Common Sense? The Message Is Being Lost
February 19, 2010
I was puttering around last night (ie. trying to work but also watching the Olympics and in general procrastinating) when a tweet from Sarah Dessen caught my eye.
Rating on the “appropriateness” of books? I didn’t like the sound of that. Not one itty bitty bit. So I hopped over to BN.com and checked out the listings for Dessen’s books to see what she was talking about.
This is what I saw in the listing for Just Listen.
Do. Not. Like.
I dug a little bit more. What would they have to say about John Green’s Looking for Alaska, you know, the one that he won the Printz award for?
Now not only did I not like it I was getting steamed. And ranty. But before I went too far I needed to know who or what Common Sense Media was.
This is from the Barnes and Nobles site.
Common Sense Media is dedicated to improving the lives of kids and families by providing the trustworthy information, education, and independent voice they need to thrive in a world of media and technology. Kids today spend more time with media and digital activities than with their families or in school. It profoundly impacts their social, emotional, and physical development and well-being. Kids consume and create media, experiencing the good and the bad, and they need the guidance that only involved parents, educators, and other adults can provide.
Common Sense Media was formed in 2003 as a non-profit organization to ensure that parents remain the primary influence in their kids’ lives. We’re helping parents and others teach kids how to use media and not be used by it, and see media for what it is.
Through information, education, advocacy, and a belief that sanity, not censorship, should guide our approach, we’re leading the way to a better life for kids and families.
Visit www.commonsense.org to learn more.
“Sanity, not censorship.” Hmmm, not too bad but based on what I saw in on the book listings I was not convinced. So I went to their website to learn more and whoa Nelly did I ever. First stop was their mission page, which includes these “Ten Common Sense Beliefs.”
Ten Common Sense Beliefs
- We believe in media sanity, not censorship.
- We believe that media has truly become “the other parent” in our kids’ lives, powerfully affecting their mental, physical, and social development.
- We believe in teaching our kids to be savvy media interpreters — we can’t cover their eyes but we can teach them to see.
- We believe parents should have a choice and a voice about the media our kids consume. Every family is different but all need information.
- We believe that the price for free and open media is a bit of extra homework for families. Parents need to know about media content and need to manage media use.
- We believe that through informed decision making, we can improve the media landscape one decision at a time.
- We believe appropriate regulations about right time, right place, and right manner exist. They need to be upheld by our elected and appointed leaders.
- We believe in age-appropriate media and that the media industry needs to act responsibly as it creates and markets content for each audience.
- We believe ratings systems should be independent and transparent for all media.
- We believe in diversity of programming and media ownership
Again, they say “sanity not censorship.” I’m not crazy about all their points or rating systems on children’s books in general (too much like age-banding) but I pushed onward and went to their book reviews. My first action was to look up Looking for Alaska to see what is said on their site versus BN.com.
When I look at that I see significant differences between the way it is presented on their own site versus BN.com. The different categories such as consumerism and sex have degree ratings. The descriptions of each remain the same on both sites but without the degree rating it removes the context. On BN.com it’s a yes or no equation. It says that there is consumerism but on Commonsense.org actually receives zero dollar signs indicating that any consumerism is very minor. The “Families Can Talk About” section? Completely blank on BN.com but contains some pretty good discussion points on Common Sense Media.
On BN.com they only list the bad or potential troubling stuff. Did you notice that the BN.com screen shot does not have the Role Models category? That it doesn’t have the Good stuff ratings?
Common Sense Media also includes ratings by parents and educators as well as kids. It’s kind of fascinating to look at the differences in opinion between adults and kids on that.
And here’s what the Common Sense Media website had to say about Dessen’s Just Listen:
I have two different reactions looking to the two different interpretations of Common Sense Media’s opinion of this book on the two different sites. But I wanted to push the comparisons a bit further with a more beloved book – a book that is both much lauded and challenged. A book that is one of the best books I’ve read. Yes, I looked up To Kill a Mockingbird.
It’s two totally different takes on the same book, supposedly from the same source. The message is truly being lost.
I was prepared to be really ranty about Common Sense Media. I was prepared to dislike them and everything that they stood for. When I saw the ratings on BN.com last night I was angry. After going to their website I really don’t have an issue with what they are doing. I may not agree with their age-appropriateness on a lot of items (I was a free-range reader as a kid) but they are giving kids their voice as well as the adults and I appreciate that. They are anti-censorship. They aren’t against any of the books, but they are trying to provide ways for families to discuss the issues in the books rather than for them to simply not read them. I can see Common Sense Media being a good tool for parents and educators. I have to give them kudos for their efforts.
But (there’s always a but) I have issues with the way that their service has been implemented on BN.com. The focus is entirely negative. It lists only what the book has in it that is potentially “wrong.” There is no context for any of those potential issues. There are no merits to any of the books like how they deal with those issues. I think it completely derails what Common Sense Media set out to do.
It’s not lost on me that I found this just days before Canada celebrates Freedom to Read week. When I look at BN.com’s implementation of Common Sense Media’s rating I see a haven for book banners. I can hear them say, “Just look at this! Look at all the bad things in this book! Must! Protect! The! Children!” When I look at Common Sense Media’s website I see them trying to encourage discussion about issues. I do not see their ratings as a warning not to read these books. I see them saying, “Look this book contains x, y, and z and here are some suggestions for how you can discuss these issues and themes as a family. Oh and it also has these awesome a and b messages as well.”
I’m glad I pushed into this. I’m glad that I took the time to check out Common Sense Media’a website. But BN.com? You get a big ole FAIL on your implementation of Common Sense Media’s ratings.
February 19th, 2010 at 11:13 am
Mrs Dubose was addicted to morphine? I missed that.
Thanks for investigating further. I like what Common Sense is trying to do. It is hard to read everything kids want to read so parents having that information is important. I especially liked: “Every family is different but all need information.” Because what is ok at my house might not be in others.
I like how they list the good stuff as well, because sometimes a lot of bad stuff has to happen in order for the message the author was trying to achieve to surface.
But you are right about BN. It’s too cut and dry. Too simplified. The information is just not there. I could see how it could be abused.
Chrisbookarama´s last blog ..Friday Bookish Buzz:
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
It’s not something that I really would remember to point out to anyone but if I stop and think about it I remember there being something. Not sure I could have said it was morphine.
I think I understand what BN is trying to do but I hate the way they are dong it.
[Reply]
February 19th, 2010 at 11:59 am
I’m not thrilled with the “ratings” but I like the “Good Stuff” and “What to watch out for” – What to watch for isn’t necessarily bad, in my opinion.
I hate the way it’s used on BN – there’s no good stuff, the red/yellow/green age level thing makes the book look scary because of all of the red and very little green. It’s misleading.
Another reason not to shop BN. (Like I needed another reason?)
Denise´s last blog ..The Hidden Staircase
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Yes, way too scary. They scream, “DANGER! DANGER!”
And the “what to watch our for” doesn’t bother me, especially since they offer questions and resources for how to discuss it as a family. That’s the big thing for me – they are promoting discussion on Common Sense Media and most importantly they are bringing kids into it.
[Reply]
February 19th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Hmm. Not sure what I think. First instinct was GAH! but at the same time.. it is sort of helpful for the decent parents who care, not like the obsessive ones.
I am on the fence.
kit-cat´s last blog ..Unbound
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Not sure of what you think about which – as presented on BN.com, Common Sense Media or both?
[Reply]
kit-cat Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
I am on the fence with both. I agree on one hand about the idea being a useful tool but I also agree that like the bn.com it can focus way too much on the negative.
At the same time, movies and games have ratings, and I suppose it makes sense for books to have a system of rating as well. But I feel like somehow this can censor so much incorrectly.
kit-cat´s last blog ..Unbound
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 4:43 pm
I don’t disagree. And when I first saw this last night I was all, “Bah! Ratings! Sassymonkey SMASH!” But then I went to the Common Sense Media site and looked around. They are *absolutely* not try to censor anything. They really want to use the potential issues that some people may have with some of these books as a framework for discussion. I really do have to give them kudos for that.
February 19th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
I agree with you. BN disappoints me on this one.
Nordette aka Verite´s last blog ..Real Men! I’m a Womanist, But Dayumn this is Funny
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 4:41 pm
I think they are trying to do something good (ultimately) but are missing the key components. I’m disappointed with the way they’ve implemented it. Absolutely.
[Reply]
February 19th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
Just a question…did you send this to B&N? Not super fair FAILing them in a blog post and not letting them know of your concerns. (Of which I agree, but still)
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 19th, 2010 at 4:45 pm
Hi Jen. I can have an opinion with something without needing to to inform a company directly that I don’t agree with what they are doing. I’m not a BN.com customer and I’m unlikely to ever be (I’m Canadian, in case you didn’t know and we don’t have them here).
If BN.com wants to know what people think they’ll be monitoring internet conversations. I’m easy to find.
Thanks for stopping by.
[Reply]
February 19th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I don’t mind the content run-down but I *really* hate the age recommendations. Kids are ridiculously individual and one of my major challenges as a parent has been fighting the concept of “age-appropriate” milestones and expectations for my son (who is very atypical). Parents should know their own children well enough to be able to look at the pros and cons of media and decide if their own child is mature or aware enough to deal with certain topics. The age tag will be the easiest part of this to be misused by overzealous community members (ie. people who want to parent my child but are not my child’s parent).
Kristen M.´s last blog ..New Release: Shades of Grey
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:17 pm
I’m absolutely with you on the age recommendations. And yes, that will be the easiest part to be abused (followed by the list of all things wrong).
[Reply]
February 19th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
I was prepared to hate CommonSense, too, but their site actually isn’t bad. I like that they suggest topics to open up discussion. BN on the other hand…ugg.
Andi´s last blog ..Sticky Post: Starting an Etsy Shop!
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Yep, I was fully prepared to hate them AND rant about it but I really didn’t find their site too bad. But ugg I think sums up my opinion of the way it’s being used on BN.
[Reply]
February 19th, 2010 at 10:10 pm
As you point out, CommonSense offers a fairly nuanced take on different points, with many details and additional information. They are not one of those “all these books are EVIL” websites. Also important? Those parents/kids who WANT that type of take (who agree with CommonSense or want that detail before reading) can go and read it on their own.
The problem with Barnes&Noble is that it is now thrust on everyone, not just the people who want it. And its done in an anvil-icious way, with loss of nuance, so it does turn into an “this book is BAD” vibe.
I understand that NETFLIX has also added this.
Personally? I find it enough that a book is children, middle grade, teen, adult. That is enough to say, especially when combined with the summary and regular reviews of a book. I’m not a fan of judging a book based on whether there was a kiss with tongue on page 56, or someone talked back to their mother on page 312, etc.
And “free range reader”. Love that!
[Reply]
Kristen M. Reply:
February 20th, 2010 at 12:56 am
Yes, it looks like Netflix has done this and in a much better way where they list the notes about the parental conversations before the laundry list of what’s notable in it.
Although I’m really not understanding some of the things they pull out — like “lots of very sharp teeth” in Finding Nemo. Yes, there are animals with sharp teeth. They exist in nature. We all have teeth. Are we going to start rating exhibits at zoos and aquariums with age appropriateness?
Kristen M.´s last blog ..New Release: Shades of Grey
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 8:34 am
Liz – I’m with you. I think that anything that is “teen” you have to expect more mature subject matters and language. And a book is so much more than the sum of it’s bad (or good) parts.
Kristen – I suspect that the teeth this is for very little children who are prone to nightmares? The sharks in Nemo are kind of meant to be scary. (We have friends whose daughter had nightmares about a character in Dora the Explorer for a long time.)
[Reply]
February 20th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
All sounds religious based to me. Trying to raise everyone else’s children under their belief system. My next book should blow them away! HA. And Good! I write for teens, who have muddy lives. Deal with it!
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 8:37 am
Jackie, have you clicked on the links? Have you read anything about them? Because I really don’t think they are. And Common Sense is *not* saying that anyone should not read any these books. They are offering up ways for families to discuss the muddy issues of life.
[Reply]
February 21st, 2010 at 4:48 pm
I’m a parent and like a lot of parents, I’m overwhelmed with a lot of stuff my kid throws at me. Do I need or want Common Sense or B&N to become the other parent?
I get what they are trying to do, but wouldn’t it be easier, more engaged if the parent simply scanned the book and even ask the teen what’s it about?
I’m not being critical of either group though I’m not getting any warm fuzzies either.
My girlfriend just realized her daughter was reading adult lit despite the teen was reading it all summer in plain view. I say pick up the book, read a bit and sometimes force your kid to talk to you.
And in full disclosure let me say, most days I want to engage my drama queen as much as she wants to chat with me but it happens.
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 8:41 am
Susan, I don’t think that they are trying to be the other parent. If you read their mission statement they don’t want to be the other parent, nor do they want media to. Again, they are trying to encourage discussion and help give parents the tools they need to have that conversation.
[Reply]
February 22nd, 2010 at 10:53 am
I wish that instead of depending on these websites, parents would just read the book for themselves before giving it to their children. They are the ones who should know their child and what he or she can handle much better than anyone else.
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Me too. Well, to be 100% accurate I wish people would let kids read whatever they want to read but if they aren’t going to do that I wish they would read the books first.
[Reply]
February 22nd, 2010 at 11:00 am
While I still have no problems with CSM for those who want to use it, I’ve been reading a range of reviews to get a sense of their bias. There is a bias — any drinking by an adult (so that is legal drinking) is marked as a “need to know,” as is stories that use “world religions.” That Barnes & Noble has adopted this bias concerns me.
Liz B´s last blog ..The Incorrigible Children of Ashton Place: The Mysterious Howling
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 1:50 pm
I get what you are saying but there are people who find that a “need to know.” Ditto dancing, playing cards etc. There are religions who don’t approve of any of those activities. Just because I don’t agree that those are questionable activities doesn’t mean that they aren’t need to know for someone. I don’t know enough about Common Sense Media to know if they have a bias but just because they are pointing out those items, to me, doesn’t automatically mean that there is either. My impression of their mission is that they are trying to point out anything that might be troubling to anyone who might read the book and some people would find that offensive or troubling.
I don’t see “need to know” as equivalent to “don’t read this or let your kid read this” but maybe others do.
[Reply]
Liz B Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Since that “need to know” ups the age level, it does show a bias that “drinking” skews older than if this was done by people who didn’t have such a bias against drinking. BREAKING DAWN (and its violence) is age 13; LIPS TOUCH THREE TIMES is 15, with off page sex, much less violence, but use of Hell/world religions. To me, that is a bias. I’m not saying its right/wrong, just saying that when these biases factor into the age, and that age is used on Barnes&Noble without being clear about this, it pushes that bias onto all.
My impression is not that they are pointing out what is troubling to all; its pointing out what is troubling to some, and then Barnes & Noble is using it as if its troubling to all. I’m also wondering if Barnes & Noble is using this for any recommended lists, given the absence of most GLBTQ titles from CSM. I haven’t been able to figure that out.
Liz B´s last blog ..The Incorrigible Children of Ashton Place: The Mysterious Howling
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:15 pm
Ah, ok that’s different. I wasn’t even thinking of the age ratings. I hate age ratings. And I think I was getting confused to the use on Commonsensemedia.org vs BN.com.
I was wondering about GLBTQ titles…I only looked for one and they didn’t have rating for it but they only had ratings for two of the author’s books (most of which don’t have GLBTQ plotlines) so I wasn’t sure if that was just by chance.
Sigh.
February 22nd, 2010 at 11:01 am
While I like the concept of parents having some idea of what is in a book (drugs, violence, etc) the age-appropriate listing drives me bonkers. Who is to say who is to read what at what age? By the time I was six (yes, six) I had read most of Shakespeare, most of Ellery Queen, every Nancy Drew I could get my hands on and several of Pearl Buck, to say nothing of Boswell and Johnson. My parents never censored my reading and anything in their library was fair game as long as I could lift it and not tear the pages. Every child is different, and deserves to be treated differently.
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 1:54 pm
I really hate age banding. Hate it, hate it, hate it. What I was ready to read at age 14 was not the same as my best friend or the guy who sat two seats behind in me in homeroom.
[Reply]
February 22nd, 2010 at 1:18 pm
As a librarian in a rather conservative community I have had many teens ask me, does this book have sex, violence, or inappropriate language. As a result, at the end of my reviews on our Teen Scene Blog, I include a “Cautions for sensitive readers” section. I really abhor censorship, and every time I put that on there I feel terribly self conscious, but I don’t tell the teens who it is appropriate for. I just mention that you will find this in the book. I do this for two reasons, so the teens go into the book with their eyes open and so my coworkers, who use my reviews to recommend books when I am not here, are aware before they recommend something. I like what Common Sense does and recommend it to parents and teens who want to know more about a book, but I do not like what BN.com has done. It is not fair to a book to have all the negatives listed without the positives which is why I put my cautions at the end of the review. I just looked at BN.com for “If I Stay” by Gayle Forman, I just got done reviewing that one and it doesn’t mention how touching the story is. Sad…
Melissa Wheelock´s last blog ..Book Review: If I Stay by Gayle Forman
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:05 pm
Cautioning readers about content is not the same as censorship, IMO. For example, if I read Speak or The Lovely Bones and add a “trigger” warning to my review for readers that have been raped or sexually assaulted I’m not telling them not to read it. I’m telling them that it contains content that may bother them and if they are reading it they should maybe know that they will encounter it.
I really, really hate how BN has implemented Common Sense ratings. Can’t say that enough.
[Reply]
February 23rd, 2010 at 3:59 pm
While, of course, I don’t believe in censorship and I will allow my son (who’s 3) to read what he wants when he is older, I do want to know what he is reading so I can answer questions or just share in something he likes. I take the age ratings as suggestions like age ranges. They may say 13+ but I assume that some younger readers might like it too. That being said I like the idea of what Commonsense Media is doing and I’ve always liked their ratings on Netflix. I agree that B&N is doing a poor job with the CCM ratings.
Andrea´s last blog ..Teaser Tuesday – Shades of Grey
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 25th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
And that is where I see the usefulness in something like Common Sense Media – parents who want to prepare themselves for questions. Because while it’s great to ask kids what they are reading sometimes you aren’t prepared for the questions they have. Very useful for that I think.
[Reply]
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:56 pm
I agree with most of what has been said here. Parents ought to be in touch with what their kids read, especially younger kids. And CommonSense (on their website) seems to be trying to convey a real sense of the book, not just list red-flag issues. B&N might consider a simple link to their site, instead of gutting the entry of much of its meaning…??
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 27th, 2010 at 10:55 am
Yes, it’s that they are *just* putting the red flag issues. Balance is needed.
[Reply]
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:52 pm
[...] sure exactly what was up, until I saw a link to this article on Publishers Weekly. And then I found this link to the blog Sassy Monkey Reads which really breaks it down for [...]
February 24th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
I like the general idea of this. As a kid I wasn’t restricted in my reading but I’m sure my parents and I could have used this to make the questions my reading arose easier to talk about. My issues came when I looked up a couple of my favorite books. Kelley Armstrong has a warning on her book ‘Summoning’ about sexual assult and a girl getting her period. I’ve read the book twice now and while they do bring up sexual assult it never actually occurs. And by the time a person is able to understand the book they would know about periods. If not, I’d be more concerned about that. What bothered me the most was ‘Summoning’ and Sarah Dessen’s ‘Just Listen’ were at the same level. Now I’m an avid Dessen reader but I wouldn’t let most of the kids I know read her until they were older but I wouldnt hesitate to hand over ‘Summoning’. What makes the rating worse is that they don’t always have the facts. I’ve seen a few comments about ‘Along for the Ride’ because the CSM decided that they had sex. Dessen herself if wondering when this happens. I’m all for the idea but if they can’t be bothered to get the facts right why should we trust what they have to say?
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 27th, 2010 at 11:03 am
Their ratings don’t always jibe with what actually happens in the book. If any sexual activity is mentioned it rates the book higher and pushes up the age. Liz B noticed that with other things as well (eg. adults drinking). I’d like their system a heck of a lot better if it actually didn’t have ages on it.
[Reply]
February 24th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
I can understand what CSM is doing, and I doubt anyone would say it is a bad idea to try and get kids to think critically about the media they ingest, whether books, movies, etc… it’s just part of media literacy and helps ensure that they won’t just blindly swallow everything the media tries to feed them.
I do think that B&N should have taken CSM’s reviews in their entirety, or not at all. They’re kind of missing the point. I wonder how CSM feels about the format B&N is using.
Julie´s last blog ..“But… fish people! Man-eating fish people! Damn you, SyFy!”
[Reply]
February 24th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
[...] Want more? Here’s Publisher’s Weekly and Sassymonkey. [...]
February 25th, 2010 at 5:43 pm
Ummm, but the stuff on their own website is so completely subjective. No role models in To Kill A Mockingbird? Are they insane?
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 27th, 2010 at 11:12 am
I know! Isn’t Atticus one of the ultimate role models?
[Reply]
February 25th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Wanted to make sure you saw this take on age rating and common sense, and Judy Blume- from Salon’s Broadsheet
http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/index.html
Elizabeth W´s last blog ..Black History Month Books for Children
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 27th, 2010 at 11:21 am
I did see (and maybe swooned for being mentioned in the same article as Judy Blume is quoted).
[Reply]
February 25th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
Thank you for pointing out the differences between what Common Sense Media is saying and how Barnes & Noble is portraying it.
I stumbled across your blog a couple of years ago but hadn’t visited recently. A google search brought me back!
[Reply]
sassymonkey Reply:
February 27th, 2010 at 11:21 am
Well thanks for coming back!
[Reply]