Cultural Analysis of 'Maus' Removal in Russia

I have chosen to address the article "Graphic Novel About Holocaust 'Maus' Banned in Russia For It's Cover", including Art Spiegelman's interview. The keywords or cultural values I picked out from this text are "arbitrary" (relating to the rulings on the removal of the book) and "obscenity" (a word that changes definitions from person to person). The main topic of this article is questioning Russia's choice to remove the book and what Speigelman calls "rather well intentioned stupidity". 

Ardesia, "MAUS- Art Spiegelman" January 11th, 2006
NonCommercial NoDerivs Generic License 

How do these keywords help support the author's argument?

The definition of arbitrary is "a random choice based on personal whim, rather than any reason or system". This keyword was used in reference to Russian bookstore's decision to pull 'Maus' from it'se shelves. The use of arbitrary immediately negates their choice. It declares it foolish and out of the realm of reason from the very start, which boosts the author's stand point. "Obscenity" is more to provoke thought from the audience- is this really obscenity? Is a negative symbol is used for illustrative purposes that go against the symbol's intent, is it still okay? At what point can we approve or deny free speech? It makes the audience think and decide for themselves whether or not Spiegelman's use of the swastika is obscene. 

Why might an audience support the argument if it's connected to these values?

As mentioned before, listeners of NPR tend to be college educated and range from ages 25-54. (Source) Spiegelman makes a sound and professional argument. His tone and language are engaging to an educated audience, including his keywords/values. If his audience feels engaged by Spielgelman and connect to the ideas behind his key arguments, they're likely to connect to his opinion.