Tell me more ×
Libraries & Information Science Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for librarians and library professionals. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Censorship can many times be attributed to ignorance about a particular book or other artistic work. Situations can often arise where patrons or municipal officials complain about particular work for being too controversial, particularly in juvenile literature.

Rather than caving into complaints too quickly, giving the controversial work its "due process" is potentially a more rational way of handling the situation.

What sorts of ad hoc committees work best to make a decision in these types of situations? What techniques can a library use to focus the group down to make an objective decision about the work in question?

share|improve this question
This question is very similar (but better worded) to this one: libraries.stackexchange.com/questions/762/… – KatieR Jun 29 '12 at 20:56
@KatieR I would agree it is a bit similar, that was not intentional, but I think the final question is more focused. – jonsca Jun 29 '12 at 22:53

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Speaking from school and public library experience, I'd start with the original selector - the person responsible for the item being in the collection - and a supervisor (department head, school principal). Every item in a collection should be justifiable, according to selection criteria already in place, so it shouldn't take a large committee to defend, but having an item challenged can feel like a personal attack and having a supervisor's support is imperative. Libraries of all types should have procedures in place to handle this sort of situation; this document would outline who is involved. Often it will include a governing board (library board of directors, school board, etc) and may outline the various levels of review and how the process is elevated to the next level when not resolved. Having a procedure in place helps keep things objective, but can leave room for compromise if necessary.

share|improve this answer
It may be notable that this answer (which I support) rejects "ad hoc committees" as specified in the question as being appropriate; indeed, such a committee may be seen as an arbitrary vehicle for implementing censorship and result in a successful First Amendment challenge in the case of a government-run library. (I'm afraid that I don't have the citations in front of me, but there have been such cases.) – M. Alan Thomas II Sep 21 '12 at 10:59

I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

This article covers some of the issues;

Anne Klinefelter, First Amendment Limits on Library Collection Management,102 LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL 343 (2010)

It seems to me that actions must be viewpoint neutral in the light of the mission of the library. Having written properly policies and procedures may be necessary; I would expect that principles of administrative law would apply.

I would strongly suggest talking to someone in Counsel's office before preparing a policy.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.