Libraries provide an essential service. They are the centers that cater to our information curiosity. From organization to access, they are the institutions that provide the keys, the skills needed to satisfy this human craving for knowledge. Libraries have long been institutions where anyone who was seeking information could, without any interference or prejudgement, access that information. While librarians have been branded with the quiet stereotype of those who know everything and anything, in actuality, they have been the gatekeepers and facilitators of information access. Nevertheless, the ultimate decision whether to accept or reject the quality of that information has been in the hands of the user.

The world we live in today is changing. This change affects much more than libraries and librarians as providers and protectors of information. Being sensitive to society’s changing concerns is crucial to the future of libraries. The role of librarians and libraries are changing. The views and opinions in this article are those of a librarian who is relatively new to the profession and concerned with information freedom and how society views such freedom.

The terrorists events of 9/11 and the resulting society in which people accept more limits than before on the way they go about their lives have impacted the normal information cycle. Information choices are being narrowed or eliminated. Why is this happening? One factor for either accepting or rejecting the presence of any given information in libraries is national self identity or self interest.

Since the tragic events of 9/11, our national ideal is yet again changing. A simple analogy of our immediate reaction can be compared to a person walking down the street and seeing what appears to be a vicious dog. For some, fleeing is the immediate reaction which is similar to how our society acted when it implemented all of these anti-terrorism legislative items.

Someone might ask the question "What else could we have done?" If we go back to the analogy of that vicious dog on the street again, we see that there are options. One of course is to go around, or proceed with caution. We as a society did not take this approach when these events unfolded fifteen months ago. Perhaps it was our own self reassurance that if we gave up a small amount of freedom, in this case freedom to access information, we might avoid the entire situation altogether. Our society is now in a situation where we have to go back or retrace our steps to see whether or not we acted properly. Using the same analogy, it is as if we dropped our wallet while we fled; now we have to go back and retrieve it.

Libraries and library associations will have to be politically savvy with astute justification for presenting challenges to state and federal legislation. For example when the American Library Association (ALA) filed suit against the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), the arguments that went into this challenge were factual. ALA did their homework and knew that certain technicalities of filtering software created biases which in turn affected what material or information was blocked. The association won the first round in court last year and will probably have to answer more questions to justify its position this spring. The reason for this? We live in a society that has the utmost scepticism?. A sympathetic hearing of one’s argument is dependent on answering the question "why?"

In regards to another possible occurrence where information freedom has a possibility of being restricted is the application of the USA Patriot Act. We already know that libraries are being searched and are being used as sources for federal intelligence gathering. What society does not know is how often and for what reasons. In addition, society does not understand why certain types of information may no longer be available whether in libraries or from government web sites. One can only hope that, because of this lack of understanding of the how and why and how often, our libraries are not tarnished by these growing investigations.

If challenges are to be made from any library association questioning the legality of the Patriot Act or any other legislation related to last year’s events, once again, they are going to have to do their homework. Simply crying out that these events affect our right to intellectual freedom will not speak to society’s current mood. Society, because of its’ adjustment to new limits on daily freedom for the sake of security, is going to have to be presented with the actual facts and technological points in a tactful manner. After all, if average citizens perceive that they have no stake or interest in these issues, they solely become "librarian" concerns. In today’s world, this is something we can not afford.

Hector Escobar, Jr.
IFC Intern
Latino Studies/Reference Librarian, University Libraries of Notre Dame