Analyzing Purpose

Reigniting a Stagnant Debate

My argument should bring something new to the table of the Banned Books debate. After looking at the context of my debate, I got a few ideas of how I could do this. I also mapped out my purpose alongside potential audience reactions.

My controversy seems stagnant or outdated, mostly because everyone seems to be under the delusion that Banned Books Week has solved everything. I plan to prove that book banning is still an issue that needs to be more effectively addressed, to potentially introduce additional library programs to push back, and to challenge libraries and patrons to do more to combat this problem.

My audience will mainly consist of those who participate in the library system: librarians, and patrons. These two groups will be most likely to advance my cause because they participate in the system I hope to reform, and they will most likely have the same core values of information freedom as I do because it's an integral moral pillar of the library system. Librarians could work to raise patron and peer awareness of the relevance of the issue, and patrons can gain interest in participating in library programs, thus supporting the programs and the librarians, creating a cycle of support and growth in battling Banned Books in library systems.