly, they lose their power. If we take their messaging seriously, so will the public, and we will only reinforce their messaging instead of ours.
An effective way to do this is to make an example out of the ludicrous nature of book bans or point out some of the most absurd book bans that have occurred. According to our own tracking , more than 4,000 different titles have been challenged in the last two to three years alone. Yet the only ones the public sees are a handful of pages out of context from three or four books that are not at all representative of the kinds of titles that are actually being banned.
Some real-life examples of this absurdity of book banning include the banning of a book about seahorses because a Moms for Liberty activist at a school board meeting said it was too sexy . They’ve tried to ban books about crayons , tried to ban books about butts , forced librarians to draw pants on goblins , and had the dictionary removed from some schools for review because it has bad words in it.
Our testing found that when we expose the public to some of the most egregious examples from the other 4,000 books that have been targeted, they realize the true nature of the book banning movement.
THE BANNING OF CHILDREN’S AND YA CLASSICS
By far, most of the public opposes banning classic children’s books and literature, especially the popular books that people have read as children. When we talk about books like Catcher in the Rye, The Diary of a Young Girl, To Kill a Mockingbird, or Lord of the Flies being banned, we see a significant increase in opposition to book bans. The most interesting thing about this messaging is that the book bans do not need to be current. The discussion of classic books being contested over the span of the last 50 years helps the public put book bans into a historical context and envision a world with more bans. However, we are still seeing many classic children’s books being challenged and we are seeing books being banned that teach about historical figures like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King . We should be highlighting the banning of these books in our messaging.
LEAST EFFECTIVE MESSAGES
Not all the messages we tested were effective. In fact, some tested below 30 percent of public support, and a few of those surprised us. But generally, the least effective messages were ones that took the censors seriously, were overly academic, or required long-winded explanations. Unfortunately, we were extremely surprised to see that the most support for book bans occurred when messaging was about LGBTQIA+ issues, comprehensive sex ed, or issues around Critical Race Theory, politics, and fascism. The public either didn’t care about such messaging or they were outright supportive of book bans in those areas. Discussions of those marginalized communities moved the most people to actually support book bans.
FIGHTING BACK
Messaging is great, but it’s nothing unless we can use it to identify our supporters and call them into action. Simply putting these messages into the world will not ensure that we triumph over book bans. Winning against censorship means sophisticated community organizing, building relationships of power with organizations, identifying supporters and cultivating them into action, and ultimately electing leaders who support libraries and the freedom to read.
Unfortunately, most libraries, as government organizations, don’t have the tools, resources, or legal authority to build the movement they need to fight off the activists attacking them. The most effective defense against book banners comes from members of the local community who are willing to fight back. Platforms such as figthforthefirst.org allow community members to launch petitions and communicate with supporters to help them organize the community against groups who are seeking to censor the library and eliminate the community’s right to read.
If your library is facing book bans, you can fight back.
P.C. Sweeney, a former administrative and school librarian, was Executive Director of EveryLibrary California and is currently Digital Director of EveryLibrary, a statewide initiative to support library propositions. He was a 2015 LJ Mover and Shaker, and was recognized with a “40 Under 40” award by the American Association of Political Consultants for his work at EveryLibrary. He is coauthor of Winning Elections and Influencing Politicians for Library Funding and Before the Ballot; Building Support for Library Funding (both ALA), and teaches courses on politics and libraries at the San José State University School of Information.
