Purity in Print: Book Censorship in America from the Gilded Age to the Computer Age

Eleven: 1980 to Present: Symbolic Crusades, Embattled Libraries, Feminist Interventions, New Technologies

ELEVEN 1980 to the Present Symbolic Crusades, Embattled Libraries, Feminist Interventions, New Technologies The resurgence of censorship pressures that began in the later 1960s intensified in the 1970S and beyond. But Simply to speak of periodic "waves" of censorship, or a "cyclical pattern" of repressive outbursts suggesting a mechanical process like the swing of a pendulum, is, as SOciologist Alan Hunt reminds us, misleading and simplistic.1 In fact, the upsurge of repressiveness at century's end differed markedly from what had gone before, reflecting the particular political, cultural, and technological realities of these years. 31 7 PURITY IN PRINT Foremost among these realities was the conservative political resurgence that culminated in Ronald Reagan's election as president in 1980, and the culture wars that ensued. Reagan's victory laid the groundwork for another federal pornography study, very different in tone from the 1970 report. The Reaganera study, personally initiated by President Reagan and carried out under the auspices of Attorney General Edwin Meese, was released in 1986. In the manner of such reports, it cited various studies, testimony by citizens who showed up at its three hundred hours of hearings in various cities, and the views of interested organizations to buttress a predetermined conclusion. One member was James C. Dobson, founder of the conservative action group Focus on the Family. The report endorsed and added fuel to the censorship demands that had been building for years, and warned that a vast outpouring of pornography threatened the foundations of society. Wading into a particularly murky area, it cited clinical studies that, in its view, demonstrated beyond doubt that pornography, especially of a sexually violent nature , causes criminal or harmful behavior. Significantly, however, the report did not call for any extension of the legal tests of the obscene, and in fact, argued that the First Amendment should protect the printed word in all cases. "There remains a difference between reading a book and looking at pictures, even pictures printed on a page," it noted.2 Despite the Supreme Court's repressive turn and the conservative political climate, decades of liberaliZing court rulings and the emergence of new visual and electronic technologies, had clearly reshaped definitions of the legally obscene. From the perspective of print censorship-the prinCipal focus of this book-the Meese report illustrates how completely, even for conservatives, this issue had been resolved in favor of First Amendment protection. But the overall tone of the Meese report exacerbated the growing preoccupation with obscenity, feeding public alarm and encouraging a broad range of repressive efforts. Critics quickly pOinted out its many flaws and polemical biases: it not only cited the research literature selectively, drew misleading 1980 TO THE PRESENT conclusions from that literature, and assumed that findings in research settings could be extrapolated to "real world" behavior , but it also asserted without evidence that violent pornography and child pornography were increasing at an explosive rate, and included pages of undigested, unexamined anecdotal accounts of the harm allegedly caused by pornography, including amorphous psychological effects (e.g., "The Commission heard testimony from many witnesses who described feelings of worthlessness, guilt and shame which they attributed to experiences involving pornographic materials"). The commission urged relentless enforcement of existing obscenity laws and tough measures short of outright censorship to regulate pornography , particularly representations of sexual violence. In ninetytwo numbered suggestions, federal, state, and local authorities were advised on ways to combat obscenity (e.g., "The Attorney General should direct the United States Attorneys to examine the obscenity problem in their respective districts, identify offenders , initiate investigations, and commence prosecution without further delay").3 As historian William E. Brigman has documented, the Meese report was only one particularly visible component of a sustained war on obscenity by the Department of Justice in the Reagan-Bush years. As Reagan's second term began, the Justice Department established an Obscenity Unit with a staff of prosecutors that eventually grew to thirteen. Organizing "Project Porn" and "Operation Porn Sweep," this unit battled the producers and marketers of sexually explicit material, especially of films and videos. In a process of "litigation by attrition," simultaneous prosecutions were launched against target companies in multiple jurisdictions , particularly conservative ones, to wear them down and drain their resources. Prosecutors also set up fake video-rental companies in conservative areas, ordered videos from the California producers, and then prosecuted the companies locally.4 The Obscenity Unit also made use of the...