| Published by the American Library Association IFRT Report Intellectual Freedom Round Table No. 55, Winter 2004/2005 |
| OTHER ISSUES | | | | CONTENTS |
From the Editor Doug Archer Welcome to the IFRT Report. In addition to the obvious changes from issues to issue, we are constantly trying to vary and expand the mix of articles, news and reports. This issue contains many reports from the Orlando Conference, our Councilor and IFRT committee chairs. In addition for the first time we have included the minutes of the IFRT Boad Meetings so that you can get a flavor of the work done at conference and the issues addressed -- the inner workings of the Board, so to speak. Once again we have included an article on a current issue from a slightly different perspective to provoke us into fresh thinking. Though you will not find a section of “Favorite Intellectual Freedom Quotations,” this feature will return in the next issue conditional on one thing. You must send us some of your favorite quotes so that we can share them with the rest of the membership! Lastly, we have added a list of contributors with a little additional information about them when available. In addition to voting to fund an expansion of this publication as part of its efforts to further improve communications among IFRT members, the Board meeting in Orlando voted to make the IFRT list a members only discussion and information sharing list. That is, only members may post or otherwise participate on the list. Of course, not wanting to be a secretive group advocating intellectual freedom, non-members continue to be welcome to read current and archived postings (read only access). You may find further information on joining the list at http://www.ala.org/ala/ifrt/ifrtinaction/elist/elist.htm. And please, if you are not yet a member of IFRT, join us or get actively involved in the defense of intellectual freedom in some other way. The need has rarely been greater. Doug Archer Editor, IFRT Report Words from the Chair Elect Pam Klipsch As the new vice chair/chair elect of IFRT, I’ve been asked to share a few thoughts and ideas with you about my hopes and plans for the future. The first thought I want to share is: Participation! This organization is membership-driven. That means, plain and simple, that nothing gets done unless members are willing to do it. IFRT has a number of committees that are responsible for carrying out the on-going work of the organization: award committees, program committees, process committees. In order for the committees to get their work done, they need members. My first job is those committee appointments. I know a lot of IFRT members are not able to attend conferences on a regular basis, but electronic communication means this is no longer a bar to active participation in the work of the committees. I’d like to suggest that our OIF staff establish a list-serve for each committee, so that work can be done between conferences. IFRT members who would like to observe the committee’s work can also ask to be subscribed to the list. The committee chair would be the list monitor, to make sure that the list discussions stayed focused on the work of the committee. ALA members who are not IFRT members could ask to be subscribed as Read Only. Only committee members could participate in committee votes. If you are interested in an IFRT committee appointment please contact me at prklipsch@netscape.net. I’ll be working on committee appointments this fall. The second thought I want to share is: Recruitment! IFRT, like ALA and like the library profession generally, is rapidly graying. We are working hard as an association to recruit new, diverse, young people into the profession, and we need to make sure that these new librarians understand and are committed to intellectual freedom as essential to libraries and librarianship. IFRT is the organization that serves the continuing education and mentoring needs of the IF community. We have already made a start in direction. In Orlando , the IFRT Executive Committee voted to fund a luncheon meeting and orientation session at Midwinter in Boston for the divisional IFC liaisons and reps attending the Freedom to Read Foundation meeting on Friday. This is an opportunity to learn how the process works, network with other IF groups, and discuss upcoming issues and events. The IFRT Executive Committee also voted in Orlando to make a major change in the big Saturday afternoon IF program at the 2005 Annual Conference. In Chicago the program will be preceded by a reception for all IFRT members to meet the 2005 award winners and the program speakers. The reception will include light refreshments, and will be held in a room adjacent to the program room. This gives you an opportunity to grab a bite to eat, meet and mingle with others who share your interest in IF issues, and attend the program all in one easy package. I’d like to see IFRT establish a Mentoring Committee that would work with new members, especially new student members, to teach them how the IF community within ALA works, to be role models and help them become IF advocates inside and outside the profession. And my final thought to share is: Awareness! One of IFRT’s charges is to provide continuing education in IF issues for librarians, library workers and library advocates. A major part of our CE effort is the Annual Conference program on Saturday afternoon organized by IFRT. Our current chair, Barb Jones, is working with her committee to put together a great program for Chicago . I am just beginning to put thoughts together for the program in New Orleans in 2006. Specifically, I have spent some time recently learning about the controversial efforts of Native American scholars and activists to recover the histories and the historical perspectives of the indigenous peoples and to incorporate these alternative viewpoints of events into the history of the United States as it is taught in our schools, preserved in our museums and libraries, commemorated in our monuments and holidays, and perpetuated in our assumptions and attitudes. There are important issues of equality and equity of access and intellectual freedom embedded in this controversy that have implications for libraries and librarians in our recruitment efforts, our funding priorities, our collections, programs and services. I plan to make this the subject of the 2006 program, and again, ask anyone interested in helping with this program to contact me at prklipsch@netscape.net. I look forward to meeting many of you and working with all of you to continue to make IFRT a vital part of ALA. Walking the Highwire: Exploring the Tension between Intellectual Freedom, Privacy, and Intellectual Property Handout prepared by Lauren Christos Saturday, June 26, 1:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. Orange County Convention Center 209 B/C "The interest in encouraging freedom of expression in a democratic society outweighs any theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship." ( Reno v. ACLU )
Speakers
Chris Hansen, ACLU, Censorship and the First Amendment, Filtering and Minors Nancy Kranich, Copyright and Fair Use Jim Kuhn, The Development of the Privacy Toolkit Michael Malinconico, Data Mining, Electronic Spyware and Governmental Intrusions on Citizens
Copyright http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/copyright.html The LII's "Law About" pages provide brief summaries of law topics with links to key primary source material, other Internet resources, and useful offnet references. They can be accessed through: the following set of broad topic categories (scroll down), through an alphabetical listing of topics, and through a searchable index. http://www.benedict.com/info/info.aspx The Internet has been characterized as the largest threat to copyright since its inception. The Internet is awash in information, much of it with varying degrees of copyright protection. Copyrighted works on the net include news stories, software, novels, screenplays, graphics, pictures, Usenet messages and even email. In fact, the frightening reality is that almost everything on the Net is protected by copyright law. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html An attempt to answer common myths about copyright seen on the net and cover issues related to copyright and USENET/Internet publication - by Brad Templeton Permission and Fair Use Excellent site with links to copyright overview information, primary material sources, current legislation, web guides, a newsletter, and a special link to copyright information for librarians. http://fairuse.stanford.edu/primary_materials/legislation/teach.html Article on "Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act," introduced in Senate by Sen. Hatch and Sen. Leahy (3/7/01) http://www.copyright.com/default.asp Here you can get permission to reproduce copyrighted content such as articles and book chapters in your journals, photocopies, coursepacks, library reserves, Web sites, e-mail and more. http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm Lolly Gasaway - University of North Carolina Definition: A public domain work is a creative work that are not protected by copyright and which may be freely used by everyone. The reasons that the work is not protected include: (1) the term of copyright for the work has expired;
http://www.digitalconsumer.org/ Website and organization devoted to consumer’s rights to fair use and the protection of fair use rights in a digital world Harmful to Minors – Censorship http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/ The First Amendment Center works to preserve and protect First Amendment freedoms through information and education. The center serves as a forum for the study and exploration of free-expression issues, including freedom of speech, of the press and of religion, the right to assemble and petition the government. http://search.aclu.org/AdvancedSearchResults.cfm Link to articles on cyber-liberties, internet censorship laws, free speech and internet free speech http://sethf.com/ Seth Finkelstein, a pioneer in this field. Excellent link to numerous essays, articles, blogs, press releases and domain investigations. http://sethf.com/freespeech/censorware/essays/pioneer.php In March 2001, the Electronic Frontier Foundation honored me as one of winners of EFF's Tenth Annual Pioneer Awards . http://www.filtereality.net/plurality.html Excellent analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2003 decision in the CIPA case by Brian Smith with the complete text of the plurality opinion in the CIPA case, with his comments about omissions, incorrect assumptions, and other errors added in red. http://libraryfilter.blogspot.com/ A blog about a possible internet filtering solution for libraries http://www.filtereality.net/archive/ontrial.html The CIPA case, documents related to the case at the District Court level, and decisions in other court case. http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-361.ZS.html UNITED STATES V. AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSN., INC. (02-361) 201 F. Supp. 2d 401, reversed. http://www.lisnews.com/search.pl?topic=71 Link to articles by Library and Information Science News LIS.com with a strong focus on Florida. A monthly online magazine with a bias towards freedom of expression. Jonathan Wallace, who wrote Sex, Laws and Cyberspace, a book which chronicles the history of online censorship, edits Ethical Spectacle. Internet Freedom news releases have been featured on the site. The site of Irene Graham, an activist with EFA, this site is of very high standard both in terms of
design and politics. Among many areasof interest it contains a thorough critique of the Platform
for Internet Content Selection (PICS).
DATA MINING & ELECTRONIC SPYWARE http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/articles/spyware.htm Good article on spyware, and link to The Consumer WebWatch Organization. Their mission is “to investigate; inform; and improve the credibility of information published on the World Wide Web. Our goals are to build trust on the Web and provide consumer protection. http://www.spywareinfo.com/ Links to their newsletter (archived), forums, software, message boards, and other interesting articles http://www.privacyinternational.org/survey/phr2003/ Privacy and Human Rights 2003 An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments from the Electronic Privacy Center in Washington D.C. and Privacy International from London, U.K. http://www.privacyinternationallorg The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is a public interest research center in Washington, DC It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging civil liberties issues and to protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional values. EPIC is a member of the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue, the Global Internet Liberty Campaign, the Internet Free Expression Alliance and the Internet Privacy Coalition. Privacy International (PI) is a human rights group formed in 1990 as a watchdog on surveillance by governments and corporations. PI is based in London, England, and has an office in Washington, DC PI has conducted campaigns throughout the world on issues ranging from wiretapping and national security activities, to ID cards, video surveillance, data matching, police information systems, and medical privacy. Mission Statement of the Internet Free Expression Alliance – “The Internet is a powerful and positive forum for free expression. It is the place where ‘any person can become a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox,’ as the U.S. Supreme Court recently observed. Internet users, online publishers, library and academic groups and free speech and journalistic organizations share a common interest in opposing the adoption of techniques and standards that could limit the vibrance and openness of the Internet as a communications medium. Indeed, content "filtering" techniques already have been implemented in ways inconsistent with free speech principles, impeding the ability of Internet users to publish and receive constitutionally protected expression.” Mission Statement of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. “CPSR is a public-interest alliance of computer scientists and others concerned about the impact of computer technology on society. We work to influence decisions regarding the development and use of computers because those decisions have far-reaching consequences and reflect our basic values and priorities. As technical experts, CPSR members provide the public and policymakers with realistic assessments of the power, promise, and limitations of computer technology. As concerned citizens, we direct public attention to critical choices concerning the applications of computing and how those choices affect society.“ Privacy in Libraries, (ALTA, June 2004) Carolyn Caywood Thank you for this opportunity. I am especially honored to speak with library trustees and advocates because I have had recent experience of the importance of your role as the citizens' voice. Our local law enforcement asked the library to set up and retain logs of Internet use that they could check to see if anyone was accessing child pornography. Our attorney, who had previously supported us on other issues, counseled us to change our policy and comply. We turned to the Library Board, who saw the implications of a public record that, once created, could be used in unpredictable ways and who voted against creating these records. Their courage and wisdom affirms the important role of citizen boards. For me, the incident highlighted four important issues:
1. The necessity of a current policy -- ours is undergoing revision to catch up to new technology and the new ALA policy; 2. The importance of understanding public records retention & FOIA, as well as court orders; 3. The value of an informed Board and awareness & training for all who work with confidential information; 4. The need for public information about and discussion of privacy issues. Understanding privacy & confidentiality, content & behavior Privacy In a library, privacy is "the right to open inquiry without having the subject or one's interest examined or scrutinized by others." This is intellectual, not physical, privacy. It is secured through service planning as much as through policy. The best practice is to provide users with opportunities for informed choices and independent use. Choice is one of the Fair Information Practices that provide the structure for the model policy in the IFC's Guidelines for Developing a Library Privacy Policy. Attention to privacy can reduce our confidentiality responsibility by reducing the collection of personally identifiable information. Confidentiality We are responsible for ensuring confidentiality when the library is in "possession of personally identifiable information about users and keeps that information private on their behalf." Personally identifiable information means both information identifying an individual and data that connects identification with interests. We have an active and ongoing responsibility to honor the public's trust. The best practice is to keep as little data as possible for as short a time as possible. What we must have, we must actively protect. This means not only technology and procedures, but training for everyone who could compromise that protection.
Another important distinction is between behavior and content:
Behavior. Libraries have the right to make rules that protect safety, insure the care of the library's physical resources, and maintain an atmosphere conducive to study. Policies should show their tie to these reasons, which will help in publicizing them. Patrons have a right to know what the rules are and why they are necessary. They need to understand that libraries do not provide privacy for behavior. A library is a public place. It is inevitable that we will recognize some of our patrons. What we must avoid is letting what we know about their interests lead to assumptions about their behavior. And, of course, policies must be applied evenhandedly without prejudice. Library users should understand that breaking library rules can void their privacy protection, e.g. overdues or vandalism. If staff observe illegal behavior, they should report it to law enforcement. Nevertheless, libraries should avoid becoming involved in schemes to elicit and catch criminals.
Content. Courts have found a First Amendment right to receive information. The right to privacy and confidentiality is implied even though it is not stated. The Privacy Act of 1974 states that Federal agencies may not maintain records describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by individual about himself or pertinent to law enforcement. A 1988 bill to protect library & video records was passed without the library provision because the FBI, was pushing elements of its "Library Awareness" campaign into the bill. Read Herbert Foerstel's Refuge of a Scoundrel (Libraries Unlimited, 2004) to follow developments from that campaign to today's USA PATRIOT Act. ALA's Privacy Interpretation asserts that a lack of privacy and confidentiality is a barrier to receiving information. Recent developments that may affect Privacy Policies
Privacy an Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights was adopted in June of 2002. Heretofore ALA policy dealt only with confidentiality. There are extensive resources on the ALA web site and the IFC continues to update the Privacy Tool Kit which includes the model policy and Guidelines for Developing a Library Privacy Policy mentioned earlier. Information technology continually makes new opportunities for both privacy intrusion and protection, but more complexity means more uncertainty that the protection is effective. The Internet created an illusion of anonymity and heightened both expectations and fears of privacy. Technology has enabled commerce as well as government to mine data about individuals. Information technology has also spawned non-technological threats like social engineering, shoulder surfing, and dumpster diving. Every library need a shredder! Bruce Schneier's Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World (Copernicus, 2003), offers excellent guidance for evaluating security, from home burglar alarms to Homeland Security. He makes it clear that we cannot rely on technology, we must heighten staff awareness of threats to the security of confidential data. Information technology has made possible digitized databases and thus has created the opportunity for datamining. This is the retrieval and aggregation of personally identifiable information. At the same time, we are all well aware of the persistence of false information once it gets into a database, and the threats of hacking and identification theft. Despite evidence to the contrary, we tend to be far too uncritical of the accuracy of mechanized information. Nevertheless, the biggest threat is behavior prediction, that is, that the dataminers will think they can predict a person's actions based on a pattern in the data. In libraries, that means that they may equate reading interests with character. In addition, we ourselves face the temptation to misuse library data for library advocacy or fund raising. Not only is this a betrayal of public trust, it can backfire and create negative publicity. Any database used for library advocacy should be created through informed choice and kept separate from library use data. In addition to digitized databases, other new technologies may be considered by libraries, like surveillance, biometrics, smart cards, and RFID. We must evaluate whether safeguards are adequate to protect confidentiality before adopting any new technology. I recommend the Harry Potter rule, "Never trust something that can think for itself if you can't see where it keeps its brain!" With all technology, plan for regular review to make sure it has not been compromised by continuing technological development. An especially important function of policies is to prevent "function creep" - collecting or sharing data for other agencies' purposes. Each new technology is liable to raise this temptation. Finally, the societal pendulum that was already swinging toward risk avoidance before 9/11 has increased in its wake. There is a higher tolerance for privacy intrusion, especially among those who expect that it will only impact others' liberty. Thus we must raise awareness that privacy invasion affects the innocent. Accurate risk assessment is among the least taught skills of critical thinking, thus terrorists and psychopaths loom larger in public awareness than risks to civil liberties or commercial snooping. Bruce Schneier's book shows how such misperceptions actually compromise our security. Safety & security We have a responsibility to insure safety in libraries. Begin with a behavior policy that supplements laws with time, place, or manner (but not content or viewpoint) rules. When creating rules, consider the impact of unattended children issues. Publicize the rules and train staff on policy enforcement. Talk with local law enforcement, library counsel, and the library's governing body about expectations. Seek their advice on safety but weigh that advice against the library mission. Examine the facility for safety improvements. Focus on preventing crime rather than catching criminals. The first step toward data security is Records Management - are your records retention statements congruent with the library's use of the data? Know your state's Freedom of Information Act - states vary. What resources does your state provide? The Virginia FOI Advisory Council offers training and advisory opinions. Library records and library communication may be public documents, unless specifically exempted. At the Federal level, the USDoJ v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 1989 case states that since the purpose of FOIA is open government, access to personal records of private citizens does not serve that purpose. But, the Virginia FOI Advisory Council says the state law provides no protection except its 81 exemptions, one of which is library circulation records. Find out if it is possible in your state to FOIA a research question, a database search, or other non-circulation record. Investigate what protections may be possible, for example, we are offering informed choice to borrowers for email notification. Remember always that library personnel are agents of government, and thus the First and Fourth Amendments apply to staff, volunteers, & governance! Spell out the privacy and confidentiality rights and responsibilities of staff, volunteers and trustees as government agents, as employees, and as library users. Include anyone who handles personally identifiable information in your library. People who are informed are less likely to embarrass the institution or resent its rules. Schneier has called people the "weakest link" in security, but shows that, when properly trained, they can be its strongest defense. Data security also needs regular privacy audits. A privacy audit compares an organization's goals and promises of privacy and confidentiality with its practices. Regular audits protect confidential information from abuse and the organization from liability and public relations problems. Auditing examines how information about customers and employees is collected, stored, shared, used and destroyed. Involve all stakeholders and aspects of privacy, from information technology to public relations and don't forget vendors. Make changes official in the library's Records Retention Schedule. Talk to local law enforcement before you must confront them over a request for confidential information. Understand their mission is different from the library's. Remember too that libraries enjoy the greater public confidence! Explain library ethics - we facilitate, not monitor, access. Do not attempt to do their job of investigation and be clear that the library is not to be used. Explain why we require a court order for disclosure - judicial review is an important Constitutional protection of individual rights. Preserving an uncompromised "chain of evidence" may be a common ground in the discussion. Also, talk with counsel as you develop policies. Train all staff, including pages, custodians, and volunteers to refer any request for confidential information to the appropriate authority. The library can move to quash a subpoena if it doesn't meet the Constitutional standard, "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized Minors' privacy rights may have extra legal protection from the Family Educational Right to Privacy Act (FERPA, or Buckley Amendment), and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA). The Pico case stated that the right to receive information applies to minors. Often the issue of parental responsibilities is raised as a challenge to confidentiality. Make sure that staff take opportunities to communicate with families to clarify expectations. When the child's age makes it reasonable, urge parents to communicate with their children rather than to snoop on them. Think about the library's mission and potential unintended consequences, for example, my library issues cards for preschoolers too young to select books, much less to take responsibility for their return. Accept that families have changed and policies must accommodate joint custody and latchkey children. Educating the public is key Users have the right to be informed about library policy and to make informed choices. Confrontation is often the result of surprise and mistaken expectations. Policy should be stated on data collection forms with an explanation of why the data is needed and how long it is kept. Seek every opportunity to provide choices. Consider creating handouts on privacy in the library. Users have a responsibility to respect each other's privacy. They should never be co-opted as content police. Library practices that turn users into informers invite trouble. Staff should model respect for privacy and interior design should reflect a concern for both privacy and safety. Especially following the USA PATRIOT Act, the public has a critical need to understand privacy issues and risks and to learn how to protect personally identifiable information. Libraries can add materials and create web sites and bibliographies to help. Consider holding public forums on privacy issues. Privacy has good public relations potential and cuts across the usual ideological lines. It can be a foundation for broadening library support and public understanding. Remember, above all, the necessity of policies to communicate the intent of the library, careful implementation of privacy protection and new technology, the importance of public records retention & FOIA, the necessity of training for all who handle confidential information, and the value of proactively creating opportunities for public information and discussion of privacy issues. Thank you. IFRT & Council Carolyn Caywood, IFRT Councilor Council I completed its regular agenda but did not get to New Business. The main point of interest was the report of the Task Force on Rural School, Tribal, and Public Libraries that suggested many actions but did not bring resolutions. They were told to come back with resolutions at Council III. At the APA Council meeting, relations between mirrored committees were discussed, as was the APA business plan, e.g. selling subscriptions to Library Worklife, selling For Love or Money, a new video about how badly we’re paid. Again, at Council II the old business was completed, but not the new resolutions. After the Treasurer's report, I brought up the discontinuance of the ALA Handbook, which started a landslide of protest. Others asked about the plan to buy property in D.C. as a home for the Washington office and a revenue generator. Council adopted as Core Values, Access, Confidentiality/Privacy, Democracy, Diversity, Education and Lifelong Learning, Intellectual Freedom, Preservation, The Public Good, Professionalism, Service, and Social Responsibility. The Task Force on Library Closings was reappointed but its charge remains focused on Georgia. Proposals from the Committee on Diversity were referred. Council III began with a proclamation of lifetime achievement for David Cohen included among the Memorials and Tributes. The Resolution on Privacy and Library Use (actually on misuse of patron databases) was withdrawn from the agenda, pending work by IFC. Five resolutions brought by the Committee on Legislation were passed. The three with IF aspects were to provide access to "sensitive" information, to protect whistleblowers, and to assure public access to government information. The Committee on Organization authorized a "Libraries Fostering Civic Engagement Membership Initiative Group." They also protested the end of the Handbook. IFC brought a resolution on the FCC's new policy on broadcast indecency, which passed. Also passed were 8 revised Interpretations. One Councilor fussed that she hadn't had time to read them prompting several others to thank Nancy Kranich for her efforts to distribute the revisions so that they did have time to read them. Other revisions will be presented at Midwinter 2005.
REVISED POLICIES ADOPTED BY THE ALA COUNCIL AT THE 2004 ANNUAL CONFERENCE Access for Children and Young People to Videotapes and Other Nonprint Format POLICIES STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION Access to Electronic Information Services and Networks The International Relations Committee Report was met with mutiny by committee members. Chair John Berry, (ALA past-president), had added documents about Cuba (letter pleading for support and his draft response, resolution from a South Dakota library board) for information, but committee members said they had not known he would include the documents. A resolution was introduced to delete the documents and forbid the committee chair from writing anything but "thank you for your letter - here's our policy." This was a bit too Orwellian for Council to stomach, however much they didn't want to re-discuss Cuba. Although sympathetic to committee members’ feelings that they had been misrepresented by the report, I voted against the resolution which did not pass. The Rural Task Force returned with specifics that were referred to other committees for study, and a new permanent committee on rural library issues was approved by Council. In view of the lack of a quorum at both Membership meetings, the Committee on Membership Meetings proposed lowering the quorum to 75. Many, myself included, protested that the number was so low as to be meaningless, but the resolution passed 70 to 68. It will return at Midwinter before being put on the Spring ballot. Finally we got to part of the New Business. After considerable debate, the resolution on torture passed. I informed Council that it had been endorsed by IFRT and spoke in favor of it. The resolution on accessibility for the ballot and the website passed and again I presented IFRT's endorsement. The resolved portion of the resolution on Iraq was completely reworded but there were no print copies of the new wording. It failed. Council did not get to the resolutions on health care, ALA partnerships, workplace speech, reinstating the Handbook, or attacks on two Jewish libraries. I have no documents for the partnerships resolution, but I am one of the seconders of the Handbook resolution. Since I had a very late flight, I sat in on part of the Executive Board meeting. What I heard was that ALA's budget is very tight and Council's desires on rural libraries, accessibility and the Handbook will strain it. Of those topics I raised before the Conference, Ø US use of torture – resolution passed. Ø Misusing patron data for library promotional messages - withdrawn till the results of IFC's work are reviewed at Midwinter. Ø Neither RFID, CIPA, the USAPATRIOT Act, the Archivist nominee, nor publishing as contraband came up. Ø No resolution on Fahrenheit 9/11. Ø The Core Values list was adopted. Ø Accessible ALA electronic ballots and ALA web site was passed. Ø No resolution on 501 (c) 3 limits on speech, or "One Voice" or Opt-out." Ø After some back and forth, a resolution on how ALA chooses partners was added to the final agenda but we ran out of time. This was prompted by the ALA/Walgreens partnership to distribute government Drug Card brochure. American Library Association Intellectual Freedom Round Table Executive Committee Minutes 2004 Annual Conference Orlando, FL IFRT I June 25, 2004 2 – 5:30 PM Present: Officers: Melora Ranney Norman Chair Barbara Jones Chair-Elect Christine M. Allen Director Christopher F. Bowen Director Susan Brynteson Director Pam Klipsch Director Carolyn Caywood Councilor Sylvia Turchyn Secretary Committees/Liaisons: Laura Koltutsky SRRT Liaison to IFRT Jim Kuhn IFRT Liaison to SRRT Martin Garnar Chair, Oboler Memorial Award Comm. Elizabeth J. Dailey Chair, SIRS-ProQuest State and Regional Achievement Award Comm. J. Douglas Archer Chair, Publications Comm. Jim Teliha Member, John Phillip Immroth Memorial Award Comm. Laurence Miller Member, John Phillip Immroth Memorial Award Comm. David Cohen Chair, Merritt Fund Subcomm. Nanette Perez OIF Staff Liaison Jonathan Kelley OIF Staff Members/Guests: Janice Tsai, Tom Weissinger, Michael Sinclair, Jake Sherman, June Pinnell-Stephens, Bryan Baldus Call to Order: Norman called the meeting to order at 2:09 PM. Review and Approval of Agenda: The agenda was approved as presented. Review of the 2004 Midwinter Meeting Minutes: The minutes were reviewed. Caywood moved, Klipsch seconded, and it was VOTED, That the minutes were approved as submitted. The motion was approved. IFRT Final Budget: Perez reported for Lombardo that the budget currently shows a balance of $31,099, which will be reduced when bills are paid from Annual Conference. Round Table membership has decreased by 100 members but the increase in dues offset any loss. Archer reported that the IFRT Report issues previously cost IFRT $4,000 per year when it was strictly a paper publication. Currently, as a primarily electronic publication, the Report costs $200 per mailing, or $400 per year. Norman offered that IFRT should use the available funds to support members. Bowen supported a social function or reception to draw in new members with an interest in IF issues and groups. Caywood asked about the quantity of IFRT brochures, with a suggestion to distribute them to those attending the Conference showing of “Fahrenheit 9/11.” Klipsch would rather have funds supporting functions to make IFRT grow, such as a reception in conjunction with the big IF program. Norman tabled further discussion on the budget until the Board discussed other relevant agenda items.
Discussion of Other Educational IFRT Project Ideas: Tsai suggested that IFRT sends a brochure, which would define the various intellectual freedom groups in ALA, to SLIS chapters. Garnar reported that the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered Round Table is seeking volunteer liaisons to serve as professional contacts by visiting library schools. Norman created an ad hoc educational group (Norman, Garnar, Kuhn, Turchyn and Tsai) to explore ways to create opportunities for new members to be active. It was suggested that this ad hoc group review a survey, which was prepared by IFRT members a few years ago, to determine which library and information science schools offer intellectual freedom courses or where the concept is supported in the curriculum. Publications Comm. Report: Archer announced the intent to expand the IFRT Report to four issues instead of two per year. Archer issued a plea for members to provide coverage of programs or to contribute columns of interest. Norman made a plea for the IFRT list to be used as a way to bring membership to a more active level of participation. The ad hoc education group could consider that possibility. Norman wants the IFRT list to be more meaningful. Caywood noted that the OIF list is open to the world. She asked if it would be repugnant to make the IFRT list open only to members. Caywood moved, Turchyn seconded, and it was VOTED, That the IFRT list become a member-only list for posting, with read-only access for non-IFRT members. The motion passed. Caywood would like to see content on the list include how some members have put together programs on intellectual freedom issues, how a book was defended, how to share successful experiences, etc. Garnar spoke about having a small group to start and support this type of list. Norman spoke about the differences between managing and moderating a list. Caywood spoke in support of a new ad hoc group to promote the list. Norman recommended that an ad hoc group be formed to coordinate this effort. Brynteson asked if there are managerial issues for ALA that should be considered. Perez responded that that would not be a problem. A guest asked if this new list would be redundant with the IFRT Report. Jones and Archer agreed that it could be redundant. Jones said that Archer should be involved in the ad hoc group. Caywood suggested that Archer announce the new format for the IFRT list in the next IFRT Report, with a request that all members be actively involved in the IFRT list. Archer asked for an August 1 deadline on articles covering conference events. Brynteson suggested that Caywood invite all ALA councilors to become read-only members. Division IFC’s Chairs Brown Bag Lunch: Norman asked Klipsch to report on the brown bag lunch idea, which was initiated at the Midwinter Meeting. Norman envisions this luncheon to be an opportunity for people to network, get acquainted and learn how all of ALA’s intellectual freedom structure works together. It was proposed that the IFRT liaisons would represent Divisional chairs, with the luncheon to be scheduled the day of the Freedom To Read Foundation (FTRF) meeting. Questions were posed regarding the cost of the luncheon and who would pay for it. For this initial luncheon, hosted by IFRT, it was proposed that the twenty-three representatives of Round Tables, Divisions and Committees who have liaisons to FTRF, be invited. Klipsch suggested that the IFRT liaison to the FTRF facilitate the luncheon meeting. Executive Committee members voiced support for the luncheon because it is aligned with the Round Table’s purpose of education of the general membership on intellectual freedom issues. Caywood reminded that the ALA President Elect and President Elect-Elect often attend FTRF so we could invite them. It is expected that hosting will cost the IFRT about $300 to cover the cost of the lunch. Koltutsky spoke in favor of the idea, drawing from her experience as SRRT liaison to IFRT. Pinnell-Stephens reminded that the FTRF program requires scheduling flexibility if we cater this luncheon around its agenda. Allen moved, Klipsch seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT organizes a luncheon and orientation program for the Divisional, Committee and Round Table liaisons attending the ALA Midwinter Meeting in Boston, 2005, with an allocation of $300 to cover the cost of the luncheon for attendees. The motion was passed. Other educational issues: Archer asked about handing out IFRT brochures at the “Fahrenheit 9/11” showing. Perez said that she would make a flyer. Archer also asked about planning a reception in conjunction with IFRT’s Saturday program. Klipsch asked about planning an open food reception over the lunch hour were we would honor the IFRT award winners, with the intent to entice conferees to stay for the program. Caywood further suggested that we have an award luncheon for which people can purchase tickets or can just attend gratis to hear without a luncheon ticket. Klipsch was concerned about the inconsistency of the draw of speaker. Brynteson disliked the idea of charging for that which serves as the membership meeting. Klipsch moved, Jones seconded, and it was VOTED, That instead of having officers and speakers of IFRT attend a pre-program lunch, that IFRT organizes a program with light refreshments from 12 - 1:30, then move to an adjacent or close room for the IFRT program, to be held at the 2005 Annual Conference, with $2,000 allocated for this event, for which IFRT would seek underwriters. The motion was passed. Garnar suggested that the award plaques be placed on display at the reception. Caywood suggested that IFRT members man information tables with a goal of IFRT recruitment. Caywood volunteered to do this. Klipsch suggested calling for these volunteers in the IFRT Report and Archer suggested liaising with NMRT. Norman reported on the Round Table Coordinating Assembly lunch. She spoke about her Idea to have a liaison from IFRT to NMRT and to support a scholarship of $200 for a new IFRT person to attend ALA Annual Conference. 2005 Annual Conference Program Planning: Jones asked for background on the proposed topic, religion and intellectual freedom. Norman spoke about how religion and IF played off against each other. Caywood commented on how the wall of separation runs through the library. Some questions and specific topics suggested for the program were: · What constitutes entanglement with religion in libraries? What does that mean and what does that not mean? · Help dismiss the misconceptions of what does and does not constitute separation of church and state · Why do libraries collect religion materials? · Represent both sides of the establishment clause · The history of religion in the public schools · Explore how intellectual freedom is handled differently in parochial schools
The Executive Committee also suggested the following speakers for consideration: · Barry Lynn (Executive Director, Americans United for Separation of Church and State) · Susan Jacoby (author; Freethinkers: History of American Secularism) · Martin E. Marty (author, professor emeritus at University of Chicago) · Fr. Andrew Greeley (author, sociologist) · R. Scott Appleby (author, Professor of History at University of Notre Dame) Archer volunteered to help with program planning. Caywood moved, Brynteson seconded, and it was
VOTED, That IFRT thanks Lauren Christos for her bibliographies and related background work for the 2004 IFRT program. The motion was approved by acclimation. Preconference Planning for 2006 Annual Conference in New Orleans: Norman reported that IFRT cannot present the “Lawyers for Libraries” program as is. Following discussion with Judith Krug, Norman proposed the topic of “Every day ethics: How to prepare Library Bill of Right library policies.” The timing of this preconference would coincide with the rollout of the 7th edition of the Intellectual Freedom Manual. Norman explained that the program would feature lawyers, trustees and librarians who have prepared good library policies. The speakers would bring sample policies, which would be critiqued by the participants. The program would be held on the Friday of conference, with IFRT I being moved up to a start time of 3 PM. Dailey, Weissinger and Norman volunteered to serve as a preconference planning committee. Norman called for volunteers to help distribute IFRT flyers at 9:30, before the showing of “Fahrenheit 9/11”. Kuhn, Caywood, Norman, Klipsch and Tsai volunteered. ALA’s One Voice Policy Challenged by SRRT, IFRT, et al. Kuhn reminded that there was not a program on ALA’s one voice policy at this conference. Norman spoke that there is no ALA policy on Round Tables endorsing candidates so if IFRT wanted to use existing fora or publications for that purpose it is OK. What is not allowed is using ALA funds for a special effort, such as a mailing. Caywood recommended that we table the issue until there is attempted enforcement of a non-policy on “one voice.” Koltutsky acknowledged and thanked Kuhn on all of his work on this issue. Privacy Tool Kit: Kuhn reported that the Privacy Tool Kit will be discussed at the IFC Privacy Subcomm. and he welcomed comments. The Toolkit features a sample privacy policy, how to conduct a privacy audit and how to address privacy issues in libraries. The Subcomm. will be preparing a “to do” list at their meeting on Sunday, 10 AM until noon. Nominating Comm. Report: Norman reported for Wessells the following election results:
· Chair-elect - Pam Klipsch (2004-2005) · Secretary - Carol Gulyas (2004-2006) · Directors - Doug Archer and Sylvia Turchyn (2004-2006) Other Intellectual Freedom Programs: ACRL’s Intellectual Freedom Committee’s program, with the title “Community Use, Community Pressure” will feature Martin Garnar. Caywood announced that she will speak at ALTA’s closing session, which will focus on privacy policies, the USA Patriot Act and RFID. Standing Committee Reports: · SIRS-ProQuest State and Regional Intellectual Freedom Achievement Award Committee: Dailey reported no business, except giving the award at the IFRT program. · Eli M. Oboler Memorial Award Committee: Garnar reminded that the Committee will need a new chairperson and that next year is an off year the Oboler Award. The award will be given at the IFRT program. · John Phillip Immroth Memorial Award Committee: Turchyn reported no business, except giving the award at the IFRT program. · Publications Committee: Archer reported that he wants to get a meeting planned at conference to get more involvement of committee members, so that they function like reporters. The current Issues are now in HTML and PDF, as well as full print. In addition, four back issues are now in PDF. Archer will arrange to have other back issues scanned into PDF, back to the recent history of regular publication of the Report. Archer also asked that potential authors provide some biographical information to accompany their articles. Brynteson alerted everyone to the 2004 Program Tracks in the conference’s printed program and, specifically, to the lack of intellectual freedom as a track. Brynteson moved, Caywood seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT recommends to those responsible for conference planning tracks and to ALA leadership that, as intellectual freedom is a Key Action Area and established priority of the ALA, it be established as a separate track, if tracking continues, for the 2005 conference. The motion passed. Norman will represent the IFRT’s displeasure that the IFRT’s program did not get properly listed in this program. Norman will also bring our motion to the joint IFC meeting. Caywood moved, Brynteson seconded the following resolution:
Whereas librarianship exists to facilitate access, not to obscure access; and Whereas the Web has conditioned us to expect multiple paths to lead to the same result; and Whereas being restricted to a single track does not reflect the breadth of cross-disciplinary programs, like those on intellectual freedom, and makes them hard to find; and Whereas the 2004 IFRT program was not listed under the intellectual freedom subtrack of Issues and Updates, therefore be it Resolved that future Conference Programs provide multiple access points to programs by listing all applicable programs in each track, with a page citation to the program description. Koltutsky recommend that this resolution be presented at an ALA Membership meeting. Brynteson moved, and Klipsch seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT tables discussion on Caywood’s resolution on program tracking until IFRT 2. The motion was passed.
Intellectual Freedom Manual (7th ed.) Garnar reported that the IFRT councilor has made multiple comments that have been well received by IFC. Other comments need to be made this afternoon so they can be considered. Garnar noted that one general recommendation was that responsibility be shifted from an entity to a person on a case by case basis (e.g. libraries to librarians). Garnar gave an update on the status and discussions of the current proposed changes in each Interpretation to the Library Bill of Rights. Caywood reminded that three other revisions to Interpretations are in progress. Norman assigned chairperson duties to Caywood, so that she could depart for another meeting. In the remaining minutes several Executive Committee members expressed concern that ALA Council would vote on the numerous changes to multiple Interpretations in time for the publication deadline. Recess: Caywood called the meeting into recess at 5:16 PM. American Library Association Intellectual Freedom Round Table Executive Committee Minutes 2004 Annual Conference Orlando, FL IFRT II June 28, 2004 8 – 10 AM Present: Officers: Melora Ranney Norman Chair Christine Allen Director Christopher Bowen Director Susan Brynteson Director Pam Klipsch Director Carolyn Caywood Councilor Sylvia Turchyn Secretary Committees/Liaisons: Laura Koltutsky SRRT Liaison to IFRT Martin Garnar Chair, Oboler Memorial Award Comm. Doug Archer Chair, Publications Comm. Jim Teliha Member, John Phillip Immroth Memorial Award Comm. Francis Buckley Senior Trustee, Leroy C. Merritt Humanitarian Fund Wendy Westgate NMRT Liaison to IFRT Nanette Perez OIF Staff Liaison Jen Hammond OIF Staff Members/Guests: Carol Gulyas, Tom Budlong, Mary Rushfield, Janice Tsai, Janet T. O’Keefe, Fred Stielow, Thomas Wilding Call to Order: Norman reconvened the meeting at 8:03 AM. Programming & Conference Tracking Issue: Wilding, ALA Councilor, addressed the IFRT Executive Committee to explain the history and development of program tracking for ALA conferences. He explained that all presidents’ programs, including those for division presidents, were excluded from tracking. Analysis has revealed that programs not tracked had low attendance, including the division presidents’ programs. Another continuing problem with tracking is that scheduling deadlines for tracking occurred before most Round Tables had finalized programs so the Conference Comm. tried to place the Round Table programs into tracks. The Conference Comm. also tried to develop multiple lists, which became unwieldy. The Conference Comm. is still exploring how to successfully use tracking, in particular for areas of wide-ranging interest like LAMA. Caywood explained that the conference’s printed program does not do what we as librarians expect it to do. She added that ALA needs to find a way for a conference program to be searchable by all possible access points. Archer reminded that Intellectual freedom is not like the job-related tracks, but is a topic that affects everyone and has a wide interest to librarians. Budlong spoke in favor of having issues-oriented tracking not compete in a timetable with job-related program tracks. Wilding noted that tracking works well at smaller conferences. Turchyn proposed that ALA Council ask ALCTS’ Subject Analysis Comm. to design tracking options for Council’s consideration. Caywood supported returning to a heavily indexed printed conference program to alleviate the problem. Wilding was asked why all programs are not held in the convention center. He explained that hotel program rooms are complimentary but ALA pays additional fees for the use of convention centers. Brynteson opined that intellectual freedom should have its own track. All agreed that as librarians we should be able to do a better job in this area. Tsai suggested having a conference Web page link to all of the Division pages, which would be available prior to conference. Klipsch reported that only three intellectual freedom programs were tracked for 2004 Annual Conference, while in reality numerous intellectual freedom programs were offered at conference. Caywood moved, Archer seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT tables the Resolution on Conference Tracking until the 2005 Midwinter Meeting. The motion passed. Norman agreed to take the will of IFRT to Council and to work with Wilding on this issue. Proposed Joint Project with ALSC and/or YALSA: “IF and Youth: Helping Librarians Stand Strong”: Gulyas made a presentation, which covered the objectives, description of the event, handouts and displays, bibliography, considerations, proposed budget and next steps. Brynteson suggested spelling out “IF”, which Gulyas corrected immediately. Caywood expressed concern that local teens would not want to speak if they could be quoted in the newspaper. Caywood suggested that we shift that part of the program to a speaker giving a general overview of what was happening around the country, followed by a panel of teen reactors. Norman was concerned that IFRT should give them a budget. Klipsch suggested looking at teen advisory boards in libraries as a good area for recruiting potential teen participants. Brynteson did not think that this program would be of interest to academic librarians. Klipsch responded that academic librarians are struggling to provide services to teens who have encountered information roadblocks in schools. Koltutsky spoke in support of involvement of teens first hand. Klipsch suggested this title: “We’ve Got Your Back: Teens and Librarians Speak Out on Intellectual Freedom.” Budlong offered that the title needed to convey that live teens will participate. Caywood wanted to incorporate teen advocacy into this program. The “Best Books for Young Adults” program also brings in teens so maybe the two programs should be coordinated. Caywood moved, Brynteson seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT approves the program as discussed with the tentative title, “Teens Speak Out” with up to $1,000 budgeted for this event. The motion passed. Teliha reminded IFRT that funding from other sources should be pursued. Report on Leroy C. Merritt Fund: Perez reported that the Merritt Fund Reception would be held in the Presidential Suite of the Peabody Hotel from 5-6:30 PM. Report from Councilor: Caywood presented a number of issues and resolutions for comment and/or action: · Resolution Against the Use of Torture as a Barbaric Violation of Intellectual Freedom and Human Rights Members asked if this was a library issue. Klipsch stated that if this is an attempt to prevent free expression, then we stand against that. Caywood noted the citation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Bowen moved, Klipsch seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT directs its Councilor to support the resolution on torture. The motion passed by acclimation. · Resolution on Accessible Voting Klipsch moved, Bowen seconded, and it was
VOTED, That IFRT directs its Councilor to support the Resolution on Accessible Voting. The motion passed by acclimation. · Resolution on the Occupation of Iraq Caywood presented the resolution on Iraq and suggested that IFRT not support it. · Resolution on Privacy and Library Use Caywood reported that Council was expected to appoint a joint task force to address various issues related to privacy practices in libraries and examine extant ALA statements related to privacy. Garnar reported that the IFC Privacy Subcomm. will develop a “Q&A” on the issues. · Resolution on Health Care Caywood presented the resolution, which was submitted to Council by Norman. Klipsch moved, Allen seconded, and it was
VOTED, That IFRT directs its Councilor to support the Resolution on Health Care. The motion passed. Koltutsky announced that the Resolution on ALA Partnerships and Sponsorships was withdrawn at Council. Brynteson expressed concern that the ALA Handbook will no longer provide print copies but will only be available online. Caywood suggested that she and Norman work on representing this issue to Council. Bylaws and Organization Comm.: Brynteson directed attention to the handout with the recommended revisions to the bylaws. Brynteson moved, Bowen seconded That IFRT accepts the changes in the Bylaws proposed by the Bylaws and Organization Comm. In discussion of the motion, Perez, after consultation with Krug, reported that the leading phrase “members of” should be deleted from Article 7, Sect. 5 Garnar added that Coalition Building should be removed from Article 7, Sect. 4. Additional discussion on further editing suggestions ensued. Norman redirected the report back to the Committee for additional work. LeRoy C. Merritt Humanitarian Fund: Buckley thanked the IFRT for its support. Intellectual Freedom Manual (7th ed.): Caywood moved, Klipsch seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT endorses in principle the proposed changes to intellectual freedom policies in the Intellectual Freedom Manual. The motion passed. IFRT Final Budget: Archer reminded that additional funding was needed to expand the number of issues of the IFRT Report from two to four per year. Turchyn moved, Allen seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT increases the amount budgeted for the electronic version of the IFRT Report from $200 to $400. The motion passed. Brynteson commended Norman, Kelley and Perez for distributing IFRT flyers at the showing of Fahrenheit 9/11 on Sunday evening. Based on decisions voted at conference, Perez reported the following additions to the IFRT budget: $1000 IFRT program $300 Brown Bag lunch $2000 IFRT reception $300 IFRT membership promotion $250 IFRT membership mailing $200 IFRT Report mail service $3,900 TOTAL
Klipsch moved, Caywood seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT reconfirms the budget as it has been so changed. The motion passed. Any Other Business That May Properly Come Before the Committee: Kelley reported that David Cohen will be honored with a resolution that will also mention his work with IFRT. Caywood moved, Bowen seconded, and it was VOTED, That IFRT endorses in spirit any acclimation or praise in support of David Cohen. The motion passed. Adjournment: Norman adjourned the meeting at 10:01 AM. Don’t Filter – Select! : First Suggestions Toward a “Technological Solution” By Stephen Cochran Introduction The author has played with the idea presented in this article for over five years, wondering if anyone else out there is thinking in the same direction. Lurking – and participating to a degree – in discussion lists dealing with cataloging, intellectual freedom, and filtering issues, he hasn’t seen the idea explored – or mentioned – in the way in which it is conceived. The editorial by Leonard Kniffel in the October, 1999 American Libraries – particularly the sentence that states “…while we argue that filters are not effective, we do nothing to develop a technological solution” – prompted the article’s completion, and suggested its title. The author is neither a programmer nor a computer whiz, and cannot therefore assert with certainty that the concepts discussed here can be implemented. However, he feels intuitively that they ought to be, for the sake of both library professionals and the public they serve. It must be noted at the outset that the usefulness of a selection tool that can be applied to the Internet’s vast resources will be different for large academic libraries striving to collect comprehensively in all areas than it will be for small school libraries where teachers and librarians are required to act in loco parentis. It is hoped that this piece will generate fruitful discussion, and will allow librarians to reclaim the function of selection from those who would use the innocuous label of “filter” to censor access for everyone. The Issue It seems in library-land these days, a person can’t open a professional journal or magazine without reading articles or news briefs about the content of the World Wide Web, discussion about “protecting our children,” Internet filtering devices, and related issues. We read about court cases, going all the way to the Supreme Court, dealing with whether or not the Internet is a public forum and thus deserving of First Amendment protection. We hear about library Boards at odds with library Directors about whether to filter or not to filter. We see, in the long CIPA and COPA legislative struggles, an ill-informed move by the federal government to strong-arm libraries into using Internet filtering software if they wish to receive or retain federal E-rate telecommunications discounts. We witness local initiatives like the one in Holland, Michigan, where libraries would be required to filter or lose local funding.1 Entirely absent from this discussion is any perspective that would allow librarians to do with Online resources what they have traditionally done with every other form of print and non-print material; that is, selection. Why, given the digital tools and standards either developed or under development, has nothing been made to facilitate the selection of web resources for inclusion in the library? Even more damning, why have librarians not vigorously pursued the development of tools which would allow them to select web sites to include in their collection? Assume shelf space, cataloging resources, and materials for shelf preparation are not an obstacle in your library. If someone gives you 500,000 new books, absolutely free, would you put each and every one of them on the shelf without a glance at your collection development policy? If you answered “yes,” it can be reasonably argued that you aren’t doing the basic job of a librarian: to select, organize, and disseminate information, because you’re ignoring the selection function. If you answered “no,” then perhaps you see why, philosophically, the notion that librarians have no selection obligations when it comes to web-based resources is objectionable. Philosophy of Selection: “Selection refers to the decision to retain as well as to add to the collection. It is based upon awareness of the diverse needs and interests of the individuals in [the] community, balanced against evaluation of material and knowledge of the collection’s strengths and weaknesses. The selection process is also shaped by …the accessibility of alternative information sources.2 Given this definition of selection, it can be safely asserted that most libraries don’t “select” web-based resources. But why not? Surely, many libraries have decided to “deselect” certain print resources because of the facile availability of web-based “alternative information sources.”3 How is the library patron enabled to find the new, web-based replacement for the print resource if the web-based resource isn’t cataloged, but instead merely “bookmarked” at the library’s public access Internet terminal or linked via the library’s web site? Ronald Hagler, on the very first page of his book The Bibliographic Record and Information Technology, says:
That different information storage and retrieval techniques have become associated with different formats, subjects, and information-service agencies is no surprise since each has its own history. That this is neither theoretically ideal nor even efficient is and should continue to be a concern of librarians, the scope of whose professional activity is both information in its broadest sense and user requests at their most specific.4 Part of what Hagler is saying is that it isn’t “ideal” or “efficient” for librarians to treat print resources one way and electronic resources another. It opens libraries up to charges of inconsistency in the way materials are provided. It gives the public the impression that librarians are biased in favor of one type of material over another. This can also create administrative and operational headaches. What Is “Filtering” Really? The fact of the matter is that the public likes selection. If the Internet filtering debate should teach us anything, it’s that library users want librarians to exercise some sort of control over the availability of electronic resources. The way in which this control is exercised is what needs to concern librarians professionally. This brings us to the question: What is “filtering,” really? Filtering is – operationally as well as philosophically – much more akin to censorship than it is to selection. In an article that reached its 50th birthday in 2003, but which bears examination by every collection development librarian because of the timelessness of its message, Lester Asheim examines standards for selection and for censorship (standards like the intent of the author, literary merit, and presumed effect upon the reader) and concludes that “if…the standards employed as touchstones by the librarians are essentially the same as those used by the censor, the distinction between selection and censorship will have to be found in the way the standards are applied..”5 He goes on to point out such distinctions:
The major characteristic which makes for the all-important difference seems to me to be this: that the selector’s approach is positive, while that of the censor is negative. This is more than a verbal quibble; it transforms the entire act and the steps included in it. For the selector, the important thing is to find reason to keep the book… For the censor, on the other hand, the important thing is to find reasons to reject the book… The positive selector asks what the reaction of a rational intelligent adult would be to the content of the work; the censor fears for the results on the weak, the warped, and the irrational.
…The negative approach is that it leads to the use of isolated parts rather than the complete whole upon which to base a judgment…In other words, four letters have outweighed five hundred pages.
The negative orientation, which seeks reasons to ban rather that to preserve, also leads to the judgment of books by external rather than internal criteria… what kind of husband and father is the author; of what nation is he a citizen; what are his political affiliations;…what is his color, his race, his religion?…
The selector, on the other hand, judges by internal values…it is the content of the book that is weighed, not the table manners of the publisher or the sartorial orthodoxy of the author…
Finally, the selector begins, ideally with a presumption in favor of liberty of thought; the censor does not.6 In the above passages, replace the word “book” with “web page,” and the word “censor” with the word “filter,” and it will become clear that a filter is neither more nor less than an electronic censor and, as such, deserves no place whatsoever in the librarian’s toolbox. Filtering, like censorship, is reactive and exclusive, having as its objective the exclusion from the collection those materials with which its proponents disagree. These materials are Internet resources in the case of filtering, everything else in the case of censorship. Selection, on the other hand, is proactive and inclusive, having as an objective the inclusion in the collection of all of those materials which patrons want or may find useful. Now, how do we apply the philosophy and standards of selection to web-based resources? In the world of print and audiovisual resources, an item not held by the library simply isn’t available for perusal without some sort of intermediation by a librarian, such as filling out a request for purchase, or an inter-library loan request. Imagine a similar situation pertaining to online resources. Suppose, for instance, a Java script applet that could be invoked by your library’s web browser to automatically check your OPAC to see if a MARC record existed for whatever URL was being sought. If such a record was found, then the browser would download the web site. However, if no such MARC record was found, a dialog box would appear in front of the web browser window which said something like: “the item you have chosen is not currently held by this library; would you like to request that the library add this item to its collection?”, allowing the patron to request the addition of the web site in the same way patrons request other library materials, but leaving the browser window where it was. Such a piece of software would eliminate the need for a filtering device, and may even meet the CIPA-required definition of a “technology protection measure”. The library would once again be enabled to assume full responsibility for its entire—virtual and actual—collection. The library catalog would once again be given primacy as the place from which to begin a search for information, and the same controlled vocabulary—e.g. name and subject authority files—applied to actual materials would be applied to virtual materials as well. Patrons would still have to worry about their children finding inappropriate content on the web, but no more than they worry now about their children finding inappropriate content in books and magazines. Rather than using the broadax that current filtering technologies represent to deal with such “inappropriate” web content, web sites considered “inappropriate” could be challenged by library patrons as being incompatible with a particular institution’s collection development objectives in the same way that as other types of materials are challenged currently. How do we facilitate selection of web-based resources? In the MARC bibliographic and holdings records for electronic resources, the 856 field allows for the storage and display of information required to locate and retrieve an electronic item. Further, most ILS vendors have products that allow for hot links from the 856 field, allowing patrons using a web-based catalog to click on a URL displayed in a bibliographic record in order to jump directly to the web location of the resource. That’s good, and saves the time of the user. A Java script applet like the one mentioned would give library selectors a steady stream of electronic resources in which patrons are not only interested, but which they have already tried to access. Since this is not at all different from the patron who comes and requests a book that they have already tried, unsuccessfully, to locate in the catalog, it effectively “levels the playing field” between print and electronic resources, and ensures that all materials “held” in the catalog have been selected by those responsible for overall collection development. There are certainly problems that this method will introduce, least among them the increased maintenance of cataloged URLs that would result. Patrons would initially be confronted by the dialog box nearly all of the time, and the “surfing” allowed by unrestricted access to the “uncataloged” Internet would be greatly constrained. Certain web sites used for communication (e.g. Hotmail.com) or commercial (e.g. ebay.com) purposes rather than for informational purposes would have to be accommodated by this system somehow. There are doubtless more problem areas, that the critical reader will have no trouble articulating. None of the problems envisioned thus far are insurmountable. The development of a high quality, locally relevant collection of electronic resources will – like the development of any good collection – take time. The appearance of the dialog box would generate many “requests for acquisition” of sites that users found important and useful. Perhaps vendors could develop “opening day collections” of electronic resources tailored for specific niches (for example, elementary students, undergraduates, retirees, reference collections). User surveys could easily gather information on the general and specific types of electronic resources in greatest local demand. OCLC’s Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (CORC), a three-year research project to catalog and provide Pathfinders for web-based information resources represented a significant step towards the development of a sizable opening day electronic resource collection. Its integration into Connexion, a web-based cataloging tool for print, non-print, and electronic resources, has allowed the cooperative cataloging for which OCLC is renowned to be expanded to include an ever-growing number of web-resident electronic resources.7 The point is that such a piece of software would allow librarians to do what we do best: develop strong and useful collections to serve a population with localized needs and wants, to select library materials in all formats to strengthen those collections, and to allow for consistency in library technical services workflow. Moreover, all of this would be done with the consistent application and interpretation of established collection development policies, while respecting and conforming to the Library Bill of Rights. 1 See, for example, Library Hotline. V. XXVIII, N. 2, p. 1; N. 4, pp. 1,4; N 11 p.1; N. 18 pp. 2, 5; N. 22 p. 1; and N. 25 p.6 for an idea of the nature and intensity of this discussion in only one (small) professional serial. 2 Futas, Elizabeth, Collection Development Policies and Procedures, 3rd ed. , Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1995, p. 158. 3 In November 2000, I posted the following question to the Indiana Cooperative Library Services Authority (INCOLSA) Listserv:
Have any libraries out there decided to weed certain print resources due to the increasing availability of web-based resources? Taken to the next step, have any libraries out there re-written their collection development policies to prefer CD-ROM or Online version of publications over print versions? Of the eleven libraries that replied, all of them had made decisions to remove materials based upon the availability of online equivalents. While none had actually rewritten collection development policies to underpin their collection development procedures, one indicated that it was “a great question and one we are wrestling with,” and one indicated that a conscious decision was made “not to weed print titles” because “if we decide not to renew, or can’t renew… [subscriptions to the online resource], then we would not have the product available at all.” 4 Hagler, Ronald, The Bibliographic Record and Information Technology, Second ed., ALA/CLA, 1991, p. 1. 5 Asheim, Lester, “Not Censorship But Selection,” Wilson Library Bulletin, September, 1953, pp. 63-67. 6 Ibid. p. 66 passim. 7 When checked on July 28th, 2004 OCLC’s WebCat listed catalog records for more than 457,000 unique domains. Banned Books Week at Biscayne Bay Library Lauren Christos “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”—Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas Biscayne Bay Library held its first-ever Banned Books Week Readout September 21 – 24, 2003. Readings from works ranged from the scientific—Galileo to Darwin’s Origin of Species—to the supernatural, Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets. Why have some texts been forbidden? Mostly because organizations and institutions almost always political or religious in origin, take it upon themselves to decide what is acceptable or allowable for you to read. Unfortunately, attempts to restrict access to materials of choice are not a thing of the past. Through the ages only the direction of censorship has changed: during one period concern was with religious heresy; during another, with incitement to rebellion; and today, obscenity. The earliest report of book burning in England was that of William Tyndale's translation of the New Testament (1525-26). In the next century William Prynne's Histrio-Mastix, a criticism of the immorality of the English stage, was burned by the common hangman in 1633. For criticizing the queen, Prynne was imprisoned, pilloried, and shorn of his ears. In America in 1650, authorities found William Pynchon's theological work, The Meritorious Price of Our Redemption, to be "erronyous and hereticale" and ordered it burned in the Boston marketplace. In 1690 the first American newspaper, Publick Occurrances, was suppressed after the first issue. And on it goes. The history of censorship has a long tradition, and sadly it is one that continues to this day. In any city, state, or nation, restriction from the freedom to choose or to express one’s opinion is under challenge. The BBC’s aim was two-fold. One, to bring about awareness that over the centuries, a vast number of notable author’s writing have been challenged, censored, banned, or in some cases, burned. Two, to advance an understanding of the essential meaning of the First Amendment of the Bill or Rights:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The First Amendment of our Constitution provides our nation’s blueprint for both personal freedom and an open society, containing broad recognition of the fundamental liberties we hold dear. But despite this, attempts to censor words, thoughts and opinions remain constant. Our recognition and celebration of these rights is essential to maintaining them. Appropriately, the last reading of the last day of Banned Books Week was that of The Bill of Rights. Under the wood gazebo in front of the library, the pleasant shade from the trees and occasional delightful breeze from the not-so-distant bay provided a relaxed atmosphere in which to read and discuss select passages from the books. Passersby, on their way to the library or to class would stop first at the pictorial Banned Book Display. Still curious, they would walk up to the gazebo and hear live the written words from Candide, Lady Chatterly’s Lover, Lolita, Molly Bloom’s soliloquy from Ulysses, Catcher in the Rye, Animal Farm, poetry by Walt Whitman, The Martian Chronicles, The Merchant of Venice, and many other distinguished works of literature being read by students, librarians, and professors. From eleven to one every day, the informal venue of the Readout invited and allowed visitors the convenience of staying for as long as they preferred. Many stayed for the duration, others just for a reading or two. Moreover, several times during the week, entire classes visited the gazebo with a few students even volunteering to read spontaneously. The faculty readings were thoughtfully prepared. Whether an historical or contemporary reading, the background information on the chosen text was framed, allowing for a finer appreciation of the passages selected. For example, the gravity of the Vietnam War was brought to light as it pertained to the reading of The Pentagon Papers. Illustrating the secrecy and attempted suppression of documents written by the U.S. government regarding Vietnam, these papers were published by the New York Times only because of a direct U.S. Supreme Court Order freeing them for publication. Even a fictional work, such as Huxley’s Brave New World, published in 1932, produced the realization that one author’s idea of science fiction - test tube fertilization - has become reality. The perennial conflict of theologies and ideologies—from the fifteenth century through the twenty-first century was shared in the gazebo.
According to the American Library Association, “A strong intellectual freedom perspective is critical to the development of academic library collections and services that dispassionately meet the education and research needs of a college or university community.” At Florida International University, the support of the faculty, students, and librarians in their support of The Banned Books Week Readout demonstrates that intellectual freedom is flourishing. The display of The History of Banned Books along with many of the challenged or banned books will remain in the Biscayne Bay Library lobby through October 10, 2003. Banned Books Week is sponsored by the American Booksellers Association, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the American Library Association, the American Society of Journalists and Authors, the Association of American Publishers and the National Association of College Stores. It is also endorsed by the Library of Congress’ Center for the Book. Keeping IFRT Strong and Active Martin Garnar With a large number of librarians poised to retire in the next few years, we stand to lose much of our profession's collective knowledge of and experience with issues of intellectual freedom. To counteract this brain drain, new librarians must be given opportunities for continuing education on intellectual freedom so that the principles they've learned in library school can be transferred to practical applications. IFRT is the perfect place for such educational efforts, but our hard work will be for naught if we're not reaching the right audience. It is essential for IFRT to reach out to new librarians and bring them into our activities as colleagues and fellow defenders of intellectual freedom. Along with education, one of IFRT's primary purposes is to advocate for the principles of intellectual freedom within our professional association. As one of the five largest Round Tables in ALA, we have our own Councilor. It's crucial that we maintain our membership numbers in order to ensure that there's a champion for intellectual freedom in our organization's governing body. Therefore, in order to advance the twin goals of education and advocacy, we must ensure a robust and active membership for IFRT. To that end, we spent some time at the Annual Conference in Orlando generating a number of ideas, including: * developing information packets on IFRT for display/distribution at local, state and regional meetings * recruiting/identifying IFRT members to serve as the main contact person for each state association, with duties of recruitment and publicity for IFRT * recruiting/identifying IFRT members to serve as liaisons to all library schools (same duties as above) * transform the existing IFRT e-mail list into a value-added information exchange (e.g., a place to share experiences with intellectual freedom challenges) that would complement existing information sources like the IF Action Network All of these ideas will require some effort from both the Executive Board and from our existing membership. Over the next few months, we will be soliciting volunteers to help us with these membership promotion efforts. Please give some thought to how you want to participate in these new ventures. If you have any questions or would like to volunteer, please contact Martin Garnar (Membership Promotion Committee chair) at mgarnar@regis.edu. Martin Garnar, Reference Librarian Dayton Memorial Library, Regis University 3333 Regis Blvd., Mail Stop D-20 Denver, CO 80221-1099 303.964.5459 303.964.5497 (fax) mgarnar@regis.edu Honor Your Local Intellectual Freedom Fighters! Christopher Bowen and Nanette Perez Has your state library association developed great public relations campaign to promote an awareness of intellectual freedom issues? Has a coalition formed in your state or region to respond to a particular intellectual freedom challenge? Has your state intellectual freedom committee reorganized to provide better support to members? Has a legal defense fund been formed to defend first amendment rights in your area? Let your Intellectual Freedom heroes know you appreciate their efforts by nominating them for the IFRT's ProQuest/SIRS State and Regional Intellectual Freedom Achievement Award. Winners receive a handsome citation and an award of $1,000 donated by ProQuest. Programs may be one-time, one-year or ongoing/multi-year efforts. Examples might include a statewide public relations initiative to promote awareness of intellectual freedom, programmatic assistance to meet a broad-based censorship challenge, coalition building or education outreach efforts, or effective reorganization or management of an intellectual freedom committee.
State libraries or library associations, educational media associations or programs, legal defense funds, intellectual freedom committees or coalitions and related parties are eligible for nomination by themselves or others. The Colorado Association of Libraries Intellectual Freedom Committee (CAL IFC) is the 2004 recipient of the ProQuest/SIRS State and Regional Achievement Award. At the December 1 deadline, no nominations had been received for the 2005 award, so the deadline has been extended to January 10, 2005. That means there is still time to nominate your organization! Information and nomination forms are available on the ALA website or from Nanette Perez, IFRT Staff Liaison, Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association, 50 East Huron St., Chicago, IL 60611. Telephone 312-280-4223 or 800-545-2433, ext.4223. Selected Intellectual Freedom Sessions in Boston, 2005 Complied from ALA’s Conference Planner* Doug Archer *Be sure to check your conference book and list of changes handout upon arrival. FRIDAY
Meeting: ALA-FTRF | Freedom to Read Foundation Board of Trustees Meeting Date: 1/14/2005 Time: 8:00 AM- 5:30 PM Location: Boston Marriott Copley Place Grand BR J Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFRT | ALA/IFRT Intellectual Freedom Round Table Liaison Luncheon Date: 1/14/2005 Time: 12:30PM- 2:00 PM Location: Boston Marriott Copley Place Grand BR I Open? No SATURDAY
Meeting: ALA-IFC | Intellectual Freedom Committee I Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 8:00 AM- 11:30 AM Location: Sheraton Independence East Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFC | IFC Issues Briefing Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 11:30 AM- 12:30PM Location: Sheraton Beacon F Open? Yes
Meeting: AASL/ALSC | AASL/ALSC/YALSA Joint Intellectual Freedom Meeting Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 2:00 PM- 4:00 PM Location: Westin St. George A-C Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-ETHICS | Ethics I Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 2:00 PM- 4:00 PM Location: Sheraton Beacon D Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFRT | IFRT I Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 2:00 PM- 4:00 PM Location: Sheraton Independence East Open? Yes
Meeting: ALTA | ALTA Intellectual Freedom Com.: Part of All Com. Mtg. Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 2:30 PM- 4:00 PM Location: Boston Marriott Copley Place Grand BR A-C Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFC | FCC Subcom. Mtg. Date: 1/15/2005 Time: 3:30 PM- 5:30 PM Location: Wyndham Tremont Schubert Room Open? Yes SUNDAY
Meeting: ALA-IFC | IFC/IFRT/Div IFCs Joint Meeting Date: 1/16/2005 Time: 8:00 AM- 9:00 AM Location: Hynes Convention Center 201 Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-WO | COL/IFC Date: 1/16/2005 Time: 9:00 AM- 10:00 AM Location: Hynes Convention Center 201 Open? Yes
Meeting: PLA-IC | Intellectual Freedom: Part of All Com. Mtg. Date: 1/16/2005 Time: 9:30 AM- 11:00 AM Location: Westin America BR North/Center Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFC | Intellectual Freedom Committee II Date: 1/16/2005 Time: 2:00 PM- 5:30 PM Location: Sheraton Independence East Open? Yes MONDAY
Meeting: ALA-IFRT | IFRT II Date: 1/17/2005 Time: 8:00 AM- 10:00 AM Location: Boston Marriott Copley Place Grand BR C Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-ETHICS | ETHICS II Date: 1/17/2005 Time: 8:30 AM- 9:30 AM Location: Sheraton Conf. Rm. 6 Open? Yes
Meeting: ACRL | Intellectual Freedom Committee Date: 1/17/2005 Time: 9:30 AM- 11:00 AM Location: Boston Marriott Copley Place Wellesley Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFC | IFC Privacy Subcommitee Date: 1/17/2005 Time: 10:00 AM- 12:00PM Location: Sheraton Conf. Rm. 7 Open? Yes
Meeting: ACRL | Ethics Committee Date: 1/17/2005 Time: 2:00 PM- 5:30 PM Location: Boston Marriott Copley Place Wellesley Open? Yes
Meeting: ALA-IFC | IFC III Date: 1/17/2005 Time: 2:00 PM- 4:00 PM Location: Sheraton Conf. Rm. 4 Open? Yes TUESDAY Meeting: ALA-IFC | IFC IV Date: 1/18/2005 Time: 1:00 PM- 4:00 PM Location: Sheraton Conf. Rm. 4 Open? Yes Our Contributors Christopher Bowen: Chris is the current chair of the IFRT ProQuest/SIRS State and Regional Intellectual Freedom Achievement Award Committee and in the past has been both a Director and Chair of the IFRT. He is Director of Downers Grove Public Library, Downers Grove, IL. Chris has more than his share of “front line” IF stories to share. Carolyn Caywood: Carolyn has been a librarian since 1972 when she graduated from Wayne State University in Detroit. She manages a Virginia Beach Public Library branch and a Subregional library for the blind. She is IFRT Councilor, a member of the IFC subcommittee on privacy, and a past Board member of the Freedom to Read Foundation. Lauren Christos: Lauren is one of our newer members having made many significant contributions to the “cause” in a relatively short time. In particular she is master of the conference handout. She is a Reference Librarian at Florida International University University Park Campus and a Director of IFRT. Stephen Cochran: Steve is active in Indiana intellectual freedom circles having served on its IFC for the past several years, chairing it for the last three. He is director of the Alexandrian Public Library in Mt. Vernon, Indiana. Previously he coordinated the Technical Services department at the Alexandrian Public Library and cataloged rare book at the Old Cathedral Library and Museum in Vincennes, Indiana. Martin Garnar: Martin is the new chair of the Membership Promotion Committee and the immediate past chair of the Eli M. Oboler Memorial Award Committee. He is a reference & instruction librarian at Regis University in Denver, CO. Pam Klipsch: Pam is both the chair elect and a past chair of IFRT. She is Assistant Director of the Kirkwood Public Library in Kirkwood, MO. Suffice it to say that former Missouri Senator and United States Attorney General John Ashcroft is NOT her favorite politician. Nanette Perez: Nanette is Project Coordinator for ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom and Staff Liaison for IFRT. She is our “go to” person who sees that all of the behind the scenes things get taken care of. Diane Sybeldon: Diane is another of our newer members. She is I nformation Services Librarian and subject specialist for the Fine and Performing Arts (Art, Art History, Music, Theatre, Dance) and Film Studies located at the David Adamany Undergraduate Library at Wayne State University in Detroit Michigan. Sylvia Turchyn: Sylvia is Secretary of IFRT and head of Cataloging at the Indiana University main library in Bloomington. In addition to many years of service on various IFRT groups, Sylvia served several years on ALA’s IFC, When necessary she has been willing to throw herself in front of the proverbial tank in the defense of IF. Doug Archer: Doug is Editor of the IFRT Report and an IFRT Director. When he is not being a Reference and Peace Studies Librarian at the University Libraries of Notre Dame, he splits his time between being a Church of the Brethren minister and pastor’s spouse and raising three pre-school aged grandchildren. |
| OTHER ISSUES | | | | CONTENTS |
| Published by the American Library Association IFRT Report Intellectual Freedom Round Table No. 55, Winter 2004/2005 |