Welcome

As stated, the topic of this blog is intellectual freedom and its role within libraries and the information science field. More specifically, this blog attempts to answer one question; does intellectual freedom promote innovation and democracy within our field? The answer of course, is not simple. Instead, merely by asking and attempting to answer this question, we, as information professionals, are forced to examine a profusion, a near plague of other questions. Some of these questions include: what is intellectual freedom, what is innovation, how does intellectual freedom affect old, emerging, and all technologies within our field, how does intellectual freedom affect children’s use of information, and how does intellectual freedom affect our profession across the world. This list could go on. These are only a few of the questions this multifaceted topic engenders however, we, as a group believe that they are some of the most pressing questions that arise from our initial inquiry and we hope in analyzing them, that we bring some clarity to our primary debate. We invite and would appreciate your comments on the issue in general as well as on all of the more specific topics.

Defining Intellectual Freedom and How It Supports Democracy and Promotes Innovation:

Intellectual freedom is defined by the American Library Association as “the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. It provides for free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause, or movement may be explored.” When an individual seeks information they are not under a societal or governmental restraint of what they have the right to expand their knowledge of. It is an essential human right that makes our country both unique and free with expression.

 The ALA maintains the democratic foundation of intellectual freedom. Democracy is defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary as “a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly…” According to Dr. Richard Fitzsimmons of The Pennsylvania State University in his paper Censorship, Intellectual Freedom, Librarianship and the Democratic State the Committee on Intellectual Freedom of the ALA “[has the responsibility of] guarding, protecting, defending, and extending intellectual freedom. It performs a ‘backstopping’ function for the Library Bill of Rights and stands firm on the ALA statement that ‘Censorship of books, urged or practiced by volunteer arbiters of morals or political opinion or by organizations that would establish a coercive concept of Americanism, must be challenged by libraries in maintenance of their responsibility to provide public enlightenment through the printed word."

The ALA’s Strategic Plan for 2011-2015 presented at the 2010 ALA Annual Conference and adopted by the ALA Executive Board on April 25, 2010 and by the ALA Council on June 28, 2010 defines and updates the definition of intellectual freedom as “a basic right in a democratic society and a core value of the library profession. The American Library Association actively defends the right of library users to read, seek information, and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment.” Innovation on the other hand, is defined by Wikipedia as “the creation of better or more effective products, processes, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets, governments and society.” One of the “goal areas” of the ALA’s Strategic Plan 2011-2015 is dedicated to “transforming libraries” and its statement reads “ALA provides leadership in the transformation of libraries and library services in a dynamic and increasingly global digital information environment.” To accomplish this four objectives have been identified and they are “(1) Increase opportunities to share innovative practices and concepts across the profession, nationally and internationally, and among all libraries. (2) Increase recognition of and support for experimentation with innovative and transformational ideas. (3) Help libraries make use of new and emerging technologies by promoting and supporting technological experimentation and innovation. (4) Increase leadership development and training opportunities designed to support the ongoing transformation of libraries.” The plan also describes how the ALA perceives the future transformation of libraries and the profession of librarianship in response to “changing needs, expectations, demographics, and technologies of the populations they serve,” by recognizing the connection of “people and ideas to each other and to the world.”

References

American Library Association. (2010). American Library Association: Strategic Plan 2011-2015. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/missionhistory/plan/index.cfm.

Fitzsimmons, R. (1996). Censorship, Intellectual Freedom, Librarianship and the Democratic State. Retrieved from http://archive.ifla.org/faife/papers/others/fitz96.htm.

Book Banning In Libraries

This post is meant to enhance discussion on the issue of Book Banning in relation to the LIS profession and intellectual freedom. Book banning has unfortunately been a prevalent limitation to intellectual freedom throughout most of history,and is still an issue today. Democracy and innovation are thought to be valued in our society by the majority, yet requests are made every day to have a variety of books banned from libraries and schools simply because they represent an alternative view. Some of the most revered authors have made the top ten most challenged authors list, such as J.K. Rowling, R.L. Stine, Stephen King, and Judy Bloom (Cogner). In addition, books that most would deem classics, such as Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, have actually made the top ten most frequently challenged books (Mullally, 2010). Infact, on the ALA Banned Book Week website, a large number of the banned books listed actually had won some type of literature award (Doyle, 2011). In general, it is easy to see how book banning limits democracy and innovation thus hindering intellectual freedom, but below will offer further insight to this complex topic.

Historical Context

The history of book banning is far too large of a topic to delve into completely.There are literally thousands of cases of banning and censorship throughout the history of civilization by a range of people including secular and religious authorities dating back to 300 A.D. as well as concerned parents of school aged children today (Mullally, 2010). Despite what the motivation for the censorship is, we must ask ourselves if it is appropriate to restrict the intellectual freedom of a group of individuals. Before the printing press, banning was much easier because the few copies of the text could simply be burned and society could be rid of the work entirely. Since this invention, however, books are more likely to be restricted in smaller scale ways, such as banning the book from a school reading list. The ALA website references numerous high profile court cases that concern the right to read freely (American Library Association, 2011). One such case listed was Todd v. Rochester Community Schools (1972), which ruled that the book “Slaughterhouse-Five” could not be banned from Michigan Public Schools and that the student should be able to make of the book what they will. Another example is Counts v. Cedarville School District (2003), in which the school district had made a restriction on students reading the Harry Potter series which the courts then overruled and removed. The board originally objected to the series because it supposedly promoted“disrespect for authority” and “witchcraft” (American Library Association,2011). In general, this should provide a frame of reference for the type of cases that are made regarding the banning. For a more substantial list of relevant court cases, please visit the ALA website:

http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/firstamendment/courtcases/courtcases.cfm

Questions:
Who should have the most say in which books children are required to read in schools (the board, teaches, parents, ext)?
Should texts not be required as long as children read something off a list of books, so as to eliminate the issue of parents being upset with the content of a specific book?
What are some general solutions to schools banning books?

Pico and the First Amendment

The most historical case regarding book banning was a court case brought against the Supreme Court by high school students and supporters. In this revolutionary case of the U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education, Island Trees School District v. Pico(1982) the court ruled that the First Amendment rights of students were violated when books were removed from library shelves (Mullally, 2010). Thus the court ruled in favor of Pico and against book banning in cases where the motivation of the banning is because the book presents an alternative view not supported by the group. Note that schools and libraries still have the right to remove materials as long as their reasoning is appropriate. For a further more in-depth look into the Pico case visit the following link:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0853_ZS.html

Though the Pico decision is an important historical landmark that supports the First Amendment, there are literally still thousands of requests each year to have books banned, some of which succeed. Some of the most common complaints that lead to these requests are sex, profanity, and racism (Doyle, 2011). Most librarians take a stand against book banning and removal due to the slippery slope idea. Once you ban one book, more and more will seem to warrant banning until the intellectual freedom of individuals is severely limited due to material not being available to view. Many believe that evidence of the increasing restrictions on intellectual freedom can be demonstrated in Section 215 of the Patriot Act (Cogner). This amendment vastly expands the right of the government to investigate the lives of ordinary citizens without probable cause or warrants. This relates to intellectual freedom and the issue of book banning because Section 215 enables the government access to library records and check-out histories of patrons without their knowledge or consent. In short, our intellectual freedom and democracy could technically be under surveillance at any time. If this short analysis doesn’t raise your concern, please view the following link to an NPR discussion:
http://www.npr.org/takingissue/20050721_takingissue_patriotact.html

Question:
What was your initial response to this NPR discussion?
Do you believe Section 215 of the Patriot Act is truly a topic to be concerned over?

Book Banning Today

Unfortunately, the issue of banned books is not in the past. School Libraries often receive the most attention on book banning issues in the media, but these are not the only cases. Doyle (2011, p 2) advised “Surveys indicate that approximately 85 percent of the challenges to library materials receive no media attention and remain unreported.” This issue is clearly larger than we will ever truly be able to measure. When I reviewed the list of the banned books of 2010-2011 posted during Banned Books Week by the ALA, I was surprised to see that many of the books I had read as a young teen were on the list.Please visit the following website and determine if any of your favorite books are on the list:

http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/bannedbooksweek/ideasandresources/free_downloads/2011banned.pdf

As current and future Librarians, censorship and book banning is going to be a topic we run into in our profession more than we probably imagine. According to the Library Bill of Rights, librarians must do their best to fight censorship and keep all materials on the “shelves” for patron use.This Bill of Rights enforces the idea that materials need to be available to provide true intellectual freedom. To view this document, please visit this link:

http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/index.cfm

Question:
Do you think the Library Bill of Rights protects Intellectual Freedom, Democracy, and Innovation? What would you change to make it better, if anything?

Banned Books: A Limitation on Intellectual Freedom and Democracy

Overall, it stands to reason that any time a book is banned,intellectual freedom is limited. The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom of every individual to gather information and develop opinions based on that information, yet there is a daily struggle to keep certain information unavailable to particular populations. In fact, the way to challenge a book personally is extremely simple; just fill out the following form and submit the reasons why you think the book is inappropriate for review:

http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/challengeslibrarymaterials/challengereporting/onlinechallengeform/index.cfm

Censorship and banning does not only take place in the form of banned books, but also magazines, videos, and other forms of media. As future librarians, it will be our job to protect the right for each individual patron and ensure information is available for viewing even if it is against our own personal ideals.

Through my research it seems that the motivation behind banned books is often to “protect” children and young adults from information deemed unsuitable, thus explaining why the most court cases take place in schools. Though this is undoubtedly a noble and just endeavor, it is indeed a slippery slope we may never be able to level out once the downhill trek is started. In support of this argument, please view the following YouTube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NONXRsYNLA

This video is a reading of the Dr. Seuss book “The Lorax”.This children’s book was banned by one community because it offends a group of people in the lumber industry. Can you imagine as a child not being exposed to the works of Dr. Seuss? I cannot. Dr.Seuss, in my opinion, is the epitome of innovation. If one of his works, not containing any profanity or sexual references, was condemned as unsuitable for society, where do the book banning standards stop? Indeed, it is a very slippery slope.

Question:
What do you think of this book being banned? How do you think this happened?

Conclusion and Questions

Please share your thoughts on this topic in general. Book banning occurs because people just like you and me deem a piece of work offensive and try to protect others from its influence. It is not the work of off the wall political groups and crazy radical schemers (for the most part), but of school teachers,mothers, and community leaders.

Do you believe censorship and banning is appropriate for certain books? If so, why?

Should there be different rules for banning books in schools verses public libraries?

If Pico won, why are there still so many cases of book banning in schools?

References:

American Library Association. (2011). Notable FirstAmendment Court Cases. Retrieved from http://www .ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/firstamendment/courtcases/courtcases.cfm

Doyle, R. (2011). Books Challenged or Banned in 2010-2011. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/bannedbooksweek/ideasandresources/free_downloads/2011banned.pdf

Conger, C. (unknown). Book Banning and the Law. Retrieved from http://history.howstuffworks.com/american-history/book-banning1.htm

Mullally, C. (2010). Libraries and First Amendment: Banned Books. Retrieved from http://www.first amendmentcenter.com/Speech/libraries/topic.aspx?topic=banned_books

written by: Stephanie Pung

The Internet and Minors at the Library: A Contemporary Hotbed of Intellectual Freedom Issues.

The Internet, itself a tool of great democratization, has, inside of our public and school libraries, become the site of a raging debate.  What makes this debate so terribly interesting is that it has specifically pitted the ALA against not just our own government, but additionally, against many patrons. Specifically, what is at issue in this debate is the highly variable content of the Internet versus minor’s free and open access to this content. There are many different opinions on this topic all of which have implications on freedom and democracy. I will first, summarize the two major stances on minors and Internet freedom held by the federal government and the ALA, then I will present my personal conclusions, and finally, I want to know what you think. 

Opposing Viewpoints

In one corner stands the ALA, its line of thinking, and those that support this line of thought which is best and succinctly summarized within the ALA document "Free Access to Libraries by Minors: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights." Adopted in 1972 and then amended in 2004 at a culminating point in the Internet access debate, the Interpretation states, "children and young adults unquestionably possess First Amendment rights, including the right to receive information through the library in print, nonprint, or digital format. Constitutionally protected speech cannot be suppressed solely to protect children or young adults from ideas or images a legislative body believes to be unsuitable for them."

In the other corner stands the United States federal government, its line of thinking and again, those that support this train of thought best summarized through a look at CIPA, the Children’s Internet Protection Act. This federal act, sponsored by Senator John McCain and adopted by President Bill Clinton in the year 2000, established Internet requirements for public and school libraries that receive federal funding for computers and technology.  These requirements, as summarized by the FCC, include “technology protection measures… that block or filter access to pictures that are (a)obscene; (b)child pornography; or (c)harmful to minors.” Additionally, schools subject to CIPA are required “to enforce a policy to monitor online activities to minors.” Finally, CIPA requires that an internet safety policy is adopted that addresses “(a)access to minor to inappropriate matter; (b) the safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms and other forms of direct electronic communications; (c) unauthorized access , including so called “hacking”… (d)unauthorized disclosure, use and dissemination of personal information… (e)measures restricting minor’s access” (Children’s Internet Protection Act. n.d.).     

One Side of the Coin: Consequences From an ALA Standpoint

At first glance, the appropriate viewpoint for library and information professionals appears to be very straightforward. The ALA and its stance many will argue, is an affirmation of first amendment rights and continues the Association’s long struggle against censorship. And indeed, this act appears to be outright censorship. Yet, not only is this censorship, ALA supporters will tell you, but there is also a myriad of other issues that must be taken into account including: 

• The cost of filtering including the actual technology as well as staff time spent learning and monitoring the technology, puts an undue burden on staff and resources.
• Filtering technology can and does erroneously filter out protected material. As stated by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration report on technology protection measures as required by CIPA (2003) “every filtering software product demonstrated excluded between 6 percent and 15 percent of protected speech” (p.15).
• CIPA requires that the same filtering requirements be applied to all computers, including staff computers, that are available in the school or library whether or not access is permitted on specific machines thus violating the 1^st amendment rights of adults and limiting staff effectiveness.
• Filtering removes decision making on what is appropriate from the locality resulting in blocked sites that although offensive to some, may not be found offensive in that particular context.
•  Although CIPA requires that filters must be removed for adults upon request without delay, numerous court cases have arisen due to the lack of a definition of delay including a highly controversial case involving the state of Washington's North Central Regional Library District and three patrons. In 2010, Oliver, Kent; Pinnell-Stephens, June; Jones, Barbara in their article All or Nothing: Hardly the Facts tell us, the State of Washington Supreme Court ruled in favor of the NCRLD who argued that it should not have to remove filters for adults as their “filters only erroneously filtered out legitimate websites at an error rate of .033%, disabling a single computer would be costly and inefficient, the filtering system is consistent with its collection policy, is consistent with its duty to work with school, minimizes confrontations between staff and patrons, and minimizes the prospect of liability for a hostile work environment.” (p.43)  This decision has opened up an entirely new can of worms but will be challenged and is headed for the US Supreme Court.
•   Due to CIPA’s reliance on filtering technology, innovation of other technological measures for internet safety are stifled.
• And finally, as Helen Adams (2010) states in Intellectual Freedom Online: The New Battleground for Minors’ First Amendment Rights “relying solely on filters does not teach young citizens how to be savvy searchers or how to evaluate the accuracy of information. Unless all families are using parental control software, filters protect minors only when they are using the Web in schools and libraries, not during their Web use at home, in the homes of friends, or on their personal web-enabled cell phones.”(p.11)

The Other Side of the Coin: An Argument In Support of CIPA

But ahhhh, if it were only so simple.  Much like all questions concerning intellectual freedom, the debate quickly muddies when one dives deeper into the points made by those arguing in favor of CIPA.  These points of contention include:

• As decided by the Supreme Court, minors in fact, do not hold the same rights as adults. As Theresa Chamara explains in Minors First Amendment Rights: CIPA and School Libraries (Pico 1982, 868, quoting Tinker 1969, 506) “the Court has acknowledged that the rights of minors are not equal to the rights of adults… thus… school boards can restrict speech or access to information for minors in two circumstances. First… if they are motivated to do so because the materials are "educationally unsuitable" or "pervasively vulgar." Second, school boards may restrict materials that are obscene, harmful to minors, or child pornography. Whether material is obscene, harmful to minors, or child pornography generally is defined by state or local law” (p.18).
• The second key argument is also based on a Supreme Court decision in which CIPA was ruled not to be a violation of first amendment rights at all. As summarized by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) report on technology protection measures as required by CIPA (2003) “In a plurality decision, the Supreme Court… in June 2003, [found] that the filtering provisions did not violate the First Amendment. Four justices held that (1) the Internet access provided by libraries is not a public forum, and therefore, decisions to block pornography are not subject to heightened scrutiny; (2) the disabling provision eases fears of "overblocking;" and (3) requiring filtering and blocking technology is an appropriate condition on the receipt of federal funding because libraries already exclude pornographic material from their other collections.” (p.10)
•  Additionally, many patrons prefer filtering. In recent Pew Research Center studies, it was found that 54% of parents of children between the ages of 12-17 limit internet use in the home through filters. This means that well over half of the parents of minors believe in filtering and that therefore the ALA’s stance may be out of touch with reality. This point was well argued by Julian Aiken in her Article Outdated and Irrelevant: Rethinking the Library Bill of Rights--does it work in the real world?.
• Finally, in response to the argument that the use of filters does not teach appropriate internet use, the government amended Title II of the Broadband Act, so that, as summarized by Donlin, (2010) "in order to be E-Rate compliant (one of the funders of schools libraries that leads to mandatory CIPA compliance), school districts must now show that “as part of its Internet policy [they are] educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response.” 

My Solution

As a former teacher and now librarian I firmly agree with the National Telecommunications and Information Agencies findings in their study of CIPA and technology protection measures (2003) that “the Internet has become a valuable and even critical tool for our children’s success. Access to the Internet furnishes children with new resources with which to learn, new avenues for expression, and new skills to obtain quality jobs”(p.7) and therefore, I cannot accept the limiting of this resource. Even if one accepts the premise that minors lack first amendment rights in schools and public libraries and even if it is also accepted that filtering isn't a violation of first amendment rights in the first place (these are both a stretch and topics for other times), as a librarian it is my job and duty to argue for empowerment through information rather then suppression.  This empowerment, I believe, can and must take on many different forms and I offer the following as possibilities for innovation:

• Offering patrons the choice to control their Internet access level through various educational and informational methods.
• The use of Internet safety policies that appear whenever a patron logs onto a public computer that sets forth what the specific locality has deemed appropriate and inappropriate use of the technology.
•   Offering or requiring participation in responsible and safe Internet use courses that teach minors how to use the Internet safely. These courses could include the skills needed to conduct safe and successful searches, lessons on how to evaluate online material,  and the necessity to, as the NTIA (2003) states it, “report bad activity, ignore and report harassment or threats, protect their privacy and personal information, and detect information that is not appropriate”(p.32).
• Finally, provide computer spaces either through the location within the building or via privacy screens to allow patrons to make their own decisions about what they deem appropriate while not affecting those around them.

Your Solution: Post Comments for Ryan on Minors & the Internet Here
As you can tell, I have a strong opinion on this topic however, I am also very aware that there are many different solutions and therefore I want to know: What side of the coin do you agree with and why? Are there solutions that mediate both sides? Do you know of any innovating answers to this dilemma? 

Written by Ryan Deery

Resources

Adams, H.R. (Sept/Oct 2010). Intellectual Freedom Online: The New Battleground for Minors’ First Amendment Rights. Journal of the American Association of School Librarians, v.39 (no.1). Retrieved From http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/knowledgequest/docs/KQ_39_1_SeptOct10.pdf

Aiken, J. (January, 2007). Outdated and Irrelevant: Rethinking the Library Bill of Rights--does it work in the real world?. Librarian Scholarship Series, (Paper 1). Retrieved From http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylss/1

American Library Association. (2004). Free Access to Libraries for Minors: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights. Retrieved From http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=interpretations&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=8639

Chmara, T. (Sept/Oct 2010). Minor's First Amendment Rights: CIPA and School Libraries. Journal of the American Association of School Librarians, v.39 (no.1). Retrieved From http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/knowledgequest/docs/KQ_39_1_SeptOct10.pdf

Donlin, M. (November 2010). The Broadband Act: Protecting Children in the 21st Century. Retrieved from http://www.insidetheschool.com/articles/the-broadband-act-and-protecting-children-in-the-21st-century/

FCC. (n.d.) Children's Internet Protection Act Guide. Retrieved From http://www.fcc.gov/guides/childrens-internet-protection-act


Jobbins, C., Lenhart, A. (March, 2005). 54 Percent Of Parents With Teens Use Internet Filters – A Big Jump From 2000. The Pew Charitable Trust. Retrieved From http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=23118

National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (2003). Children's Internet Protection Act: Study of Technology Protection Measures. Retrieved from http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/cipareport08142003.pdf

Oliver, Kent; Pinnell-Stephens, June; Jones, Barbara. (January 2011). All of Nothing: Hardly the Facts. Library Journal, v.136 (no.1). Retrieved From http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/hww/results/getResults.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.3

Libraries and Net Neutrality

The purpose of this post is to elicit discussion about net neutrality and its relation to intellectual freedom in the context of the library profession. First, definitions of both intellectual freedom as well as net neutrality will be established. Next, a case will be made for linking net neutrality as an intellectual freedom issue. Through the use of multiple sources such as blogs, journals, and periodicals, several examples will be provided concerning the library’s impact toward net neutrality. This post will then conclude with a recap of talking points to elicit discussion.

Definitions: Intellectual Freedom and Net Neutrality

As outlined in previous posts, intellectual freedom (IF) can be summarized as the right of all people to pursue and receive information from all points of view, without restriction.

The American Library Association (ALA) describes net neutrality as follows:

“Network Neutrality (or"net" neutrality) is the concept of online non-discrimination. It is the principle that consumers/citizens should be free to get access to - or to provide - the Internet content and services they wish, and that consumer access should not be regulated based on the nature or source of that content orservice. Information providers - which may be websites, online services,etc., and who may be affiliated with traditional commercial enterprises but who also may be individual citizens, libraries, schools, or nonprofit entities- should have essentially the same quality of access to distribute their offerings. "Pipe" owners(carriers) should not be allowed to charge some information providers more money for the same pipes, or establish exclusive deals that relegate everyone else (including small noncommercial or startup entities) to an Internet"slow lane." This principle should hold true even when a broadband provider is providing Internet carriage to a competitor. “

Similarly, Greyson (2010) offers a more analogous definition based on the Canadian Library Association’s stance on net neutrality. Utilizing this blog as an example- on a non-neutral net, an ISP that disliked this blog about intellectual freedom could slow or block access to future postings. Furthermore, as identified by Powell and Cooper (2011), there are also many other publicized definitions of net neutrality, as various stakeholders tend to link the term with like phrases such as preferential treatment, quality of access, or payment for traffic prioritization.

Net Neutrality as an Intellectual Freedom Issue in LIS

According to the ALA, net neutrality was a founding principle of the internet, and was adopted from the “common carrier” laws used to oversee telephone lines in both voice and data access. However, many emerging technologies such as DSL and Cable are not restricted to these same common carrier laws, and lack enforceable regulations in net neutrality that meets the standards of the ALA. Furthermore, Cable and DSL companies are hinting of plans for“bit-discrimination”, the act of providing faster connections to services and websites that pay a premium. This also includes the act of having a preferential treatment toward certain business partners in delivering content.

Back in July of 2009, the ALA hosted its annual conference in Chicago. A new addition to the regular panel presentations was the emerging topic of net neutrality, where over five-hundred librarians came to hear Cliff Lynch, Greg Jackson and Carrie Lowe speak about the subject and what it means to the library profession. The latter of the panelists, Lowe, is a representative of the Office of Information Technology Policy, and argues that libraries are connected to net neutrality in two ways: through the issues of competition and as a threat to intellectual freedom (Lowe, 2009). But the greater of these implications is net neutrality’s threat toward intellectual freedom. If Cable and DSL companies discriminate against certain types of information due to the content of the material being delivered, then a direct attack on intellectual freedom is being performed. Similarly, net neutrality no longer exists when ISP’s are the ones deciding what internet users can read, watch, access, and communicate online (Greyson 2010). For more information regarding the ALA’s policy position on net neutrality, visit their web site:

http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/telecom/netneutrality/index.cfm

The Library’s Impact Toward Net Neutrality

Innovation

Many core principles of the internet are hinged upon the foundations of the library profession: metadata; online search; indexing; and full text search (Lowe 2009). Nowadays, many rely on their local libraries or personal home connections to access the internet. Furthermore, there has been great debate about origins of real innovation, and whether they occur at the edge or core of a network. For example, Steve Job’s Apple Inc. being developed out of his parent’s garage would be considered a product of the edge. Where would we be as a society if access tools to innovation were stifled, or controlled by corporations?

For further discussion, see Larry Bursato’s blog post on “bit-discrimination” and Carrie Lowe’s post concerning innovation:

http://larryborsato.com/blog/2007/04/bit-discrimination/

http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/09/08/10/american-library-association-wants-network-neutrality

Research Libraries

Network neutrality is essential to the success of research libraries. According to Adler (2010) research libraries host services, content, and applications on the internet. They rely on a fully open internet for collaboration purposes, as well as to acquire content from other sources and vendors. To learn more, download the PDF entitled “Three Key Public Policies for Research Libraries: Net Neutrality, Fair Use, Open and Public Access”:

http://publications.arl.org/rli273/

Competition

With regard to competition, the argument lies in the fact that libraries are providers of all varieties of online information, such as online local history resources and rare collections. As trusted overseers of free public access to information, libraries simply cannot compete with for-profit collections and literature websites that have greater incentives and resources for negotiating bandwidth with ISP providers (Lowe 2009). Competition for bandwidth will put libraries at an unfair advantage. This form of discrimination is a direct threat against the main values of the American Library Association. Watch this short cartoon on competition, as well as the article from The Economist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy5T4lYIxIc&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnoisyroom%2Enet%2Fblog%2F%3Fp%3D18314

http://www.economist.com/node/17800141

The Importance of Democracy

The success of libraries is born from First Amendment rights (and Intellectual Freedom). Read this article from the NPR to justify why the internet belongs to the people, and not coorporations.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113038106

http://xrefer.blogspot.com/2006/06/net-neutrality-this-is-serious-from.html

The Future of Net Neutrality

According to Dougherty (2010) net neutrality is the 800 pound gorilla that no one wants to talk about, mainly because of the potentially devastating effects to libraries. Do you believe that net neutrality is a real threat? If so, do you side with the ALA in insisting that net neutrality is a threat to intellectual freedom? Should librarians be worrying about this issue?

References

AlisonPowell & Alissa Cooper (2011): Net Neutrality Discourses: ComparingAdvocacy and Regulatory Arguments in the United States and the United Kingdom, The Information Society, 27:5, 311-325

Jessica L.Cooper (2010): Intellectual Freedom and Censorship in the Library,

Community & Junior CollegeLibraries, 16:4, 218-224

Lowe, C. (2009). American Library Association WantsNetwork Neutrality. Retrieved October 10, 2011, from Save The Internet: http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/09/08/10/american-library-association-wants-network-neutrality

Greyson, D. (2010): Net Neutrality: A Library Issue, Feliciter (CLA), 56:2, 57-59

American Library Association (2011): Network Neutrality. Retrieved October 10, 2011, from the American Library Association: http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/telecom/netneutrality/index.cfm

Prudence S. Adler. “Three Key Public Policies for Research Libraries: Net Neutrality, FairUse, Open and Public Access.”Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, no. 273 (December 2010): 1–7. http://publications.arl.org/rli273/

Dougherty,W. (2010): Managing Technology in Libraries: A Look to the Past with Hope for the Future. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 36:6, 543-545

Written by: Joshua Meyer

How does Intellectual Freedom Support Democracy?

When I think of democracy in relation to a country, the United States comes instantly to mind. The USA, however, is just one of many democracies which exist today under a multitude of different names: parliamentary republic, parliamentary democracy, direct democracy, constitutional parliamentary republic, federal presidential constitutional republic, etc. In this post, “democracy” will be understood to be a political system wherein the people possess the ability to express, by vote, their preference for the laws and leaders which govern them. Can you guess which democratic countries were ranked as having the most intellectual freedom by Reporters without Borders (Reporters Sans Frontiers)? Hint- neither the US nor Canada were in the top five.

In an ideal democratic system, voters’ choices are informed. Having considered all the options, the best one, or rather, the one believed to be best, is chosen. In this way, intellectual freedom supports democracy. It provides us with the ability to access the information we need to make an informed decision. Consider the case of Uzbekistan, a presidential republic in which people vote. Intellectual freedom is not protected in Uzbekistan, and there is little freedom of expression. When questioned by a reporter, a resident of the capital said, “’Most people just don't watch the news, because we know that it's pure propaganda and has nothing to do with reality’” (Antelava). Can the Uzbeks be said to have a true democracy? Or does the lack of intellectual freedom force them into a sort of inevitable dictatorship, unable to choose from several candidates, or hear criticism against their current leader?

I would argue that democracy requires intellectual freedom. Theoretically, however, simply having intellectual freedom does not guarantee democracy. If the vast majority of the populace looked upon the laws of dictator, and practicing intellectual freedom, compared, debated, and criticized these laws, and found them to be just, than intellectual freedom could co-exist with a dictatorship. I cannot find an example of this having occurred in this century.

There is one example which goes far towards proving that intellectual freedom cannot co-exist with a totalitarian regime. In 1957, Mao Zedong was leading the communist party in China. Chairman Mao decided that the party could use some helpful criticism, and encouraged intellectuals to present their critiques. This was called the Hundred Flowers Campaign, named for a poem: "Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend." The people of China responded. There were protests and debates. Articles criticizing party members were published, and thousands of letters were sent with ideas for political reform. For six weeks, the flowers bloomed. But the criticism turned towards Chairman Mao, and he felt it was unjust. The Hundred Flowers Campaign was shut down, and many of those who had spoken up were imprisoned or forced into hard labor (Cheng; Neih). Intellectual freedom was found to be incompatible with the regime. Do you think that Chairman Mao would have been able to stay in power if he’d let the Hundred Flowers continue? Do you know of an example of intellectual freedom in a country without a democracy?

Our question asks about intellectual freedom supporting democracy, but I would like to touch briefly on how, or rather if, democracy supports intellectual freedom. In a democracy the majority is said to rule. During the Cold War, many books on communism were deemed inappropriate for public libraries and pulled from the shelves (Robbins). These books were removed by council members who were elected democratically, and they democratically voted to get rid of the books. Intellectual freedom was countermanded, not supported, by this democracy. Do you believe that democracy supports intellectual freedom? How?

Intellectual freedom needs to exist in spite of the political system, not simply in support of it. Libraries have a duty to present all the sides of argument, even if the ruling majority does not want to look. It was the majority, after all, who thought the sun rotated around the earth, and that slavery was acceptable, and that homosexuality was a psychiatric disorder. And now that these views have been debunked or fallen into the minority, they must yet remain on our shelves (Doyle; Schlesinger). If there is only one option, then it is no option at all, for it cannot be proved correct by reference to what is incorrect. Democracy is based on the ability to choose, and without intellectual freedom, informed choices cannot exist.

Sources

Antelava, Natalia. (2007, Dec. 19). Uzbekistan’s Silenced Society. BBC News. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7150697.stm

Cheng, Huanwen. (Winter 2001). The Effect of the Cold War on Librarianship in China. Libraries & the Cultural Record, 36 (1), 40-50.

Doyle, Tony. (Jan. 2001). A Utilitarian Case for Intellectual Freedom in Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 71 (1), 44-71.

Nieh, Hualing. (Ed.). (1981). Literature of the Hundred Flowers: Criticism and polemics. Chichester, New York: Columbia University Press.

Reporters Without Borders. (2010). Press Freedom Index. http://en.rsf.org/spip.php?page=classement&id_rubrique=1034

Robbins, Louise S. (Winter 2001). The Overseas Libraries Controversy and the Freedom to Read: U.S. Librarians and Publishers Confront Joseph McCarthy. Libraries & the Cultural Record, 36 (1), 27-39.

Schlesinger, Arthur Jr. (Sep.-Oct. 1997). Has Democracy a Future? Foreign Affairs, 76 (5), 2-12.

2010 Countries with the most intellectual freedom as ranked by
Reporters Without Borders:

1. Finland
2. Iceland
3. Norway
4. Netherlands
5. Sweden