Seen side-by-side, Fister said both cases were an attempt to chill speech at a time when universities need librarians to help them navigate the rapidly changing publication landscape. “In a time when options are proliferating, that advisory role is increasingly important and needs protection from nuisance lawsuits and other attempts to stifle professional and measured speech.”
But, she said, such moves ultimately may be self-defeating.
“While the Internet makes it easier to share opinions in writing, it also makes it harder for a publisher to sue its way toward a good reputation, because once word gets out, any number of librarians and scholars confirm in writing, loudly, exactly what the defendant in the suit is being sued for saying,” she said. “The number of librarians who will never buy a book published by Mellen and the number of scholars who will avoid ever signing a contract with them went up enormously as a result of their nuisance suit. This is not a business plan I would recommend to publishers.”
Librarians are professionals. We evaluate and distribute information. As the amount of information proliferates, we evaluate the sources of information. Inevitably (sadly) some sources of information will be worse than others, even to the point where it's not worth it for anyone serious to be involved with them. When that is discovered, librarians should and almost have a duty (if not actually _have_ a duty) to report that. That's not slander, it's a professional judgement. Another publisher accuses a librarian of libel | Inside Higher Ed
