John Yaged, the CEO of MacMillan Publishers received PEN’s 2025 Business Visionary Award. During his acceptance speech, he decried the rise of censorship in various places and forms, all seemingly in the US.
“Today the concepts of censorship and free expression have been co-opted by people that want anything but the free exchange of ideas and the freedom to read,” Yaged said. “Their message is clear and overt: do what we want or else.” He then listed threats people have faced, and pointed out that, “All of this has a chilling effect and encourages self-censorship. People don’t know what they can do, so they stop saying or doing anything. Stop out of fear of criminal prosecution or financial ruin.”
To a point, I think a lot of us can agree with his general concern. There is a fair amount of censorship and speech restriction in the air—around the world, and on the internet. However, the specifics seem to focus on the United States, rather than expanding to include non-governmental groups, other governments, and various religious and philosophical denominations (all sorts, not just the ones that usually get on the news.)
Yaged goes on to describe efforts by the US federal government, including the Department of Defense and Department of Education— “Our government has even banned the use of words, utterly unthinkable throughout my lifetime, and is initiating legal proceedings against people who don’t step in line. States are now emboldened by this and are passing laws, in some cases with criminal penalties, for people who make certain, vaguely described, types of books available.” [https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/awards-and-prizes/article/97798-macmillan-ceo-jon-yaged-censorship-puts-us-on-a-path-to-mediocrity.html ]
I’m pleased that he points out that it is government censorship, not what usually gets tossed around as “censorship.” A bookstore choosing not to sell certain books because the owner disagrees with the politics of the author or of the book’s argument, or parents asking that certain books not be required in class if other options are available … In my mind, that’s not censorship. I might disagree with the decisions or requests, but that’s not truly censorship. The materials are still available, just not in those particular locations.
To me censorship is … oh, a government sending alternate pages to paste into reference books when someone is unpersoned, or ordering that certain books not be published and not be allowed into the country. It can be less formal, a “gentlemen’s agreement” between the government and the press or publishers not to do certain things, or to conceal certain information “for the good of the public.” This includes all levels of government, and other institutions if those institutions have the power to prevent anyone from reading, hearing, seeing, or otherwise getting access to information or stories. I agree with Yaged that laws need to be as specific as possible, given that different places have different cultures and thus varying ideas about what is OK and what is off limits, and for whom*.
Censorship is one of those things that always makes me perk my ears when people decry an instance of it. Who is censoring what, and why? I censor things on my blog because I try to keep the language PG-13, and there are better places to argue over politics, religion, the religion of politics, and if white sauce on chicken is really bar-b-q. People who decry “banned books” and point to, oh, a parochial school limiting young students access to explicit [as in “tab A into slot B”] or gory and violent books? I don’t think of that as true censorship. If a national government is banning books and punishing authors and readers? That’s censorship. There’s also a lot of shades of interpretation between those two extremes. If a government does not provide national or state funds for a book or an art project, but also does not try to stop that book being published or written, is it censorship? Some will say yes, others say no.
However, I also had a bit of “Methinks he doth protest too much” as I read Mr. Yaged’s impassioned acceptance speech. How many books did his press turn down because they disagreed with the authors’ ideas? How many contracts included clauses encouraging authors to have “sensitivity readers?” What sorts of informal censorship do all the major publishers use to ensure that the proper sort of books are published to keep from offending readers? I don’t know. I do remember several YA authors who self-censored or who pulled books (or had contracts cancelled) because someone complained that the wrong kind of person had written the book. Was that censorship?
I’m sure we will hear more on this topic in the future. For one, summer is when school curricula get adjusted and revamped. For another, various governments are trying to sort out what is allowable speech and what incites riots**. And there is always someone who will be unhappy about a book being available, or not available.
How should society define unacceptable censorship? Or is it something so specialized that it needs to be done locally? [Please think in broad terms, keeping in mind that was have readers and commenters from all over.]
Edited to add: The discussion in the comments about Texas is closed. Thank you.
*US law takes into account community differences, artistic merit, and other things to decide if something is obscene or if it is protected speech.
**Incitement to riot in the US has a specific legal definition. Don’t do that. “Falsely crying fire in a crowded theater” in order to incite panic and hurt people is not protected speech, either. Making fun of a politician? Go for it, unless the laws of the country you are in make it illegal.
Mad Genius Club 
19 responses to “Here We Go Again, Again: Censorship?”
There is a law grinding its way through the Texas government right now that will make “any depiction of an underage person in a sexual situation” punishable by a $10,000 fine and (I think) 5 years in prison. ANY depiction.
All ‘to protect the children’ of course, even though no actual children are involved.
I know what prompted this. The same pedos that are behind the push for ‘trans’ and ‘Drag Queen Story Hour’ are getting books placed in elementary school libraries that depict children indulging in various weird sex fetishes. So, “There Oughta Be A Law!!” And there will be.
But as always, when the government sets out to fix one issue, it’s like swatting a fly with an elephant. The collateral damage is far worse than the original problem.
If (when) that abomination is passed, my copy of Gate will be a felony in Texas. One of the characters is Rory Mercury. She is the 961 year old apostle and oracle of Emroy, god of war and death; but she looks 12 years old, her ‘robes of office’ are rather provocative, and she gets herself into some risque situations with a male character in his 30s. Guilty!! Even though she’s the one doing the cradle robbing. 😀
Then there’s Dance In The Vampire Bund…
I thought condemning people for drawing pictures was the Moslems’ gig.
As you say, babies and bathwater. Like Minnesota accidentally (?) banning door keys because they have trace trace amounts of lead. When was the last time a child got lead poisoning from a door key? And what exactly is “any sexual situation”? Because someone will declare that [harmless thing] is really sexual, because somewhere in the really disgusting depths of the internet (or because someone wants to point and laugh at “gullible rubes”) there’s something that uses [harmless thing] as a euphemism.
Babies, bathwater, politicians …
They may also manage to ban manga / anime with this if someone wants to lawfare.
There is always somebody that wants to lawfare. And since the government pays the prosecutors, it’s ‘Free!’
Do you have any kind of details beyond what you’ve said for the Texas law?
The only bill I can find that’s at all similar is about libraries lending out sexually explicit books to under-aged persons without parental consent, and promoting sexually explicit material in areas designated for minors. (IE, it cuts out the pr0n in the kid’s section that has become popular.)
https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=89R&Bill=HB3225
Notably, it has a 45 day compliance window after the library is notified, without penalty.
TX HB 267 https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB267/id/3026212 could be seen as part of what Imaginos was referring to.
https://thetexan.news/issues/criminal-justice/texas-legislature-removes-education-exception-for-pornography-sexual-performance-of-a-child/article_81a79258-fd96-48e1-b6d3-111882ebff06.html
I don’t know exactly how the state defines “obscenity,” which certainly could be stretched when combined with the libraries bill: https://www.ksat.com/news/texas/2025/05/10/after-a-sometimes-graphic-debate-texas-house-advances-bill-limiting-kids-access-to-sexually-explicit-books-in-libraries/
Found the legal section that would be amended:
https://law.justia.com/codes/texas/penal-code/title-9/chapter-43/subchapter-b/section-43-24/
It is under public obscenity, but the standard in question is harmful material.
So, if the bill passes, it has the exact same standards for providing harmful material that are already in place, but removes the exception for it being done by a registered educator.
The videos I saw about the issue said it was HB 20.
I think the difference is that it criminalizes the possession, possession with intent to view, or viewing of any depiction in any media of children or child-like characters in situations described in a different section of the law, that the videos didn’t bother to explicate on.
As far as I know any previous laws only prohibited to production and distribution, not the owning and watching.
…it must be a prior year’s bill, then, the current HB20 is something about Science Pathways? (Looks like a sort of tech training/applied sciences thing.)
The $10k fine would match HB 3225, and the HB267 is under obscenity, but neither of them would touch GATE or similar media– there’s nothing educational about GATE, unless one goes “how to use Ride of the Valkyries,” so it would already be illegal, and “JDF goes and does anime style killing in a mirror world where bodycounts don’t” is really not suitable for the kiddy section unless mom and dad gave permission.
FOUND IT!
It’s Senate Bill 20.
And… looks like it sounded familiar because it is, this is the same thing most states passed20+ years ago, when “computer generated images” got to be a big thing, and the guys selling snuff films of little kids tried to make it so you had living victims or there wasn’t enough proof of a crime.
Have to go look up the definitions in place, but … it’s just another “still illegal if you’re using AI to do it” law.
“The collateral damage is far worse than the original problem.”
When you see an over-reach this extreme, it seems to me the collateral damage is the point. The fuss is what they’re after.
I’ve got 3 books on Amazon that could, if you squint -really- hard (or just lie) be captured under a law like this. My books are about robots, and there are zero sex scenes in my books, but the robots look like people (sometimes), so… I can see a prosecutor itchy for some free advertising to boost his/her/its career going for that.
The State of Texas doesn’t really have the power to make me knuckle under, given that I live in a different country and I am most unlikely to visit Texas. (Particularly if they’re pulling stunts like this.) They (probably) also don’t have the power to make Amazon stop selling my books in Texas. First Amendment, free speech is free.
But they’re going to pretend that they do have that power, and they’re more than willing to make everybody miserable while they do it.
This is -exactly- the same thing the Left is doing in Canaduh with a variety of propaganda campaigns, the one against Jordan Peterson being an example. Here’s another good one right here:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-education-student-punished-for-questioning-decolonization-sues-uwo
All you need to do is substitute “decolonization” for “any depiction of an underage person in a sexual situation” and carry on just the same.
“Freedom? For YOU people?! Don’t make me laugh!” they said. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Y’all Texans may have a fight on your hands with your Conservative representatives. New faces, same fight.
I’m kind of impressed with how he skips past the part where the laws are against spending public money to promote sexual and … hm… philosophically protected … material to under-aged folks, against the wishes of their guardians and the population who were taxed to provide the money.
Hard to call it censorship when the media exists, and is freely available, but folks aren’t forced to buy them and kids aren’t forced to consume them.
Then make providing sexually explicit material to minors illegal. Don’t ban the entire genre of school romance anime!
I’m sure My Dress-Up Darling would be banned for the scene where Wakana measured Marin in her skimpy bikini, and the photo shoot where she cosplayed as a succubus.
Last year there was a huge uproar about Uzaki-Chan Wants To Hang Out. Somebody claimed the 20-year-old main character looked ‘too young’ even though she’s a college student and, umm… extremely well endowed. What if they could sic the government on anybody who has a copy? Even if a court eventually ruled that no crime was committed, somebody’s life would be ruined.
You might be enlightened by actually looking at the text of the multiple different laws that seem to have been combined to create the story you were told about what is coming up through the Texas legislature.
The text I’ve seen makes ‘possession’ a crime. And even if the laws are not meant to be so used, if there’s any way they can be contorted into such a shape, they will be. Like I said, there’s always somebody that wants to lawfare.
Oliver Wendall Holmes is an idiot and his “fire in a crowded theatre” decision got overturned. As was aptly demonstrated in the musical Chicago.
“…To falsely cry fire in a crowded theater.” (Yes, this is a serious pet peeve of mine, because I teach the case several times a year). Yes, it was overturned.
https://sutherlandinstitute.org/the-history-behind-shouting-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-and-other-free-speech-phrases/
TXRed as Mod: Since the topic of pending Texas legislation has been sufficiently aired, I am declaring it closed. Imaginos, thank you for bring up the example. Foxfier, thank you for the citations.
I do nothing but scoff at such a speech. “There’s gambling going on here! I’m shocked, shocked!” Give me a break. Has any author published by the fossilized “publishing industry” not had to self-censor? We all know certain topics and POVs are verboten by the industry.
What about bowdlerized versions of Huck Finn to remove the N-word. If we sanitize everything historical, are we any better than the Soviet Union and their erasing “inconvenient” people from photographs?
On the pedo fears, I do worry that banning all mention of sexual content with minors is too broad a definition. Is a scene suggesting sex between a 19 and a 17 year old now to be considered pedophilia? I worry about having to upgrade a character’s age, no matter how unrealistic it is for the surrounding story. Also, are you allowed to depict villainy even if it’s clearly viewed as villainy by the author? Should we ban Mein Kampf because we worry that some people will take it as marching orders instead of a valuable primary source to understand the rise of Nazism and its demented Fuhrer?