The Librarian and Challenged Materials

A challenge to a particular material is the attempt to have the material removed from an institution based upon the objections of a person or a group. It is not the actual removal of a material, as a banning would be, but neither is it simply the expressing of an opinion. A challenged material is at risk of being unavailable to everyone, not just those that are expressing the objection. This is the basis of censorship – a threat to the democratic society that the librarian serves. Librarians in particular face an ethical dilemma on the subject of challenged materials.

Number two of the American Library Association’s Code of Ethics states, “We uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources.”[i] Although the ALA has no authority to require libraries to adhere to its standards, it is understood that librarians are duty-bound to follow them. Furthermore, the Library Bill of Rights is clear in regards to intellectual freedom. Article I speaks of prohibiting exclusion of materials based on the “origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.” Article II states, “Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.”[ii] Librarians must always keep in mind the community they are serving.

Materials are usually challenged with the best of intentions – to preserve innocence. For the years 2000 – 2009 the top three reasons for material challenge were offensive language; material was sexually explicit; or unsuited for the age group.[iii] Free Access to Libraries for Minors is an interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights, and states that, “Librarians and governing bodies should maintain that parents—and only parents—have the right and the responsibility to restrict the access of their children—and only their children—to library resources.”[iv] In a perfect setting this would work. However, a parent’s supervision of their child is not always possible in a library setting, therefore it naturally falls on the librarian to monitor the child’s access to materials. Librarians are continually finding themselves compromising in this way, as they are caught between upholding the ALA standards and appeasing the community which funds their institution. The consequences to free speech can be severe, though, as censorship in any form, even for protection of the innocent, is a violation of the First Amendment.

There is support for librarians to adhere to the ethical principles of their profession. The Freedom to Read Foundation has at the base of its mission to “promote and defend” the First Amendment right of free speech. The Foundation also protects the public’s right to access materials found in libraries. Educating the public about the right to free speech, especially in regards to the nation’s libraries, is one of the primary objectives of the Foundation. In addition, through the allocation of grants, the Foundation supports legal counsel and litigation in defense of libraries and librarians who have found themselves in the crosshairs of censorship.[v]

The American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom holds an annual event called Banned Books Week. This event is a celebration of the freedom to read and support of the book community in its entirety (librarians, booksellers, journalists, teachers, etc.) in the effort to allow a continued open access to materials, even materials considered to be on the fringe. Part of the work done through this event is education regarding the harms of censorship to a democratic society. The event has been a success as it can boast that although some materials continue to be banned, most challenged materials are still available to the public.

Librarians are continually at risk of compromising the ethical foundation of the profession, as outlined in the American Library Association’s Code of Ethics and Library Bill of Rights – open access to all material for everyone. It is understandable that the librarian can feel torn between upholding the ALA standards (and First Amendment rights) and appeasing the source of funding or protecting those whose innocence is considered at risk by exposure to some materials. However, the support available to librarians and others in the “book world” is exemplary to continue to allow this open access that our democratic society demands.

---

[i] Code of Ethics of the American Library Association, http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics

[ii] Library Bill of Rights, http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/

[iii] Challenges by Reasons, http://www.ala.org/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/statistics

[iv] About Banned and Challenged Books, http://www.ala.org/bbooks/about

[v] About FTRF, http://www.ftrf.org/?page=About

Libraries and Intellectual Freedom: Protecting Individual Privacy

                                                               Joseph Mhanna

       LIS 6010 Blog Assignment

 

            The issue of intellectual freedom has been a matter of debate for several decades. The American Library Association defines intellectual freedom as “the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. It provides for free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause or movement may be explored.” This is an essential human right in order to have a decision based on knowledge.

            Democracy is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) as “a system of government in which all the people of a state or polity (or, esp. formerly, a subset of them meeting particular conditions) are involved in making decisions about its affairs, typically by voting to elect representatives to a parliament or similar assembly.” The ALA considers intellectual freedom as the basis for a democratic system and expect people to be self-governors. But to achieve this responsibility, the citizens must be well-informed. Therefore an educated population is a fundamental element of democracy. Libraries are major places representing intellectual freedom and they have always opposed any kind of censorship. Librarians strive to provide balanced collections to present both sides of an issue. Brey (2002) posited “there are many things in any library collection that are sure to offend someone, because we represent the points of view of all the people” (p. 30). In this context, intellectual freedom upholds democracy. It provides people the ability to access needed information to make a decision based on knowledge and information. Brey (2002) explained “as librarians, we must never forget the basic tenets of our profession. We are places of democracy, of opportunity for the diverse communities that we serve” (p. 31).

Our privacy is under attack from various sources; governments have been keeping surveillance through various medium such as wire recordings, data mining and mail interceptions. Moreover, the technological advancement has made it possible for governments to expand the scope of surveillance. The big problem is that not only are governments monitoring our lives but our privacy is exposed to hackers who can unveil sensitive materials and information, invade a credit card account and many other private issues.

One of the core values of librarianship is intellectual freedom and privacy is an essential part in exercising intellectual freedom. “The American Library Association affirms that rights of privacy are necessary for intellectual freedom and are fundamental to the ethics and practice of librarianship.” Libraries have always defended and respected the privacy of their users. Lack of privacy prevents users from seeking information and exploring new ideas because they are afraid of being monitored and being faced by criminal charges or ostracism based on their access to information that are considered a threat to national security. Reading books on terrorism or how to make a bomb does not necessarily mean that the reader is a terrorist. It is critical for societies to have innovation and this process relies on people accessing information to explore new ideas, retrieve and criticize old ones, and formulate new conclusions. The ALA states that “lack of privacy and confidentiality chills users' choices, thereby suppressing access to ideas. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society.”

With the technological advances and increased numbers of electronic publications, access to the Internet became an essential resource in libraries. Similarly, issues of privacy and confidentiality are becoming more complex and critical for library users. The question is how libraries can protect the privacy of the patrons. Every library should have in place privacy policies to govern the revelation of patrons’ use of information. Moreover, libraries should continuously plan to train staff and educate patrons about the status of their privacy rights and necessary activities that could help in protecting those rights. The increased use of electronic information raised more concerns with respect to privacy; libraries are using the service of third-party vendors to supply electronic content to patrons. The problem is that vendors are capable of tracking patrons’ data while using digital devices and accessing e-content. Chmara (2012) explains that “based on research conducted by various digital organizations, it appears that the third-party vendors have the capability to track patron data and use of information on digital devices” (p. 64). Libraries should extend the protection of library use to electronic resources. The author also states that “contractual provisions governing use of electronic reading devices by library patrons should ensure that the patron’s browsing of reading materials, download of reading materials, and reading habits will note be divulged to any other parties without the specific permission of the individual user” (p. 65). However, the feasibility of such contracts remains questionable. On a different level, less complex procedures to limit privacy violations in libraries include elimination of sign in sheets, avoid using smart ID for circulating records and providing private workstation with no monitoring.

            As a general overview of the intellectual freedom in Lebanon, the Lebanese Library Association (LLA) sets the professional standards and ethical codes and ensures their implementation. However, there are no written policies addressing the notion of intellectual freedom. Therefore, the presence of an interdisciplinary collection meeting the different needs of all users is not feasible in Lebanese public libraries; there are many factors that come to play in determining the type of collection such as political views, religious views, and location of the library. It is rare, for example, to find a book about GLBT and erotic literature in public libraries.

Things are different in academic libraries. Inspired by the values and beliefs of the ALA, academic libraries are active in protecting individual privacy and advocating intellectual freedom. In major academic libraries users can find a book about almost any topic. Even banned books are usually available as “closed circulation” materials where users can use them within the library building. Privacy is respected by all means such as providing individual workstations with no monitoring, retaining the confidentiality of borrowers’ records and signing license agreements to prevent users’ browsing history and use of electronic materials from being divulged by third-party vendors. Universities have been working hard to meet different users’ needs because they believe that students are the future of the nation. It is the role of the LLA to set clear rules and practices to foster intellectual freedom in all type of Lebanese libraries.

Intellectual freedom is fundamental for a democratic system. Innovation is another aspect of intellectual freedom in its relationship with democracy. Exploring information, new thoughts and ideas leads to innovation in all fields. However, this objective cannot be achieved without the respect of individual privacy. Libraries have always been pioneers in defending individual privacy. With the technological evolution, privacy has been more exposed. Thus, it is more important now than even before for librarians to fight for their patrons’ privacy. There are many things that could be done, yet education and public awareness are fundamental. While ALA is continuously fighting for intellectual freedom, the question is what more can be done to protect our privacy.

  

References:

Brey, C. A. (2002). Libraries as places of democracy. Texas Library Journal, 78(1), 30-33.

Chmara, T. (2012). Privacy and E-Books. Knowledge Quest, 40(3), 62-65.

Privacy and Confidentiality: Library Core Values. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/privacyconfidentiality/toolkitsprivacy/privacy-and-confidentiality-library-core-values

Questions and Answers on Privacy and Confidentiality. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/qa-privacy

 Mission Statement. Retrieved from http://www.llaweb.org/aboutus/mission.php

A case for open-source scientific publishing

Kate McDaniel

LIS 6010 Blog Assignment

“We’ve arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology.  We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology.  This is a prescription for disaster… “  Carl Sagan A Demon Haunted World

            The concept of intellectual freedom refers to the privilege which allows the everyday person access to the information they need in pursuit of their own study and enlightenment. This is a need that libraries have traditionally filled by acquiring reading materials and resources for patron use.  But, what happens when the cost of purchasing the needed materials can shut the library completely down?  This is what has been happening in academic libraries -- especially where the cost of purchasing journal subscriptions can cripple the library’s budget. The investment in research journals is one way the library addresses the mission of providing access to resources, but the rising cost of these subscriptions is hindering their ability to do that.

The purchasing of academic journals can consume up to 65% of an academic library’s budget, and these costs are being passed along to the students.  This extortion has come under fire not just by noted scientists (Wolfgang, 2012) and universities (Sample, April 2012), but also by whole governments (Sample, July 2012).  The truly inappropriate aspect of this situation is the fact that the peer review and often the editing process is done for free.  The publisher does not pay for this in most cases, nor do they pay the researcher for his or her work.  The publisher makes an enormous profit off of the submission without really contributing much to it except allowing the researcher to be published in a “prestigious” journal.

            The peer review process as well as most of the editing is all done for free by volunteer researchers and scientists.  The same people that submit the articles to be published, in fact, do almost all of the work, and their colleagues are doing the editing and review.  How publishers Elsevier, Springer and Wiley have gotten away with this for so long is truly a mystery.  It has also been a major inhibiting factor in the growth of collections and services in academic libraries when so much of the budget goes to journal subscriptions. 

The students in these universities have to absorb the cost of paying unusually high prices for the journals that the university needs to remain competitive and in some cases, accredited.  The library budgets are cut down to the bone, and almost all other purchasing ceases in order to accommodate the soaring cost of academic journal subscriptions.

            The lack of transparency is the scariest aspect of the publishing business.  Almost no data can be found on how much actual profit is made by companies that own these journals.  Estimates into profit margins are just that, estimates.  According to sources below, publishing companies are not very forthcoming about margins, and libraries must sign non-disclosure agreements regarding what they actually have to pay (Van Noordan, 2013).  “Elsevier's reported margins are 37%, but financial analysts estimate them at 40–50% for the STM publishing division before tax” (Van Noordan, 2013).  Another topic of concern is the fact that the money made from publishing goes to shareholders, not back into research or education. 

Where does this leave the academic library, the scientist, and the student?  Unfortunately, there has been very little large-scale change since the initial boycott in 2012.  Elsevier just makes too much money to be daunted by a few geeks staging a boycott.  However, it may be that the stand taken by the British government to have all British academic research free and available by 2014 will make them sit up and take notice.  If several countries stood together to take this step, it could change the landscape of scientific research.  With open source research publishing such as PLoS, PeerJ, and BioMed Central becoming much more reliable, it is possible to break the stranglehold, at least a little bit.  Even ceasing the practice of bundling would be a great help to many.  Allowing institutions to purchase just the journals they needed for accreditation and research would free up funds for libraries.

            Let’s perform a thought experiment: What would happen in libraries if extortion prices of academic research suddenly fell away and freed 65% of the libraries’ budget?  Services could increase, technology purchases could increase, collaborative spaces could be developed, tuition could go down instead of up.  Imagine the possibilities with potentially millions of dollars put back into instruction and services. 

In a world dominated by the sciences, our understanding of the world around us is more essential than it has ever been.  Whether the discussion surrounds the climate crisis, responsible energy or wildlife sustainability scientific literacy must no longer be the property of a privileged few.  When problems arise, and the people need understanding, the knowledge has to be there- free and accessible- without shutting down the libraries that provide them.

           

Sources:

Wolfgang, B. (2012, February 29). Scientists protest cost of research journals. Washington Times. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/29/scientists-protest-cost-of-research-journals/?page=all

Journal pricing. (n.d.). Elsevier Home. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.elsevier.com/journal-pricing

Van Noorden, R.  (2013, March 27). Open access: The true cost of science publishing.Nature.com. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.nature.com/news/open-access-the-true-cost-of-science-publishing-1.12676

Corbyn, Z. (2013, January 22). Price doesn't always buy prestige in open access.Nature.com. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.nature.com/news/price-doesn-t-always-buy-prestige-in-open-access-1.12259

Sample, Ian. (2012, April 24). Harvard University says it can't afford journal publishers' prices. . Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/apr/24/harvard-university-journal-publishers-prices

Publications. (n.d.). PLOS. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.plos.org/publications/

Swoger, B. (2012, September 26). Why are journals so expensive? | Information Culture, Scientific American Blog Network. Scientific American Global RSS. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/2012/09/26/why-are-journals-so-expensive/

Nguyen, T. (n.d.).  Freedom to Research: Keeping Scientific Data Open, Accessible, and  Interoperable. . Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://sciencecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/freedom-to-research.pdf.

Sample, I. (2012, July 16). Free access to British scientific research within two years. The Guardian. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jul/15/free-access-british-scientific-research

Open Access to e-prints in Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science, Quantitative Biology, Quantitative Finance and Statistics. (n.d.). e-Print archive. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://arxiv.org/

An alternative archive of 8196 e-prints in Science and Mathematics serving the whole scientific community. (n.d.). viXra.org open e-Print archive. Retrieved July 9, 2014, from http://vixra.org/

The Cost of Knowledge. (n.d.). . Retrieved July 10, 2014, from http://gowers.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/elsevierstatementfinal.pdf