despite the barren stage, however, it keeps getting recommended. why? a companion piece ran with the naomi wolf's article in the new york times. it was called "" by . she says, "" she then goes on to recommend "looking for alaska," saying only:
the press release goes on to say, "for nearly 50 years yalsa has been the world leader in selecting books, videos, and audiobooks for teens." fine. but why not also reveal that at a certain point along that timeline yalsa started recommending sexually inappropriate books for children, accompanied by glowing reviews that intentionally hide such inappropriate material? this is another example why the ala should no longer be considered authoritative when it comes to the recommendation of children's books. here's another:
Looking for Alaska- John Green – Victoria's Reading Log
here are words and phrases from "looking for alaska" most people, except ala librarians, think are inappropriate for 12 year olds. the numbers represent the number of occurrences of such words, phrases, or variants. the grand total of 281 occurrences out of 216 pages with print yields 1.3 occurrences per page. no attempt was made to count religious vulgarities, but they were numerous as well.