Everyone has a stake in National Information Policy. There is a tug and pull between those who want to restrict and those who want an unrestricted flow of information. Overtime policies can change in favor of one group or another. For example, the USA Patriot Act was put into effect on October 6, 2001 shortly after 9/11. It increased the abilities of law enforcement to perform various surveillance and investigative measures. Some states strengthened their privacy laws in reaction to the Patriot Act to protect their citizen’s privacy. The ALA continues to take a strong stance to protect patron privacy. This is an example of balancing an individual’s need for safety with their need for reliable and accurate information.
Library and Information Science professionals are champions of the First Amendment. Per Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute:
“The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. See U.S. Const. amend. I. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. See U.S. Const. amend. XIV.”
The Supreme Court hears cases pertaining to the First Amendment. These comments were given in cases regarding obscene material, but are still relevant to National Information Policy. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch.” (Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969)) Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote: “First Amendment freedoms are most in danger when the government seeks to control thought or to justify its laws for that impermissible end. The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought.” (Wikipedia)
However, it is not always easy or simple to be a champion of the First Amendment. In 1977, the ALA commissioned the creation of a film entitled “The Seeker” in conjunction with their theme of National Information Policy. The premise of the film was that a school group invited a “white supremacist” to come and conduct a discussion for their class. The repercussions of that invitation at the school and within the community are portrayed in the film. The film itself challenged the ALA’s own abilities to have open discussion about controversial topics. It generated feelings of betrayal, suspicions of racism, and conflict between its members. (Wedgeworth)
National Information Policy requires us to be advocates for our communities. Our role is to aid our communities in acquiring access to the information resources and formats that they need and want. (Allen) Sometimes this will require us to say that a certain book should be available or that it is wrong to place restrictions on certain topics or that such and such a database should be made available for use by patrons. Then we must continue to stand by our decisions. The free flow of and access to information is vital to the democratic process.
Things to Think About:
- How can we as LIS professionals champion the First Amendment today?
- What are ways we can be advocates for our communities?
References:
Allen, Kenneth B. “The information society: will the right to know become the need to know?..” CD-ROM Professional. 3.n3 (May 1990): 6(2). Academic OneFile. Gale. Librareo. 14 Oct 2011
Case, Donald O. “A framework for the information policies with examples from the United States.” Library Philosophy and Practice. (Sept 2010): NA. Academic OneFile. Gale. Librareo. 14 Oct 2011
“First Amendment” (Cornell University’s Legal Information Institute). 19 Aug 2010, 5:27 PM. www.law.cornell.edu. Viewed 7 Nov 2011. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_amendment
“First Amendment.” Last modified 4 November 2011, 2:19. Viewed 7 Nov 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_amendment
“Library Community Statement on Freedom of Speech and Access to Information.” 20 Sept 2001. www.ala.org. Viewed 9 Nov 2011. http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/advleg/federallegislation/theusapatriotact/FreedomofSpeech9.pdf
Wedgeworth, Robert. “The seeds of prosperity: ALA in the 1970s: a former executive director tells the story of Huron Plaza construction and the dawn of high finance for the Association. (ALA History).” American Libraries. 34.2 (Feb 2003): 47(5). Academic OneFile. Gale. Librareo. 14 Oct. 2011
Aubrey Maynard
One way librarians have the opportunity to be advocates for their own communities is by collection development. It's important that libraries maintain a collection that meets the needs of its patrons- all of its patrons.
ReplyDeleteAlthough we may find some content distasteful, or we may feel that it doesn't belong in the hands of impressionable youth, we have an obligation to the community as a whole.
That is a great way to be advocates for our community. They are made up of differing groups of people with a wide variety of needs and interests and our collections should reflect that as well.
ReplyDeleteAubrey
Collection development can be a tricky thing. I completely agree that it is important to meet the needs of all patrons by having an extensive collection of materials. Yet putting this belief into practice could be challenging. How can we make sure to effectively serve those patrons who do not speak up about their wants and needs if these needs are out of the ordinary? Also, what about the "unborn" patron who has just never came to the library because they know we don't have the materials they are looking for? It just seems like saying we need to represent all patrons is easier said than done.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think this plight is getting easier with the advances in technology. It is now getting easier to serve more people and from a distance! Perhaps soon, this will not even be an issue.
Technology has its pros and cons when we are trying to represent more patrons; from those who have never come to those who are vocal about their wants and needs. I think it provides more of an opportunity to find out what our communities need and want. At the same time it challenges us because it can also mask those same needs and wants if we are counting on on-line surveys or other features alone to tell us what those needs are. We have to be aware of those options and provide as many avenues as possible to communicate with the community at large about the services and materials we provide.
ReplyDelete