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
I do not consider ensuring age-appropriateness to be an affront to intellectual freedom. Steps should be taken to ensure that material never up in the hands of those who should not legally be seeing it. Things like bad language do not have hard legal limits, but I am not against attempts at community efforts (including a change in public library practices) to avoid exposing young children to it.
ReplyDeleteIf an item is challenged, that could be just as bad as being censored because it might make others avoid the item,where they might not if it wasn't challenged. On the other hand it might make some people more interested in the work, because it is controversial, which makes it worse if the item is pulled.
ReplyDeleteAs a whole, this blog is very informative, and raises a lot of thought provoking questions. As a class, we discussed the meat of what intellectual freedom is, however this blog connects those initial ideas within the context of the operation of libraries. I like how Kate’s post provides quotes and interesting statistics related to budget concerns. Joseph’s post definitely connects with the issue of intellectual and general privacy that we discussed in the semester as well. In addition, all posts reflected on the ALA codes of ethics and the Library Bill of Rights.
ReplyDelete