![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
owlectomyI am vehemently pro-intellectual-freedom, and especially when it comes to public libraries, but I winced when I read this argument in favor of throwing out our material challenge forms.
Now, just to say where I'm coming from, 99.5% of the time people who fill out a material challenge form are not going to be successful in getting a book removed from the library in my system. (The other .5% is things like, we have "Tintin in the Congo" available by request but not on display in the children's shelves -- and I grew up on Tintin but that book is pretty racist.) And that's as it should be. The purpose of having a materials challenge form is not so librarians can be bullied and harangued into removing materials from the collection. It's because a library is an institution of democracy, and that means that free speech should be one of our highest values, but it also means that the collection development director shouldn't hold dictatorial fiat over what the collection includes and doesn't include.
"What we say, goes," just isn't a great message to be sending to people. I think it's much better to say to people, "Hey, if you have a problem with this, let's talk about it -- and generally we're going to err on the side of having a wide variety of materials including some that you might find offensive, but let's talk about it."
(On the pragmatic side, not having an official channel to deal with material challenges means that the patron doesn't have any recourse but to yell at whichever staff member happens to be on desk, so I can't think that's an ideal solution.)
As for the the author's contention that books with authority problems (unreliable information presented as fact, typically) should be caught by the collection development process -- well. Isn't it pretty to think so.
Now, just to say where I'm coming from, 99.5% of the time people who fill out a material challenge form are not going to be successful in getting a book removed from the library in my system. (The other .5% is things like, we have "Tintin in the Congo" available by request but not on display in the children's shelves -- and I grew up on Tintin but that book is pretty racist.) And that's as it should be. The purpose of having a materials challenge form is not so librarians can be bullied and harangued into removing materials from the collection. It's because a library is an institution of democracy, and that means that free speech should be one of our highest values, but it also means that the collection development director shouldn't hold dictatorial fiat over what the collection includes and doesn't include.
"What we say, goes," just isn't a great message to be sending to people. I think it's much better to say to people, "Hey, if you have a problem with this, let's talk about it -- and generally we're going to err on the side of having a wide variety of materials including some that you might find offensive, but let's talk about it."
(On the pragmatic side, not having an official channel to deal with material challenges means that the patron doesn't have any recourse but to yell at whichever staff member happens to be on desk, so I can't think that's an ideal solution.)
As for the the author's contention that books with authority problems (unreliable information presented as fact, typically) should be caught by the collection development process -- well. Isn't it pretty to think so.
No...
23/9/13 08:28 (UTC)A worse solution is when the irate patron decides to steal, deface, "lose" or otherwise remove the book from circulation themselves. If they're determined, it works, because libraries aren't made of money and can't keep replacing the book indefinitely. Worse if it's short-run and not easy to replace at all. And that's a trick some religious groups actively advocate.