Stephen King, the world’s bestselling horror author, the man whose novels fill aisles at Target and whose movie adaptations clog every streaming service, is now declaring himself a victim of censorship. He says he’s “the most banned author in America.” Eighty-seven books, he claims, silenced by the forces of repression.
It’s a remarkable claim — and a ridiculous one. None of King’s books has been outlawed. None has been removed from bookstores, online retailers, or public libraries. Every one remains for sale, for rent, for download, for optioning by Netflix. His “ban” consists of a handful of school libraries deciding that novels filled with sex, sadism, and supernatural murder aren’t appropriate for children.
In other words: his adult books were curated out of children’s collections.
But “curation” doesn’t get you headlines or moral applause. “Banned” does. And nothing sells books faster than martyrdom.
Each year, as Banned Books Week rolls around, publishing houses and celebrity authors fall over themselves to claim the mantle of the persecuted. They wrap themselves in the language of resistance and free expression while their PR teams make sure the “banned” titles are prominently featured on front tables and social-media feeds. It’s become a ritual, a kind of literary Lent, where authors claim suffering to gain virtue and sales.
King’s tweet is just the loudest expression of a wider trend: the transformation of censorship into marketing. What once signaled danger and rebellion now signals opportunity. Being “banned” is no longer a badge of courage.
It’s a brand strategy.
While King is polishing his halo, there are writers who will never see their books on any shelf at all. Not because their stories are obscene, but because the writers are. Because they were born the wrong color, or sex, or because they dared to hold the wrong opinions in an industry that now screens for virtue before it screens for talent.
These authors aren’t “banned after publication.” They’re banned before it. Their manuscripts never reach the public. Their queries are rejected unread once the agent realizes the author is a white man, or a Christian, or politically noncompliant. Sometimes they’re told so outright: “We’re not taking submissions from white authors right now.” More often, it’s couched in euphemisms about “representation” or “alignment with our values.”
Related: DEI vs Story Part 7: How Publishing Lost the Plot: The Way Forward
This is the real censorship — quiet, polite, institutional. It doesn’t come with hashtags or sympathy interviews. It doesn’t move units or spark public campaigns. It just erases people.
A few push through anyway. They self-publish or find refuge with small, independent presses that still judge by story rather than by identity. But the cost of independence is invisibility. Without the distribution networks of legacy publishing, their books rarely make it into libraries or chain bookstores. They fight for every reader, one sale at a time, while the cultural establishment pretends they don’t exist.
Meanwhile, Stephen King’s supposed “ban” earns him national headlines and a sales bump. The truth is that being “banned” has become a performance, a way for the powerful to cosplay as oppressed while the genuinely silenced go unseen.
There’s a sick irony in that. The authors who can most easily claim victimhood are the ones least in need of it, while those who are truly excluded don’t even get the dignity of being noticed.
A school deciding not to stock It isn’t censorship. A culture deciding not to permit certain writers to exist? That's censorship.
Banned Books Week used to mean something. It was meant to remind us that censorship is the death of culture, that no government or mob should have the power to decide which ideas are allowed to exist.
But like so much else, it’s been hollowed out and turned into theater. The publishing industry now treats “banning” as a marketing angle. The American Library Association prints glossy posters of “forbidden” titles, all conveniently available for purchase on Amazon and displayed on every major retailer’s front table. Publishers line up their authors for interviews about their “courage” in writing what the establishment already celebrates.
It’s no longer about defending expression. It’s about performing rebellion.
When Stephen King declares himself “the most banned author in America,” he’s not standing against power. He is power. He’s the literary establishment incarnate: millionaire, household name, global brand. The man has more cultural reach than most religions. Yet here he is, insisting on being seen as a victim because a few school boards decided that eleven-year-olds don’t need to read Carrie.
Meanwhile, the authors who truly live under bans are the ones whose work will never be stocked, never be reviewed, never be recommended, have no stage, no microphone, no “Banned Books Week” to parade them. They are the silenced majority, erased not by bonfires but by algorithms and bias.
And the worst part? The people celebrating “Banned Books Week” are the same ones responsible for that erasure.
The self-declared defenders of literature are strangling it, smiling all the while, congratulating themselves for their moral courage as they shovel more dirt on the coffin of creative freedom.
Curation is not censorship. It’s stewardship. A librarian’s job has always been to discern what belongs where: to help readers of every age and background find the books that will stretch their minds without violating their innocence. It’s an art form as much as a responsibility.
But something has gone badly wrong. The guardians of the shelves have turned into activists behind the desk. The American Library Association, once a byword for professionalism and free inquiry, has become openly ideological. Its leadership issues political manifestos. Its conferences feature panels on dismantling “whiteness” in cataloging systems and embedding “equity goals” into collection development.
And when librarians become activists, curation rots into corruption.
There’s a new rule in play now: Sexually explicit books marketed to minors must be protected at all costs, while traditional or faith-based titles can quietly vanish without protest. If a parent questions a book’s appropriateness, that parent is smeared as a censor. If a librarian shelves pornographic material in a children’s section, she’s praised as brave.
This inversion of duty betrays everything the profession once stood for. Librarians once saw themselves as servants of the community: guides, teachers, curators of knowledge. Today, too many see themselves as the community’s conscience. They are no longer handing out books that fit a reader’s curiosity; they are handing out books that fit their cause.
And the rare librarians who still believe in neutrality are being pushed out or breaking away. The newly formed Association of Library Professionals, a group of centrists and moderates, exists because ordinary librarians could no longer stomach what the ALA had become.
The library was once a sacred space of trust. Now, for many parents and readers, it’s a battlefield.
When I was a child, librarians were magicians. They seemed to know exactly which book would open a door in my mind. The gentle smile as one placed a novel in my hands felt like an act of grace. They were the keepers of a kingdom, and their keys were stories.
Today, those keys are being melted down.
The modern censor doesn’t burn books; he buries them. He shelves them where no one will find them, hides them behind search filters and algorithmic fog, or quietly leaves them out of the catalog altogether. A book can die without a single protest, simply by being unseen.
That is how real censorship works now. It’s not loud; it’s silent. Not public; procedural. The wrong author’s work just doesn’t make the cut, doesn’t get ordered, doesn’t get displayed. And no one notices.
Meanwhile, the industry’s darlings proclaim themselves victims of oppression on national television, at literary festivals, in paid ad campaigns disguised as moral outrage. They turn “banned” into a brand, alleged persecution into publicity. They profit from the illusion of danger while the truly endangered, the honest, unfashionable storytellers, vanish into digital dust.
The shelves aren’t getting emptier. They’re getting fuller, but not with what we need. They’re packed with sermons masquerading as stories, with propaganda in place of imagination. The books that nourish the soul, that form the mind, that give children something worth growing toward, are quietly disappearing.
Books aren’t in danger from people who question them.
They’re in danger from people who claim to protect them.
And until we remember the difference between stewardship and control, between curation and corruption, the shelves will keep groaning under the weight of hollow books while the ones that matter fade from sight.
So read widely. Read bravely. Read the books they call dangerous, and the ones they pretend don’t exist. Seek out the voices pushed to the edges, the storytellers who still believe in truth, beauty, and goodness.
And when you find them, don’t just read — build. Support the presses and authors who still care about story more than slogan. Teach your children to love books that uplift instead of corrupt. Don’t wait for the institutions to remember what they once were. Rebuild the shelves by hand, one honest book at a time.
Editor’s Note: Help us continue to report the truth about books, banned books, and the real struggle against censorship.
Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.