The Effect of Censorship on Collection Development in School Libraries

 Kent, Amanda

Follen, J., Goff, M., & Salazar, K. (2018, May 16). The effect of censorship on collection

 development in school libraries. SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3172616&download=yes

Summary:

    Three students from the School of Information, University of Texas Austin, conducted three case studies regarding the effect censorship has on collection development in middle and high school libraries. The article discusses the pressure librarians and teachers feel to keep material on the shelves that serve the students but also worry about offending the parents. With the ongoing complaints from parents to remove books that they feel are inappropriate, librarians tend to self-censorship to avoid conflict. The themes that parents tend to want censored the most are LGBTQIA+ themes, graphic violence, language, drug use, and sexual content. The case studies conducted involve a book that had the N-word, the author of a young adult novel, and the aftereffects that banning a specific book in school causes. The article speaks of the perspectives of the parents, students, and librarians.

Opinion/Thoughts/Evaluation:

    Censorship of books in collections has been an ongoing battle. I found this article interesting because not many resources provide the perspective of the challenger or parent. The article brings up good points regarding the challenger's actions and mindset. I do not believe in book banning and, along with librarians, feel everyone should have access to information. Reading about complex topics brings understanding and empathy, but from the parent's perspective, it has negative consequences such as "bad moral behavior." Another interesting aspect is the acknowledgment that little research is done regarding the child's perspective. The children are usually caught in the middle but are unheard. The article brings up a great point of how children want to read a book based solely on the fact that it is now banned and that those interviewed do not agree with their parents. It is important to understand the mindset of parents so that collection development policies can be implemented that benefit everyone involved.

Social Tolerance and Racist Materials in Public Libraries

Tammy Ross

Burke, S. K. (2010). Social tolerance and racist materials in public libraries. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(4), 369–379. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.49n4.369

In this study, Susan Burke examines the concept of intellectual freedom in libraries and reviews the literature for studies about racism in library books. To learn which variables are linked to social intolerance and the censorship of racist library materials, Burke used data from the General Social Survey (GSS). The GSS is conducted by the National Opinion Research Center and began in 1972. From 1976 to 2006, the survey asked randomly selected adults in the U.S. whether they would support removing a book “spouting racist beliefs” that Black people are “genetically inferior” (p. 372) from the public library. Burke examined how certain demographics -- such as age, race, education level, occupation, geographic location, and political and religious affiliations -- impacted responses. She also looked at another study that examined attitudes toward removing books written by homosexuals or communists from a public library collection, and how these differed from “opposition to negative portrayals of African Americans” (p. 378). More people supported banning a book written by a racist because “racism limits the civil liberties of groups of people, which is not in line with the social trend of increasing tolerance” (p. 378).

Burke does a thorough job of synthesizing the GSS data and points out limitations of the dataset, i.e., that the survey does not ask participants if they’ve ever participated in a book challenge or whether the hypothetical racist book was written for adults or children. Still, the information in her study is designed to help librarians understand “how the library stance on intellectual freedom fits within the larger picture of scholarly thought from other disciplines and the broader public opinion” (p. 378). In regard to collection development, the article may help librarians be more aware about “self-censorship" -- not including certain books in an effort to avoid controversy. Burke argues that librarians should “stand by their professional values and educate the public and library shareholders concerning the implications of removing or not removing [racist] items from the collection” (p. 378). There’s a lot to unpack in 10 pages, especially all the survey results, but the article is worth the read. Burke ultimately reminds librarians that “Adding excellent materials to the collection regardless of their potential to spark controversy -- and resisting challenges to such material -- is an important professional obligation ... and it supports the principles established by the American Library Association” (p. 378).

For discussion, I give you a conflict posed in the article: Is exposure to controversial ideas or social/ethnic intolerance harmful, or does it teach readers to be critical thinkers?

Unnatural Selection: More Librarians are Self-censoring

Mathenia, Aimee

Jacobson, L. (2016, September 26). Unnatural selection: More librarians are

    self-censoring. Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://www.slj.com/2016/09/

    censorship/unnatural-selection-more-librarians-self-censoring/

Summary:

“Unnatural Selection…” provides results from the “Controversial Books Survey” conducted by School Library Journal in March 2016. The article notes that 40% of librarians have dealt with a challenge on the appropriateness of a particular book in their collection. The article also reports that 90% of school librarians have avoided adding books to the library collection that might be seen as controversial. In effect, the librarians are self-censoring books whether they are doing so purposefully or subconsciously.

This article also reviews the differing policies and procedures that vary from one library to another to purchase books to add to a school library collection, with 44% of middle school and 32% of high school libraries reporting a complete absence of a policy to purchase books for a collection.

Evaluation:

Particularly at the middle school level, it is a challenge to purchase books to add to the library collection. Some students and their families show a lot of latitude in what to read and gravitate towards books like 13 Reasons Why or the latest John Green YA novel. At the other end of the spectrum, some students aren’t ready to read a Wendy Mass book that mention a girl wearing a bra for the first time.

What I take from this article is the importance of being aware of self-censoring books. It is also important to have a clear policy in adding books to a library collection. One librarian stated her library has a policy which requires two reviews from School Library Journal, Kirkus, Common Sense Media etc. for the appropriateness of a book before it is purchased and added into circulation.

Equally important is that libraries have a clear procedure for how to proceed when books are challenged. To have this policy established is a good step to proactively address any challenges that may arise.

Do Librarians Self-Censor Their Collections?

I was recently drawn to an article I found entitled Self-Censorship in Selection of LGBT-Themed Materials. In it, Downey (2013) notes that “unbiased materials selection is a vital part (p. 104)” of what we do as librarians, However, we are human, and as humans we can have feelings, beliefs and views that are in direct opposition to the books and materials we must acquire for our libraries. Personally, I am a supporter of LGBT rights and would have no qualms with carrying all types of resources and materials by and for this demographic. 

However, what if I were someone who was vehemently opposed to it? Could I censor my collection on those grounds? A similar issue came to light in the media recently when a clerk from Kentucky, Kim Davis was briefly went to jail for refusing to give marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Although this was federal law and part of her job, she refused on the grounds that doing so went against her beliefs. If she were a librarian, I imagine she would certainly not carry LGBT-themed materials for the same reason.

In the article, Downy (2013) states that “most librarians would tell you that they would never practice censorship, or allow their professional work to reflect their personal biases (p. 104). But can we prove this? She adds that “self-censorship is tricky because it’s usually invisible – if a library is missing a book, nobody can say for certain why it’s missing.” Is it missing because it disappeared over the years, was too expensive to acquire, or simply overlooked? Or did the librarian knowingly choose not to include it in the collection because having it would bring unwanted controversy or because she objected to the content? This is difficult to pinpoint. 

It is important, therefore, to catch ourselves if and when we may begin to self-censor our collections and work to prevent it. To do so, we must work to “remove our own beliefs from our decision making about our collections (Downey, 2013, p. 104).” This is clearly not an easy task, especially when it comes to a topic like LGBT people and their rights, which has strong feelings on both sides. “Studies have shown that the vast majority of libraries lack high-quality, comprehensive LGBT collections (Downey, 2013, p. 104).” Downey (2013) argues that this is due to librarians falling into one or more “traps and myths that are prevalent in our profession (p. 105).” These include the following:

·         Trap: It’s hard to find LGBT-themed books

·         Trap: They don’t circulate

·         Trap: What will it say about me?

·         Trap: There aren’t any (or many) LGBT people in my community

·         Trap: I don’t have the money in my budget

Although these five traps may exist, Downey (2013) believes that librarians have an obligation to be thoughtful and considerate in building equitable collections and a responsibility to put personal prejudices aside to do our jobs with open minds. She concludes the article by stating “the diversity of our communities is part of what makes librarianship so exciting and meaningful. When we can honestly say that we are meeting the needs of our LGBT patrons with openness and friendliness, both in person and in our collections, we can be proud of our work and ourselves (Downey, 2013, p. 107)."

I thought this article was well-written, well thought-out and timely. It is a good resource for LIS students interested in LGBT collection development, as well as all LIS professionals who need to do some introspection and evaluate whether or not they bring any personal biases into their work.

Downey, J. (2013). Self-censorship in selection of lgbt-themed materials. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 53(2), 104-107.