Banning books doesn’t work

In an age of digital media and rampant piracy, efforts to keep books away from readers are increasingly meaningless, even counterproductive

This newspaper doesn’t quite like the idea of anybody having the power to ban a book, but isn’t unduly worried that such attempts (and more on these anon) will stop the spread of thoughts, stories or ideas.

Depending on geography, history and background, the list of subjects considered “sacred” in the country include the extended Gandhi family, Ambedkar, Periyar, Subhas Chandra Bose, Rabindranath Tagore, Veer Savarkar and maybe a few thousand more people, some alive, some dead. James Laine’s book has met with opposition in Maharashtra because it is about Shivaji, the Maratha king many people in the state—at least those making a living from politics—hold dear.

The reason such bans do not work is because the nature of the books business has changed. Paper isn’t the only medium through which ideas or stories can now be communicated. Many of them can be communicated through digital media. And while piracy (just to clarify, this newspaper is against it) prevents the creators of content from being rewarded for their efforts, it ensures that books and movies that aren’t meant to be available in a particular region are—freely.

Full report here Mint