The Librarian By Day Notebook

As of June 26th, 2018, the American Library Association guidelines now explicitly permit hate groups to organize in public libraries:

“A publicly funded library is not obligated to provide meeting room space to the public, but if it chooses to do so, it cannot discriminate or deny access based upon the viewpoint of speakers or the content of their speech. This encompasses religious, political, and hate speech. If a library allows charities, non-profits, and sports organizations to discuss their activities in library meeting rooms, then the library cannot exclude religious, social, civic, partisan political, or hate groups from discussing their activities in the same facilities.” (Meeting Rooms: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights)

The basis for this policy is a misguided understanding of the effects of hate speech on marginalized people:

“Symbols of hate are also constitutionally protected if worn or displayed in a public place. Libraries should comply with the ideals and legal requirements of the First Amendment. We make room for offensive, bigoted, and biased speech in the libraries if that speech is simply that: just speech. Hate speech stops being just speech and becomes conduct when it targets a particular individual and includes behavior that interferes with a patron’s ability to use the library.” (Hate Speech and Hate Crime)

In other words, ALA policymakers do not believe that hate speech interferes with any patron’s ability to use the library. ALA leaders don’t see a contradiction between allowing fascist organizing in the library and the commitment to “advocate conditions of employment that safeguard the rights and welfare of all employees of our institutions” (ALA Code of Ethics). 86% of librarians are white, and while most are female, men are over-represented in directorship roles. Entry into the profession as a full librarian (versus an assistant) requires at least one master’s degree, which can cost upwards of $40,000. (Most states do not offer library science programs at any of their public universities.) Funding to attend national conferences and policy-making discussions is often not provided to librarians, and rarely to library assistants. Custodial staff, who are vital to every library and also disproportionately people of color, are not a target audience for ALA membership and are not addressed in ALA conference programming. Like other ALA conferences, the conference that took place this June was inaccessible to many library employees, including those with disabilities, children, or financial constraints. The decision to allow white supremacist organizing in libraries was almost certainly made by a room full of highly educated, financially privileged white people. The library profession is hiding behind its commitment to “intellectual freedom” to avoid confronting the reality of fascist organizing in our local communities. White library leaders are content to host White Pride Night in their meeting rooms (note that library leaders tend to go home at 5pm, whereas lower-ranked staff work night shifts) without regard for the safety of non-white patrons and staff. It is our responsibility as human beings to stand up against fascism and white supremacy. If “professionalism” gets in the way of ethical duty, we must challenge the norms of our professions. While intellectual freedom is valuable and worth defending, shrinking away from ethical duty is not acceptable, nor does it promote a free and open society. All of us in the library profession - particularly those of us with power - have a responsibility to acknowledge the real harm that results from allowing hate speech and organizing in the library. There is no magical world where white supremacist fascists can co-exist with the people of color, immigrants, disabled people, and queer people that libraries claim to serve. We need to draw lines around unacceptable behavior in our institutions. We have a responsibility to use our free speech to collectively organize against hate. We cannot wait until “mere” hate speech turns into hate crime, and we cannot evade responsibility for any crimes committed as a result of our complacency.

This set of seven checklists is intended to help libraries of all capacities take practical steps to implement the principles that are laid out in the ALA Library Privacy Guidelines. Each checklist is organized into three priority groups. Priority 1 are actions that hopefully all libraries can take to improve privacy practices. Priority 2 and Priority 3 actions may be more difficult for libraries to implement depending on their technical expertise, available resources, and organizational structure.

These checklists were created by a group of volunteers from the LITA Patron Privacy Interest Group and the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee’s Privacy Subcommittee.

Overview

Data Exchange Between Networked Devices and Services

E-book Lending and Digital Content Vendors

Library Management Systems / Integrated Library Systems

Library Websites, OPACs, and Discovery Services

Public Access Computers and Networks

Solove, D. J. (2007). The future of reputation: Gossip, rumor, and privacy on the Internet. New Haven: Yale University Press. 

Download