Formerly titled “Dealing with Concerns about Library Resources”
The Library Bill of Rights and its interpretations are broad statements of policy. Their purpose is to clarify application of the basic principles of intellectual freedom to libraries. As statements of policy, they offer general guidance for the resolution of practical problems, but they are not in and of themselves practical or procedural documents. Yet in the course of applying the principles of the Library Bill of Rights, librarians frequently receive expressions of concern and complaints about library resources. “How to Respond to Challenges and Concerns about Library Resources” outlines basic procedural and practical measures for responding to these complaints.
“How to Respond to Challenges and Concerns about Library Resources” is a procedural document. Its goal is to assist librarians in implementing ALA’s intellectual freedom policies; it is not itself a policy statement. Its roots, however, lie in a document titled “How Libraries and Schools Can Resist Censorship,” first adopted in 1962 but rescinded by the ALA Council at the request of the IFC in 1981.
The early 1960s saw increased censorship attacks on libraries and strenuous assaults on the freedom to read, including witch hunts in Georgia, censorship of some best sellers, and heated controversy over Henry Miller’s Tropic of Cancer. In response to this situation, a group of librarians and publishers met in Washington, D.C., on January 5, 1962, to draft a statement on censorship. The committee was composed of David H. Clift, executive director of the American Library Association; Dan Lacy, managing director of the American Book Publishers Council; Margaret Dudley, executive secretary of the National Book Committee; Emerson Greenaway, chair of the ALA Legislative Committee; and Archie McNeal, chair of the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee. The statement this group wrote, titled “How Libraries and Schools Can Resist Censorship,” gave support and step-by-step guidelines whereby a library can thwart the censor.
The text of the guidelines is published in the Intellectual Freedom Manual, ninth edition (2015), part II, chapter 2.
In introducing the statement to the ALA Council, McNeal urged its support, especially in light of the countrywide attempts at censorship. “How Libraries and Schools Can Resist Censorship” was approved unanimously by the ALA Council on February 1, 1962.1 The statement was endorsed by the Adult Education Association’s Executive Committee, the American Book Publishers Council, the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Book Committee, the National Council of Teachers of English, the National Education Association’s Commission on Professional Rights and Responsibilities, and the National Education Association’s Department of Class Room Teachers.
At the 1972 Midwinter Meeting of the Intellectual Freedom Committee, the original statement on resisting censorship was altered to include all types of libraries, not just school and public libraries; and “library materials” was substituted for “books.” The new document, “How Libraries Can Resist Censorship,” was adopted by the ALA Council on January 28, 1972:
Libraries of all sizes and types continue to be targets of pressure from groups and individuals who wish to use the library as an instrument of their own tastes and views. The problem differs somewhat between the public library, with a responsibility to present as wide a spectrum of materials as its budget can afford, and the school or academic library, whose collection is designed to support the educational objectives of the institution. Both, however, involve the freedom of the library to meet its professional responsibilities to the whole community.
To combat censorship efforts from groups and individuals, every library should take certain measures to clarify policies and establish community relations. While these steps should be taken regardless of any attack or prospect of attack, they will provide a firm and clearly defined position if selection policies are challenged. As normal operating procedure, each library should:
1. Maintain a definite materials selection policy. It should be in written form and approved by the appropriate regents or other governing authority. It should apply to all library materials equally.
2. Maintain a clearly defined method for handling complaints. Basic requirements should be that the complaint be filed in writing and the complainant be properly identified before his request is considered. Action should be deferred until full consideration by appropriate administrative authority.
3. Maintain lines of communication with civic, religious, educational, and political bodies of the community. Participation in local civic organizations and in community affairs is desirable. Because the library and the school are key centers of the community, the librarian should be known publicly as a community leader.
4. Maintain a vigorous public relations program on behalf of intellectual freedom. Newspapers, radio, and television should be informed of policies governing materials selection and use, and of any special activities pertaining to intellectual freedom.
Adherence to the practices listed above will not preclude confrontations with pressure groups or individuals but may provide a base from which to counter efforts to place restraints on the library. If a confrontation does occur, librarians should remember the following:
1. Remain calm. Don’t confuse noise with substance. Require the deliberate handling of the complaint under previously established rules. Treat the group or individual who complains with dignity, courtesy, and good humor. Given the facts, most citizens will support the responsible exercise of professional freedom by teachers and librarians, and will insist on protecting their own freedom to read.
2. Take immediate steps to assure that the full facts surrounding a complaint are known to the administration and the governing authority. The school librarian/media specialist should go through the principal to the superintendent and the school board; the public librarian, to the board of trustees or to the appropriate governing authority of the community; the college or university librarian, to the president and through him to the board of trustees. Present full, written information giving the nature of the complaint and identifying the source.
3. Seek the support of the local press when appropriate. The freedom to read and freedom of the press go hand in hand.
4. Inform local civic organizations of the facts and enlist their support when appropriate. Meet negative pressure with positive pressure.
5. In most cases, defend the principle of the freedom to read and the professional responsibility of teachers and librarians. Only rarely is it necessary to defend the individual item. Laws governing obscenity, subversive material, and other questionable matter are subject to interpretation by courts. Responsibility for removal of any library materials from public access rests with this established process.
6. Inform the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom and other appropriate national and state organizations concerned with intellectual freedom of the nature of the problem. Even though censorship must be fought at the local level, there is value in the support and assistance of agencies outside the area which have no personal involvement. They can often cite parallel cases and suggest methods of meeting an attack.
The foregoing principles and procedures apply to all kinds of censorship attacks and are supported by groups such as the National Education Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the National Council of Teachers of English, as well as the American Library Association. Whereas the practices provide positive means for preparing for and meeting pressure group complaints, they serve the more general purpose of supporting the Library Bill of Rights, particularly Article III, which states that “censorship should be challenged by libraries in the maintenance of their responsibility to provide public information and enlightenment.” Adherence to this principle is especially necessary when the library is under pressure.
In 1980–81, following the 1980 revision of the Library Bill of Rights, the Intellectual Freedom Committee reviewed “How Libraries Can Resist Censorship” and found that the bulk of the document was simply a procedural elaboration and was repetitive of other policies. Stripped to its essentials, its main utility was as a concise statement of practical measures libraries can and should take in preparing for and responding to potentially censorious complaints and pressures. At the 1981 Annual Conference, the IFC voted to request the ALA Council to rescind the document, which the council did. Later that year “Dealing with Complaints about Resources,” based in part on the former document and on discussions by the IFC, was published as a procedural statement.
At the 1983 Midwinter Meeting in San Antonio, the statement was again revised by the committee and retitled “Dealing with Concerns about Library Resources.”
In line with the ongoing practice of periodic review, the IFC carefully reviewed all statements in 1999–2000, especially in regard to their applicability to the Internet. The IFC recommended only slight editorial changes to this policy. The IFC substituted the word “resources” for “materials,” included both materials selection “or collection development,” and emphasized that library resources must be neither removed nor “restricted.” No changes were recommended in the 2004–5 review of intellectual freedom policies.
During conversations in fall 2013 with the editor of the ninth edition of the ALA Intellectual Freedom Manual, the Intellectual Freedom Committee agreed that a new document should be created. Helen Adams and Kristin Pekoll, librarians with considerable expertise in intellectual freedom and handling challenges, were asked to create a practical list of steps librarians should take when faced with a challenge, beginning at the point a concern or challenge is raised. They were asked to write the document in the form of sequential, numbered paragraphs, and to provide guidance for public, school, and academic libraries, drawing on “Dealing with Concerns about Library Resources” as well as other relevant ALA resources. The new document is intended to be more readable and helpful to a librarian faced with a challenge.
1. For the text of this statement as well as the historical context, see Harry Black, “Censorship of Library Books and Textbooks in American Schools,” Journal of Secondary Education 40 (January 1965): 3–15, files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED020923.pdf.