Nathan Bransford polled readers yesterday about this topic, which was raised before then in another post's comments and during a #kidlitchat on Twitter.
The question: should children's books be rated for content, as are movies and video games for children? Bransford also asked if publishers should rate their books voluntarily.
I can see the logic of a YES response to the main question. Books are media, just as movies and video games are media. If a parent won't let their kid watch a movie with F-bombs in it, they probably don't want their kid reading a book that drops F-bombs. In this light, I'm surprised books aren't yet independently rated.
To the second question, I say, NO, because publishers should not rate their own books. Movies are rated by the Classification and Rating Administration, which is an independent board of parents who view films and discuss their recommended ratings. They do this using a ratings framework operated by the Motion Picture Association of America and the National Association of Theater Owners. In other words, movie studios don't get to rate their movies -- they couldn't possibly be objective when money is on the line -- so neither should publishers.
But back to the main question...
Should children's books be rated for content?
Do you consider them already rated (picture book, middle grade, young adult)?
If not, why do you think books have thus far escaped independent content rating?
Would rating kids' books change the role or day-to-day job of librarians and booksellers (would they become book police, checking ID, etc)?
What percentage of Newbery Medal books would have a G rating?
Would mature-rated books be ostracized (as many NC-17 rated movies are) or wildly sought?
Does the absence of independent rating suggest the written word is less powerful than audio/visual media?
Would you be satisfied with a ratings board that comprised only parents?
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Rating Children's Books for Content
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 ate pie:
Shannon I think I'd be like you in that I can see the logic of rating books to give parents some guidance about what their kids read. A book cover and blurb don't really tell you much about the appropriate language or content of the book as a whole. I also think that publishers shouldn't be able to rate themselves for exactly the reasons that you mention. However, I'm not sure that a rating system is really feasible for the simple scale issue of the problem. I haven't checked any statistics or anything to back this up, but I'd be willing to bet that there are a lot more books published in a year than there are movies released.
It's probably also a matter of funding for the board. Not sure where the money originates from for the movie rating board, but the movie industry in general has a lot more cash resources to throw around.
I bet you're right about the number of books vs. movies. Hadn't thought of that. Plus, all movies are rated, but would the reading public want or need all books published?
Hmmm...
Rating books like movies and video-games seems a bit repellent to me. Are we to rate music afterwards? Or paintings? What mediums would fall to such bureaucratic scrutiny?
Rabid Fox - That's just it: what media does society deem ratings-necessary? Do some CDs still come with EXPLICIT LYRICS stickers? If so, music's already in the mix. Can you imagine walking through the Louvre or the Met or MOMA and seeing ratings next to the paintings and sculptures? Or, weirder, all works of the same rating put in the same room or wing?
Editorial comment: No thanks!
Post a Comment