I think the thing that has surprised me the most about the LIS profession and our class is the discussion over the democratic ideals held by LIS professional and espoused by the ALA. After doing my master's in political science, I had never expected that the MLIS would include such important political questions as well. Before I was in the class I thought libraries and archives were pretty straight forward. I thought intellectual freedom and equality of access to information was pretty straight forward. I was wrong on both accounts. Growing up in a pretty liberal area the idea of restricting access to a book because of the racial, sexuality, religious, or ethnic themes in a books seemed unfathomable. I also took it for granted that if there something immoral in a book such as large amounts of violence, sex, or foul language, that the book, video, or website would be restricted. The ethics questions and the LIS leader's assignment has really started a war within in myself as to what the right path is to decide what material should be available without restrictions to anyone.
As mentioned above my first thought about what should be restricted is anything that seems immoral, but the question is what is immoral? My opinion of what is immoral is different than many others, and who am I to say that what I believe is immoral is correct. I was mainly thinking books, videos, and websites that had gory violence, explicit sexual scenes, or vulgar language. I found from others that somethings that I would never dream as being immoral were included in the categories. Some libraries were removing or restricting access to books that simply had homosexual characters, that had references to non-christian religions, or that portrayed American in a very negative way. I would never censor or restrict access to media for those reasons alone, but others would. So if we as a society are unable to agree on what is immoral, then how can we have a system based on restricted access to something depending on if it is immoral. After reading 1984 for Banned Book Week, I also now fear that censorship will be used not just for the immoral, but for political reasons as well. The thought that censorship could spiral out of control and help support a totalitarian government is a scary thought indeed.
We often talk about the importance of the library as being a part of the community, and so then is the library at the mercy of the community in regards to what the majority deems immoral, or should the library be the bastion of freedom for the minority to hold on to their own beliefs? These are the questions that I find myself struggling with every week in class and when I am working on my homework, and I hope to find an answer to them by the end of the semester. However, I am not sure that I will find an answer to them that quickly. I have a feeling that as this semester goes on, as I get my degree, and as I become a professional I will continue to struggle with what I think is appropriate for young patrons to experience compared to what is expected of me as a librarian.
Right now I would say that I feel like there should be restrictions still on indecent materials for minor patrons, but that there should also be an easy path for those patrons to get access to the materials with parental consent. The only real way to decide what is currently indecent is what is labeled a indecent for minors by law. While others say that young patrons should not need parental consent to see the materials, or that it is the parents responsibility to check on what the child is experiencing at the library, I think it takes away from the library's role as being part of the community. If the library is pitting the child against the parent, then the library becomes the enemy of the adult and can cause negative attitudes toward the library. This could create an adult community that fears to allow to send its children to the library. However, if parents are given the chance to take responsibility for what their child experiences at the library, then they will be more supportive of it and its mission. Children can be assured that with parent permission they can access materials, or when they become adults that those materials will be present and available to them without restriction.
With each new week of class discussions and each new week of assignments, I find myself returning to this internal debate over restrictions and censorship towards the minor patrons. While I have no qualms over unrestricted and uncensored access to materials for adults, I still have reservations over minor access to those same materials. I look forward to the rest of this semester, my degree, and my career to continue debating this topic for years to come. I hope in the end that whatever my actions are, that they are what is best for society as a whole. If only it were easier to decide what is best for everyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment