So much for objective journalism.

In this article about a pretty standard book challenge* in Australia, the reporter refers to the book as having "graphic, distasteful details".

Which I find unimpressive.

"Graphic"? Is arguably an objective descriptor.

"Distasteful"? Is not.

__________________________

*Well, minus the part about the parent finding her son half-dead after playing asphyxiation games that he reportedly learned about from Tim Winton's book Breath.

The mother wants the novel pulled because she believes it's dangerous (even though there are loads of other places to find info on the subject, including multiple news stories about similar behavior completely unrelated to the book), while the student's grandmother wants it pulled because she believes it exposes teens to the "lowest extremes of human behaviour", and that teachers are supposed to "instill a sense of decency and wellbeing in youth".

The school responded that if they pulled Breath, they'd have to pull at least 50 more books out of the library.

Which is a fair argument, as I'm sure there are loads of other books in the library that depict dangerous behavior, and, of course, the word "decency" means different things to different people.