Restricting arguably age inappropriate material in grade school libraries and classrooms is absolutely not the same as restricting adults.

The exact boundaries of appropriateness for a given age group and the wisdom behind them-- and their mootness relative to parents seeming inability to keep their children off social media-- is surely a matter for parents to debate, but it is just not equivalent to or a slippery slope to doing so for adults.

The times does a disservice to the cause of freedom to publish this editorial conflating them. They are crying wolf.

And as the editorial claims, "tends to create demand for the works it targets" -- all sounds fine to me.