Banning a book may boost its circulation, small-dollar Republican donations: Study

• A new study shows that banning a book can increase its circulation by 12%. However, the analysis is descriptive and should be viewed as a first step in understanding the politics of book bans.
• The research highlights that since 2021, political figures and advocacy groups have pushed to remove books on race, gender and LGBTQ+ topics from libraries.
• While Democratic candidates use book bans to defend free speech, it hasn’t led to significant financial gains. In contrast, Republican candidates saw a 30% increase in donations under $500.

---

Full Story

A new study investigating the impact of the 25 most banned or challenged books reveals that these titles are more likely to see an increase in circulation.

“We find that book ban events increase the circulation of banned books by 12% compared with a set of control books,” the study’s authors write.

According to the study, published by the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences, since 2021, state officials, elected representatives, parents, community members and advocacy groups have worked to remove books addressing topics such as race, gender and LGBTQ+ themes from public and school libraries.

In response, the authors sought to understand why politicians bring the issue to the forefront, potentially increasing a book’s consumption. They state that book bans have become part of politically polarizing “culture wars,” with politicians using the issue during election campaigns.

The authors examined whether book bans benefit either Republican or Democratic politicians. They found that some Democratic candidates used book bans to portray themselves as defenders of free speech. However, this did not result in significant financial gain.

On the other hand, the authors found “a 30% increase in donations under $500 for Republican politicians relative to Democrat candidates.”

According to the authors, this analysis is descriptive and should be viewed as a first step in understanding the politics of book bans, not as establishing causality.

The Andrew Carnegie Fellow Program funded the study.