Should Racist Literature, Art, etc. be required to have a content warning?

[Frink]

Discuss.

[The Mikado]

I'm not in favor of content warnings on most things, but if it does happen, it should be voluntary and done by the publishing industry.  I don't really want some anthology of Supreme Court decisions to have a content warning because it contains Plessy v. Ferguson.

[tpfkaw]

No, and anyone who thinks otherwise is doing far greater damage to our society than said racists.  Obviously people should be allowed to voluntarily put whatever labels they want on their literature.

[opebo]

No, and anyone who thinks otherwise is doing far greater damage to our society than said racists.  Obviously people should be allowed to voluntarily put whatever labels they want on their literature.

Oh come on.  We can debate the point at hand but one can't really 'damage' this horrible thing.  Its like saying 'you contaminated my septic tank'!

[Free Palestine]

No, and anyone who thinks otherwise is doing far greater damage to our society than said racists.  Obviously people should be allowed to voluntarily put whatever labels they want on their literature.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Ideally I'd be fine with it, but in practice, they'd probably slap content warnings on everything, so I'm not down with the idea.

[Mint]

No, requiring warning labels for anything is idiotic least of all for unpopular ideas.

[Dr. Cynic]

I'm not down with warning labels at all. Books, music, movies, games... If the company does choose to issue a warning, I'm fine with that...

[Platypus]

No. It's subjective, ineffectual, and totalitarian.

Same with most content warnings, of course; the key difference here is the level of subjectivity. A penis is a penis, but "the Indian was washing his elephant" may or may not be racist depending on context. "The Indian was washing his elephant. the Australian was brushing his kangaroo, and the New Zealander was shagging shearing his sheep" vs. "The Indian was washing his elephant, while everyone else was washing their cars because unlike the Indian they worked hard and weren't lazy". Even then, the first could be considered racist by some of the more highly strung members of the left; the latter could be talking about a lazy Indian, or suggesting Indians are lazier than others.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What Hugh said, more or less. Most works of literature and art have problematic issues. In the case of literature, that's what literary introductions are there to flag up and comment on.

Or, to put it another way, I'm not happy with the idea of putting content warnings on Shakespeare.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I'm not down with warning labels at all. Books, music, movies, games... If the company does choose to issue a warning, I'm fine with that...

What the Doc said.

[minionofmidas]

It's not as if elephants cost less than cars, so your example makes no sense.


I agree that the idea loses whatever appeal it had, once you turn to practical considerations of how, exactly, do we determine what is Racist Literature. The Tempest is racist, surely, but is Othello?

[Vepres]

Nope, though I imagine many companies would put that on anyway so they don't get bad PR.

[Frink]

Nope, though I imagine many companies would put that on anyway so they don't get bad PR.

Not if they want to sell more than a few copies of anything. Although I suppose there is the small possibility it might be seen as a "cool taboo" and sell well because of that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

More or less my position as well.

[Dr. Cynic]

There are Looney Toons that could be called racist... But if it's something really offensive, just don't watch or read or buy... Would I ever pick up and read Mein Kampf for personal purposes? Hell no. But should it be banned? It's a book. If we put content warnings and bannings on books, we would be promoting the same ideology as the man who wrote the book. How about the Turner Diaries? Eliminate all offensive material! C'mon, folks. Let's use a little discretion.

[tpfkaw]

Nope, though I imagine many companies would put that on anyway so they don't get bad PR.

Not if they want to sell more than a few copies of anything. Although I suppose there is the small possibility it might be seen as a "cool taboo" and sell well because of that.

I'm not so sure that most people would want to bring something marked RACIST CONTENT up to the cashier.

[Frink]

Nope, though I imagine many companies would put that on anyway so they don't get bad PR.

Not if they want to sell more than a few copies of anything. Although I suppose there is the small possibility it might be seen as a "cool taboo" and sell well because of that.

I'm not so sure that most people would want to bring something marked RACIST CONTENT up to the cashier.

Depends on a lot of other cultural factors with regards to how such a law would be viewed.

[Globus Cruciger]

Oh dear. What uselessness. Probably every single book ever published has content some people somewhere will find offensive. But who gets to decide that? And if a publisher really thinks its work is that bad, then it shouldn't print it!

If you want to know about the content, read its reviews on Amazon. Anything more than that comes of evil.

[Goldwater]

No, and anyone who thinks otherwise is doing far greater damage to our society than said racists.  Obviously people should be allowed to voluntarily put whatever labels they want on their literature.

[CatoMinor]

Would the US Constitution be labeled racist literature because of the 3/5 clause in Article 1?

[Frink]

Would the US Constitution be labeled racist literature because of the 3/5 clause in Article 1?

I don't think it'd be considered "literature" to be honest.

[nclib]

Probably not, but it's a sad reality when society is far more concerned with warning people about sexuality than about hate or violence.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Probably not, but it's a sad reality when society is far more concerned with warning people about sexuality than about hate or violence.

Do books with explicit sexual scenes have stickers on them saying so in the U.S? Weird, if true. Of course, anything nominated for a Bad Sex Award ought to have a warning, though for a different reason.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

How about some common sense from parents here.......is it that hard to spot racist material or violent material, or foul-mouthed material?

If the manufacturors or artist or author wants to, fine by me, but it's not a substitute for parenting.

[Frink]

How about some common sense from parents here.......is it that hard to spot racist material or violent material, or foul-mouthed material?

If the manufacturors or artist or author wants to, fine by me, but it's not a substitute for parenting.

It can be very hard in some cases, yes (Tintin in the Congo for example). Although as said earlier that's what introductions are for..