Happy Banned Book Week Sarah Palin

Happy Banned Book Week Sarah Palin!

As the librarian community gears up for another week of bringing attention to book censorship, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin might not be so excited. Reports that she attempted to remove homosexual themed literature from the public library in Wasilla, Alaska while she was mayor in 1996, have now gained national attention. Although Palin never banned any book, she reportedly asked the library director how she would feel about removing certain titles from the shelves, namely a book called “Pastor, I am Gay” by Howard Bess. When San Franciscan Mike Petrelis heard of the controversy, he sent two gay themed children’s books to the Wasilla public library. Petrelis felt that Palin’s question about removing titles was equal to the crime of censorship. The books Petrelis sent to the Wasilla library have been received, but still need to go through a process where the library board decides what to do with them, either they will be added to the collection or they will be sold.

When does censorship begin? Is it as Mike Petrelis and the ALA assert at the mere question of removal, or when the material in question is actually prevented from reaching its audience? As the books named by the ALA as “banned” have only been challenged, and are still on shelves, I think we need to recognize that the professional community at the very least, make this determination at the questioning of the material. However, this does not prevent the librarian profession from doing a little of their own censoring when it comes to maintaining a collection. As the donated books go through what sounds to me like a screening process, I wonder what type of criteria the books are going to be judged against. Is not this process itself censorship?

How can we as professionals fight censorship? Is sending copies of titles concerned with hot button issues around the country the best way? I applaud Mike Petrelis for taking a step against censorship, but I doubt the effectiveness of his actions. The books he sent to the Wasilla library may never make it to the shelves. There must be other ways to take a stand.

It is also important to make the distinction of who is asking the questions about removal, in Palin’s case she was the mayor, a position of power over the librarian not just an everyday patron. As a librarian, I might feel more intimidated or pressured to remove a book if I was asked by someone with the power to fire me than if I was asked by the average patron. Palin did not remove or ask the librarian to remove any titles, but she came close. As future information professionals we need to ask ourselves how close is too close.

A Scientist and the FBI Walk Into a Library. . .

Many often forget that during September of 2001, the nation saw multiple acts of terrorism: not only did the nation face the tragedy of 9/11, but "Amerithrax" also began in September. Many years later, the case is only now beginning to come to a close. It was only in July of this year that the FBI informed Dr. Bruce E. Ivins that they were going to press charges for the anthrax case and only in August of this year that they concluded Ivins was solely responsible for the attacks. One of the most recent actions taken by the FBI was the removal of two library computers from Federick County Public Libraries (FCPL), MD which were allegedly used by Ivins. Articles by Library Journal can be found here: MD PL Director Acceeds to FBI Computer Seizure & FBI Serves Warrant. The library released the computers voluntarily without requesting a warrant, yet the FBI later sought a warrant to search the computers. The FCPL has stated that patrons' records are in no way connected to these computers and that computers with such information require a warrant. However, the library has further stated that they had no confidentiality policy in place in regards to Internet use.

At what point can library materials used by patrons and information about patrons be released to the government? Well, first of all, the FCPL has quickly learned that a confidentiality policy needs to be placed. As for the release of the computers by Darrell Batson, the library director and the president elect of the Maryland Library Association (MLA), it was the appropriate action. Mr. Baston has received the support of the MLA's Intellectual Freedom Officer and the library released a statement saying:

FCPL provides public-access computers as a service to the community, and access is provided to anybody, regardless of whether they possess a library card.

This provision would allow the FBI to come in and use the computers. However, and more importantly, the library is funded by taxpayer money making the computer publicly held property. The FBI should have the jurisdiction to take the computers and use the information for their investigation. It is similar to the current close to home investigation of Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick; text messages are being released and used in criminal investigations because they were sent on taxpayer funded cell phones.

Mr. Batson should be supported for his actions as well as the MLA for acting appropriately.

Tit for tat? Or something more?

This week, Google launched its own web browser, "Chrome."

The launch of Google's browser, which will compete with Microsoft's leading Internet Explorer browser and Mozilla Firefox, set off alarms in the media that a new "browser war" is in the works:

The decision by Google to create its browser...reflects a persistent concern on the part of the internet company that Microsoft would find ways to use its dominance of the PC software to favour its own internet applications, or at least hamper those of rivals.

Microsoft last week released a version of IE that makes it easier for users to block information about their browsing habits, a move that could hamper Google's move into display advertising.

This story raises fundamental questions for information professionals. Here are just a few:

1.) What is the ideal situation in terms of how people access information on the web?

• If John or Jane Doe walks into a library, wanting to access the web, should they be presented with every available browser and make their choice? Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, etc., etc.

2.) Should people care if Microsoft blocks Google's ability to collect information about its users?

• "Well, Google is just trying to profit off of knowing the websites I visit, so hooray Microsoft!"
• "But...I have found some interesting stuff clicking on ads every now and again...and if Google can't target me anymore, what then?"

3.) Will thirst for profit eventually "Balkanize" the Internet?

• Microsoft rakes in billions of dollars with Microsoft Office. Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.
• Google wants a slice of that.
• Will we start going "back to the future," seeing "Best viewed with Internet Explorer" or "Google Chrome optimized" on every page? What implications does this have for information access?

4.) Does the "consumer" of information really benefit in the end?

• "Well, I have to use this browser with this website. But I have to use a different browser for a bunch of other sites. I'm confused!"
• While there is standardization in terms of what web browsers should be able to display (and most browsers are pretty decent), who's to say a vendor can't just intentionally lock out a competitor?
  

Let the discussion begin below!

- Greg