In the comments section of the August 28th This Week in Publishing, a few people were discussing whether children’s books should be rated for sexual and/or violent content in the same way as movies and video games in order to help parents decide what is appropriate for their kids to read.
And while I wasn’t able to participate, this subject also came up in the weekly #kidlitchat on Twitter.
What do you think: should children’s book publishers rate the content in their books so that parents can determine which books are age-appropriate? Is this censorship or at the very least, could it aid censorship?
And, also importantly: would this help sales? Would a publisher who voluntarily rated the content of their books see a sales bump or would there be an outcry?
If you’re reading via e-mail or in a blog reader, click through for a poll.
Anonymous says
I am afraid that ratings could result in censorship that could inhibit the magic and freedom of children's literature. It could become too much like book burning.
I think parents and teachers and school librarians should make judgment calls on which books children are allowed to read.
Susan Quinn says
The need for ratings on books vs. movies is demonstrated by the difference between a 10 year old's imagination while reading a book and a 35 year old movie producer's vision for his movie.
Movie ratings are more important. Still, I'm in favor of ratings on books, as guidance for parents.
Heather B. Moore says
There are some review sites that already do this–you just have to know where to look.
I think it would increase sales for the more edgy books because the kids would be scrambling to read them. LOL. Maybe the utopian answer would be to have the children's publishers actually put out books that had appropriate content for children.
A rating wouldn't be nearly as effective as a content description.
Renee Pinner says
Scary idea. I wonder if parents who don't have the time to flip through a book, or do a web search to see what their child is reading will even be bothered to review a content rating?
If parents aren't taking their time to talk to their children about what they're reading, they're missing a golden opportunity for teaching and bonding.
I don't think the parents who would use a content rating system are the ones we need worry most about.
Anonymous says
I can just picture A Little Princess with that lovely Tasha Tudor illustration on the cover and a label on the back.
Contains:
Emotional and Physical Abuse of Children
Pain and Grief–Child Suffers Alone
Death of a Loved One–Child Loses Parent
Hunger/Starvation by Children
Blatant Classism
Violation of Child Labor Laws
Flagrant Disregard of Zero Population Growth
Slang
Anonymous says
The Simpsons on TV were very controversial when they first appeared. A LOT of parents thought "NO WAY" would they let their kids watch it. It was interesting to see that sentiment shift.
Harry Potter was considered anti-Christian by some.
In the end, I think it should be the parents' choice. Some parents read very sophisticated material to their kids. Others not so.
I read everything until a day when I was about ten and the local store owner called my mom and said I'd bought a certain book. Well, she immediately got it out of my hands and the house. I can't say I understood the first chapter that I read of it very well, but it sort of had disturbed me and *later* I got why. I'm glad she didn't let me read further.
But, in truth, she also exposed me to some other kinds of emotionally upsetting books that were pretty hard on a little kid that I wished she had pulled too.
Anonymous says
Let's go at this from a different direction than just for kids. I personally like knowing what kind of stuff I'm getting into before I buy a book. Me, an adult wants to know.
As an author of edgy YA, I want my readers to know what they are buying.
I have never, and will never stop my thirteen and eighteen year old daughters from watching, playing, or reading what they want to.
However, I do not want them to waste their money on things they do not want to read because hidden between some Twilight knock off's pages some vamp is getting the inside of his upper thigh sucked on by another vamp.
Would my daughters like to know what they are buying as far as content? Yes!
J. Jones says
Understandably, parents have a strong need to police what material is placed before their children. This is ideal, and should be encouraged.
However, it is simply impractical for a parent to pre-read every book her child might read to determine its appropriateness. Therefore, a rating system would greatly benefit that parent.
However, rating systems are largely subjective and subject to emotional tide. The classic example is that of the F.C.C., which occasionally decides cases one way then the opposite a year later.
As a result, any book rating system, while providing such an invaluable benefit to parents everywhere, would most likely result in ambiguity in the rating process, preventing authors from producing their best work, due to second-guessing the rating system. That's not conducive to the industry.
While no reasonable person would support the idea of putting inappropriate material – which is defined parent to parent – into the hands of children, it would take only one offense by an author to permanently remove her work from that home.
Therefore, due to market pressures, it's on the author's honor to produce work that doesn't push the envelope when it comes to children's books. There is a great degree of trust granted to authors of such books, and that trust mustn't be abused, or the penalties could be severe.
Nathan says
I like what Mira said about posting content rather than a rating. I get more useful information about movies from their content advisories than from their specific rating.
Authors who feel to inject such subject matter into their novels shouldn't be afraid of their own content. A simple listing of such content should serve to support their intended theme, rather than oppose it.
It isn't about what is too violent, or too racy. It's a simple statement that this book does contain elements of violence, or of a sexual nature, or whatever. Leave the "too" to the parents. They'll determine what's appropriate or not, and to what degree for their own children. As parents, that is their right.
Just content, not rating or censorship.
sex scenes at starbucks says
Books provide a really safe environment for kids to grow and explore. Films put it all in your head for you, but books allow a reader to digest what they can at their own rate. It's also easier to shut a book than to turn off a movie.
Jen P says
Content labels rather than ratings – I wonder if there is more graphic violence and overt sexual content in books which are considered mainstream YA reading today, than in the past? But violence, bad language and sex are not all equal in their portrayal.
There is a certainly a fine difference between content rating and age banding. The latter is clearly wrong beacuse it puts off 'slow' readers from books which are labelled below their age, yet may be ideal reading matter. In the UK, the age banding has been a hotly debated subject decried by authors and librarians alike. Philip Pullman was heavily involved amongst others, in the anti-age banding campaign http://www.notoagebanding.org.
As a parent, I automatically jump to say yes to anything I think will protect my children from 'bad' encounters of violence, language and behaviour, but content labeling might have put me off buying books such as Lord of the Rings or Lord of the Flies which I had read as a very young, young adult. Yet, the violence in TLOTR comes across as somewhat less nasty than say in The Knife of Never Letting Go.
Perhaps the types of content which are considered acceptable by publishers for YA / Children's books today warrant more guidance than in the past?
Although I voted yes, I am actually ending to no, after more consideration.
:)Ash says
Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. BAD!
That is going to automatically lead to censorship, because schools and libraries will choose the G-rated novels to be on the safe side.
And that will cause publishers to stop acquiring novels that are not G-rated.
I truly hope this never happens; it will be a sad day for children's literature.
Thermocline says
The way libraries classify and shelve juvenile books is a de facto rating system that’s been in place forever and no one seems to have any issues with it. Granted, this is more about readability but it’s still useful when trying to find books appropriate for various ages of kids.
I’d rather see content labels than ratings. Not only can they guide people away from content they don’t want but they would be better than a rating at helping people find elements that interest them – Intense Horror Sequences versus Descriptions of Risqué Encounters
Ashley says
I generally disagree with any kind of formal rating system. I do sympathize with parents, and understand it's hard to be ontop of everything with your kids. I feel, however, that informal systems (read: websites made by parents, for parents) are a better idea.
I have found, while reasearching film ratings, that many parents (yes, overgeneralization, forgive me), want it spelled out for them. They don't want to put in any effort, and so when they child is exhausted to naughtymedia, they scream and holler about it.
If you have time to check a rating, you have time to ask a librarian or bookseller, or google the title online for a review (of which there will be plenty).
The simple truth of the matter is each parent knows their own child, and what that child is mature enough to read/see/play; a little rating symbol can't tell you that.
Mark Brockman says
My WIP has the F word twice. I don't want it pushed into YA with a warning label. Or maybe I do. Hmm.
Cheryl says
I'm totally opposed to the ratings systems on the books because it is too subjective. If people want a rating system, let someone set up a website, allow parents to give feedback and reviews. Then those who want to research the book as opposed to reading it themselves can go to site and see the evaluations.
SeaHayes says
Content advisories would be helpful for parents. Our school librarian recently cautioned me to look closely at the content of books that are popular among young kids. Many times their reading level far exceeds their experience level and can present a problem for parents who want to limit what their children are exposed to.
Anonymous says
"hidden between some Twilight knock off's pages some vamp is getting the inside of his upper thigh sucked on by another vamp."
Do we really think it's bad not to warn some unsuspecting person that kind of content is being aim at young teens?
MBA Jenna says
Great question, I can't decide.
As a parent: yes, certainly. It is part of my job to shelter them while they are unable to process the flaws of humanity in a safe manner. Discussion is wonderful, but screaming nightmares are not an acceptable consequence. And yet I don't have time to prescreen all of their media. So more info. = better.
That's part of why the "classics" sell so well, they are prescreened.
But the logistical problems inherent in determining the criteria, enforcement, and the inevitable gaming of the system pretty much negate the value.
Anonymous says
Who gets to say what's appropriate and what isn't?
This is censorship, plain and simple, and will have a chilling effect on children's boook authors.
Lyn Miller-Lachmann says
The designations of "middle grade" and "young adult" are themselves a kind of rating system, especially when many young adult novels are designated as "14 and up." However, the MG/YA/YA 14 and up don't quite correspond to the movie rankings, as I'd consider most YA 14's to be somewhere between a PG-13 and an R.
As the author of a YA novel designated 14 and up, I don't object to a more explicit YA-14 designation that parents and teens, as well as readers of trade reviews, can see. But one should realize that not all books with that designation have it due to sex and profanity. I took most of the profanity out of my novel in the final revision, and the sex is not at all explicit. However, the novel portrays a 17-year-old and his family dealing with the aftermath of repression and violence during the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile, and there are things that younger children who don't have the life experience or knowledge of history would find disturbing.
Anonymous says
My daughter read like crazy and I preread every single thing through age sixteen and we talked about books all throughout. I never gave a child a book ever that I didn't read first.
As an older teenager, she wanted to privately read some books and I didn't censor those, but kept the conversation open to talking about them if she wanted to. Usually she did, but sometimes not.
I have never had a problem pre-reading. It comes with the territory of parenthood.
But if I had had a problem, I would have turned to a trusted website that offered opinions, talking points, etc. That would be helpful to non-reading parents (hopefully not too many of them here on this blog).
JES says
I've got no business voting on this, let alone commenting, because I'm not a parent (or a kid, for that matter, except in the loosest sense :), not a librarian, not a kidlit author, and otherwise not in The Business. I suspect I'd have stronger opinions and more to say if I fell into any of those categories.
But man, I gotta say, just as a reading citizen: content ratings give me the heebie-jeebies — especially if instituted for convenience.
Anonymous says
I also know enough to walk out of a bad movie.
Now that is an important conversation and example to show your kids too.
Some material is just not for people, period.
But I like my discretion and freedom as a parent.
Travener says
Nathan — Your poll should have more options for answers, such as "Don't Give a Hoot"…
Anonymous says
I think if you love good literature and a good story, you help your kids to too.
But likewise, if you watch or read in the gutter, they will probably follow you in.
Parenting is the ultimate moral and ethical defining place.
It is also my humble opinion that teachers need to be bold and brave and enlightened enough to do more than just expose kids to material; they need to talk about serious issues in books.
My biggest problem with some reading material for kids is no one helping them to understand the material.
Anonymous says
I am imagining that Nathan's future kids will have the best reading rainbow world.
bethanyintexas says
After reading the post and a few of the comments written here, my take is that there's absolutely nothing wrong with a rating system. Shoot, we have them for movies.
Growing up, my mother made a point of seeing the covers of what I was checking out. She made sure I was reading age-appropriate material. She took a look at what I had (especially if I wasn't sure about something). My mother is a mother of 8 kids, so it can be done. (I'm the second-to-the-youngest, by the way, she also had to make sure my younger brother wasn't being overly ambitious. I mean the kid was reading Encylopedias for FUN at like the age of 12! Believe me, censorship didn't harm him any or me for that matter).
I started off with things like "The Betsy-Tacy" books by Maud Hart Lovelace, "Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle" by Betty MacDonald, "B Is For Betsy" (can't remember the author's name) and several same sort of books. Besides, what about the classics? CS Lewis' "Narnia" series, "The Hobbit", Mark Twain's work…?
Now that I'm an adult I make my own decisions, but I absolutely agree with a rating system. I'm a mother and I think kids don't have to know about the "real world" when they're 10 or even 13. They'll find out about the "real world" soon enough.
reader says
They already have a rating system for YA:
On the jacketflap of each book there is a statement reading the book is meant for ages 12+ or 14+.
That means an innocent 12 year-old can steer clear of racier themes they don't care about or understand and a 15 year-old won't necessarily be bored to death reading something that is so scrubbed clean that it holds no resonance for him or her.
Are people really suggesting we do more than that? If parents are too stupid to read the 12+ or 14+ on the book and not know what that means, then that is their problem, not the book industrys.
Dick Margulis says
I voted no.
I have never seen evidence that a normal, healthy child's reading or viewing something caused harm beyond, perhaps, some vivid and disturbing dreams for a week or so. (Even kids know bad dreams aren't real.)
The major "harm" when a kid reads something the parent thinks is inappropriate is that the parent is discomfited by the child's ensuing questions. If parents are going to be uncomfortable in answering a question from a child, then the parents have to get their heads screwed on straight. If that sounds like more work than they want to do, then they'll just have to monitor what the kid is reading/viewing/playing.
Yes, I'm a parent. No, I never censored my kids' reading or viewing matter. Yes, they've both grown into healthy, productive citizens. (And my parents didn't believe in censorship either.)
Now if a kid is running around the neighborhood torturing animals, then yes, you do have to get help for that kid; and if the person providing the help suggests a censorship regime in the home, go for it. But don't encourage parents of healthy kids to do the same.
Nick says
I believe ratings to be so subjective that integrating them with the publishers would probably not be the best idea. However, third-party rating websites would probably be a nice tool for the concerned. It's not really fair to label a book and an author a concise rating, books and authors deserve a lengthier explanation. I do agree with the sentiment that YA is a pretty wide genre, encompassing books written for an older crowd who likes to read about YA age characters to actual young adults reading about YA characters.
Robert McGuire says
In theory, maybe, but in practice, we've yet to see this done well. I recommend the film "This Film Is Not Yet Rated." It does a great job of showing how the rationale for the movie rating system and the actual consequence of it are miles apart. The rationale sounds sensible enough, but the result is inane. As a culture, we haven't yet demonstrated that we are mature enough to actually handle a rating system responsibly. Maybe when we grow up a little.
M says
I just finished reading Margo Lanagan's Tender Morsels.
I voted "No."
The book was simply gorgeous. Gorgeously written. Gorgeously narrated. Just beautiful.
But if the content of the book had been displayed on the spine, what words would have been used to describe it to wary parents? "This book contains detailed descriptions of miscarriages, incest, gang rape, and suggestions of bestiality?"
That kind of copy inherently stacks the deck.
The idea that a brief content description could be somehow less biased than a rating system is illusory. It will always depend on who is doing the rating or describing. Let's just call a spade a spade.
/soapbox
Anonymous says
"PG" according to what standards? "R" according to whose standards?
Go on goodreads. There are reviews there where one person is offended because a character used the Lord's name in vain — for them that would be an "R" book. For someone else, a character would have to have graphic sex described to get that rating. The YA, "Inexcusible," is about date rape. It was a finalist for the National Book award. Would that be an "R" even though it contained very limited "bad" language, and didn't use graphic language or images for the date rape scene?
Who gets to decide?
I'd rather see a rating system that says, "Stephenie Meyer knockoff, don't bother." Or, "This cover is butt-ugly, but this book will change your life, read it." Or, "The publisher is pushing this crappy book because they paid a lot of money for it, don't be fooled –it's derivitive as hell."
One can hope, right? 🙂
Laura Martone says
I agree with Natalie… I thought long and hard about my answer before voting.
I don't have children, so I admit I'm not looking at this issue from a parent's point of view. I'm looking at it from a reader/writer's point of view… and from the perspective of someone who's already annoyed with TV and film ratings.
Who will decide the rating? And based on what criteria? For example, I would be appalled if a book garnered a mature rating for tackling gay/lesbian issues.
Movies are already a prime example – the MPAA really has no set standard. Some things get by the censors and some don't. How many curse words is too many? How racy can a sex scene get? How violent is too violent?
I understand the need to rate things so that parents can monitor their children's exposure to mature content, but on the other hand, I do consider it a form of censorship, if only because someone else is deciding what is and isn't too mature.
I like the way my mom handled it. When I was a child, she would let me read mature books and watch rated-R films as long as we could discuss them afterward. And I seemed to turn out okay. 🙂
lauren says
Ha ha, Anon 12:28, I was just thinking about what my own personal "rating system" would be! I think it would include:
rated Pr for "Prada" — excessive descriptions of characters' designer clothes, with gratuitous brand-dropping
rated DP! for "dead pets warning!" – see that nice dog on the first page, reader? He will be dead for Meaningful Reasons by page 233. Tissues included on inside back cover.
rated To for "token" – a single ethnic character shows up to teach the nondescript white characters about his/her culture.
Anyway.
I'm optimistic that a ratings system will never happen. For one thing, who on Earth would PAY for the enormous research costs involved in such an endeavor? Certainly not the already cash-strapped publishers. And even if a system were developed by an outside group (thought I can't see a group like ALA wanting to do something like this), would all the publishers agree to use it / conform to it? I doubt it.
Robert McGuire mentioned the "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" documentary. I recommend that one, too. It's quite eye-opening.
AM says
I think the voting might line up along the same lines as the number of blog followers who are parents with young children versus those who are not.
As a parent, I would want to know the age suitability of books' contents so I can help guide my children’s development.
I don't believe rating books should be considered censorship unless the ratings were used to block the sales or the offering of certain books. In fact, in some cases, rating may improve some books sales because parents could feel more comfortable with their suitability beyond the many times over dramatized covers.
Anonymous says
The kinds of people most attracted to censoring things for their children are also the kinds of people least likely to buy anything for their kids but "Bill O'Reilly's Bedtime Stories" and "The Bad Little Liberal."
jimnduncan says
While it's certainly difficult if not impossible to control what books one's kids have access to, I can certainly see the point of having content labels. The biggest thing for me, is not so much being able to limit what gets read, but just knowing that what I buy would have sexual content in it. Then of course comes the difficulty in exactly how you rate that. The range for 'sexual' is all over the place. I'd want to know if there is sexual intercourse involved, but would I care if there is lesser content? Probly not. This is a hard one. I like the idea, but not so sure implementation is feasible in a workable way.
K says
Can I speak for the YA readers here? I'm fresh out of the YA range (20, but it's not like I've stopped reading them), and I think censorship is a terrible idea. Like some of the comments before me, a lot of teens don't like to go see a PG movie, just because of its rating.
But more importantly, there are some crazy parents out there. Many of my friends would have missed out on some great literature had their parents checked out the "rating" before hand.
I understand that each parent has different levels of comfort with what their children read, but at the same time, literature exposes us to the world in a way video games and movies can't. If they want to censor books, why not censor the basic human experience as well? Impossible, and bad idea.
JJ says
I think content rating on children's books is a terrible, terrible idea. TERRIBLE.
I'm less concerned with what children are exposed to than the fact that less-than-enlightened parents might keep important things from their children. I grew up in a household that strictly held to the movie ratings rule. I was 12 years old when TITANIC was released in theatres. I was never allowed to watch it because I was not yet 13. By the time I turned 13, it was already out.
It may sound like a silly story, but the truth is, my parents didn't prevent from watching TITANIC because they didn't think I was ready for the mild nudity and discreet sex scene—they didn't even bother to check it out themselves. They made no qualitative judgment about the film and just blindly agreed with the rating.
Now, I was fortunate in that I was allowed to read anything I wanted, but my younger brother (who is 10 years younger than I) was not so lucky. My parents prevented him from reading Philip Pullman's HIS DARK MATERIALS because they had heard the series was about "killing God". No, the books are about the rightness and sweetness of losing innocence and "growing up". My parents did not bother to read the series themselves to determine whether or not the OTHER content might have been objectionable: the violence, the severing of Will's fingers, the underage smoking, etc.
I agree with someone's comment above me in that you can't shield children from the world; you can only help them understand it. I probably learned the most objectionable things from my own peers (really, does anyone remember being a kid? How the naughtiest things made us giggle with guilt?), not the books I read.
Marsha Sigman says
I think content rating children's books would be the beginning of a new era and we could call it Censorship Gone Wild.
At some point we have to actually parent and keep an eye on what our kids are exposed to instead of letting someone else do it for us. Who would decide the rating system? Someone who thinks if you like Harry Potter then you must worship Satan? I don't think so.
Reading broadens the mind, stretches the imagination. Its discovery and its different for each person. I want my son to feel that and not be restricted by what someone else thinks.
Etiquette Bitch says
we're already turning into way too much of a nanny/police state. kids always want to "read up," and I applaud kids like in Heahter Sunseri's post, want to read ANYTHING.
It's bad enough that we have parents who don't want their kids to hear our most historic president (or any president, for that matter) speak — let's not give them any more ammo or excuses to censor what the kids see.
Other Lisa says
I vote "no." The arguments against such a system have been well-articulated here, I think, but I'll reiterate the difference between written and visual content.
I'm not a parent, and I was raised in a different era of child-rearing. We just weren't micro-managed the way most kids seem to be today. We read what we wanted (though I did have to search the house pretty thoroughly to uncover that copy of "Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex…").
Any kind of ratings system is at best a shorthand for real information. I can only say that parents who are concerned about their kids' reading habits would be better served by taking the time to look through books rather than depending on a system that is essentially arbitrary. I think the censorship such a system would inevitably bring outweighs any virtues it might have as a convenience for parents.
I'm not a parent, but if I were, I'd think two things: I'd be glad that my kids were reading, and I'd hope they were reading good quality writing as opposed to junk, regardless of content.
Clarity says
The question is choice. Parents should have the option in a world were "appropriate" lines are growing more obscure – to vet.
THEN again, I am reminded of Thomas Jefferson's words:
"Are we to have a censor whose imprimatur shall say what books shall be sold and what we may buy?"
He continued,
"Maybe so".
Hannah says
90 comments as of this moment and not a single person has mentioned this already being broached and argued about in the UK?
A whole bunch of publishers decided they were going to put age recommendations on their books – 5+, 7+, 13+ etc. And promptly a whole bunch of children's authors screamed with outrage that anyone felt they had the right to deem at what age a child was ready for a book. I think I was about elven or twelve when I read my first sex scene, in Malorie Blackman's 'Noughts and Crosses'. I thought it was a fantastic book and I wasn't remotely scarred by it, or traumatised. The book said 'not suitable for younger readers' on the back, I felt I wasn't a young reader, and I made my own decision about it. That or 'Teen' is what is written on any UK book with more 'mature' content, and I think that's enough. It means parents won't buy the books for small children and people can read it without feeling they're showing the world they're reading a book containing 'Graphic violence and scenes of a sexual nature.'
Quite often, kids know when they're ready for something. I wanted to read Jeffrey Archer's 'Kane and Abel' from about the age of nine. My parents refused because there's a graphic rape scene in it, which they told me about when I was around eleven and wanted to know why I couldn't read it. I decided I could deal with it so I 'borrowed' it from their bookshelf and read it. And it was graphic but then it was over and I dealt with it, as I knew I'd be able to. Alternately a friend of mine put off reading it until she was about 15 because she thought it would give her nightmares.
Children are quite often more sensible than we give them credit for.
Marilyn Peake says
I think it would be a great idea; and, if the movies are any indication, rating for content does not lead to censorship. Movies run the gamut from G movies suitable for everyone to PG where parents should decide for their own individual child to PG-13 to R, and brief explanations are given in movie reviews for why each movie earned its rating. R movies include a great deal of adult content; but, hello, those movies are not suitable for young children. For example, I recently saw DISTRICT 9, thought it was one of the best science fiction movies I’ve ever seen, but do not feel it’s at all suitable for young children.
Laura Martone says
Bane – It took me a while to read through the comments, so I just found your question at 10:42 am –
For everyone adamantly opposed to rating books, are you equally opposed to movie ratings?
Heck, yeah, I'm opposed! Go rent This Film Is Not Yet Rated – and you'll see why. The MPAA is filled to the brim with judgmental hypocrits – with no real criteria on which to base their ratings. I'm still pissed off, and it's been months since I watched it.
Karla Doyle says
I agree with Nathan completely:
Content – yes
Rating – no
It's not censorship, just an advisory.
Heck,I'd like to see it on adult books as well, but not because I want to be 'warned' about naughty books – I happen to like my reads a little bit (or a lot) on the gritty side.
A couple of commenters said that a book isn't the same as tv or a movie because it isn't visual. I completely disagree. A well-written book is far more visual than half the stuff we view onscreen.
Nathan Bransford says
karla-
Hold on there, pardner. How can you agree with me, I haven't ventured an opinion?