Rainbow Rowell's novel "Eleanor and Park," a 2014 Printz Honor book, viewed through the "Clean Reader" app.

A newly released app promises to let readers “read books, not profanity,” by blocking out offensive words. Clean Reader, available for iOS and Android devices, is an ebook/ereading platform that can cover up profanity, references to anatomical features or deities or other language deemed offensive from titles available through an online book store. Clean Reader users can choose how they’d like their reading material to be altered. The filter, represented by a small broom, can be set to “off,” “clean,” “cleaner,” or “squeaky clean.”  Some are questioning whether this compromises the integrity of authors’ works. According the FAQ on the app’s website, Clean Reader’s creators, Jared and Kirsten Maughan, wanted to address an issue their then fourth-grade daughter faced when looking for books to read. “One day our oldest child came home from school, and she was a little sad.  We asked her what was wrong, and she said she had been reading a book during library time and it had a few swear words in it,” says Jared Maughan. “She really liked the book but not the swear words. We told her that there was probably an app for this type of thing.” However, the couple discovered that there was no electronic product designed to remove or filter offensive language. After consulting with a lawyer who told them that republishing books with altered or removed words would violate authors’ copyrights, according to the Washington Post, the Maughans turned to the Chicago firm Page Foundry, which offers a generic ereader platform that can be customized based on its client’s needs. Page Foundry already has relationships with publishers who provide licensing for the titles in its online book store. While the app is free, the Maughans earn a small commission from books purchased through the app, according to the Washington Post. While designing the app, the Maughans requested that the Clean Reader platform have a customized highlighting feature that identifies offensive language and places an opaque bubble over the text. Users can tap on a dot for a substitute word to assist with context and readability. Technically, the text isn’t republished with edits. Rather, “the app purvey[s] the same book, but [provides] the option to cover up all of the obscenities,” as a Huffington Post article reports. “This isn’t like Clean Flicks,” Maughan adds, referring to a company that faced legal proceedings after releasing edited versions of films. Indeed, publishers under Page Foundry’s umbrella sought reassurance that the original texts would not be edited. Maughan confirmed that they would not, adding that there are a lot of “snap judgments” about the app.

An evolving filter

'Clean Reader' suggests an alternate word in 'Eleanor and Park.'

Keeping up with offensive language requires the filter to evolve, Maughan says. “We keep finding new spellings...and authors using different spaces, so we have to keep putting in different words and arrangements of words, different endings, slang terms and slang ways of using them,” he says. “It’s an ever-growing list.”  Currently, more than 100 words and phrases are subject to filtering. Maughan adds he was “shocked at the amount of publicity” that Clean Reader has gotten from the media.  While he knew the app could be “somewhat controversial,” he maintains that there is a “segment of the population who just don’t care to read the f-word.” A Book Riot article reflects on Clean Reader and how it may have impacted the author’s early reading years: “I can’t forget the way it felt when a book I was loving let me down by throwing in something that offended me.... I know how much easier my life as a reader would’ve been if books had ratings or if I’d had access to the Clean Reader app.” While Clean Reader user reviews are generally positive, a Guardian article highlights this comment: “Edits inappropriately, doesn’t understand context. [Removes] words that have multiple uses and aren’t necessarily curse words, destroying context in written works.”

Compromising authors’ integrity?

This comment touches on concerns that Clean Reader impinges on authors’ original intent and right to free speech. Joan Bertin, director of the National Coalition against Censorship, doesn’t view the app’s filtering program as a form of censorship per se. “Artists and authors have ‘moral rights’ in some parts of the world, but not in the United States, where copyright law defines their rights,” she says.   However, Bertin believes that Clean Reader “distorts the integrity of the author’s vision and work.” Bertin adds that Clean Reader’s influence could extend beyond the app. For example, if a parent requests that their school district implement Clean Reader or a similar product, a “real censorship issue” could arise.  She points out that other tools that help provide information to individuals about media content, such as movie, music, and book rating systems, have “sometimes been used inappropriately by government officials to restrict minors' access to materials they're legally entitled to,” as opposed to being cited in discussions of free choice and access. Amy Wilde, a middle school librarian in Central Oregon, thinks that Clean Reader isn’t a good way to address parent’s potential concerns about an assigned title. “If the parent was having an issue [with a book a student wanted to read], I think I would rather have that student read a different book with the same theme than have them change the language of what they are reading,” she says. “We can’t put [kids] in a padded cell,” adds Bertin. “People use profanity; it’s a part of everyday conversation. [Parents should] be helping [their] kids negotiate the contemporary world, which they can’t do if they are isolated.” Maughan agrees that kids can’t be shielded entirely. “I’m not naïve to the fact that kids are hearing things on the playground or in the hallways at school,” he says. “That doesn’t mean it needs to come into the home environment.” He adds that while some authors may not be happy to have their work filtered, readers should not be concerned. “They’ve paid good money for the book,” Maughan wrote in a recent blog post on the Clean Reader site. “They can consume it how they want.” April Witteveen is a community and teen services librarian with Deschutes Public Library in Central Oregon. She is the upcoming chair of the Printz 2016 Committee and has served on the YALSA Board.