The author of  the “Biographer’s Craft” writes in a column on WashingtonPost.com that spam filters have been blocking his  noncontroversial online monthly newsletter because of some of the words he uses — words like “young adult” and “hot.”

The author, James McGrath Morris, suggests that “some efforts to block unwanted e-messages are threatening free speech on the Internet.” He writes:

“Last month, before sending out the new issue, I ran the copy through some spam-checking software. Surprisingly, my score came back so high that many subscribers might never receive the issue.

“I contacted the company that distributes my newsletter, and a staff member explained that three sets of words among the issue’s many articles could derail my e-mail: a reference to “young adult,” a common classification for books intended for adolescent readers; a sentence in my editorial — “Speaking of legal matters, it’s getting nasty out there” — referring to the growing number of lawsuits; and a distinguished biographer’s discussion of writing a book for children that included the following comment: “At my public library I queried the children’s division librarian — what works, what does not, who is ‘hot.’ “

Later, Morris, offers:

“Granted, it wouldn’t be the end of my newsletter if I had to replace “hot,” “nasty,” and “young adult” with other words. But if I surrender those words now, what might I be asked to give up next month? If a newsletter writer should mention, say, the “beastly behavior” of the Bush administration, if a literary publication uses the book title “Lolita” or if an investment consultant says the “rising number of low-priced stocks is swelling the ranks of investors” will they be among the next victims of this censorship?”