Book Challenges: Who's Who?

I was glad when Dan of SafeLibraries.org commented with a link on my post from yesterday because I'd wanted to write about national organizations and watchdog groups on various sides of the book challenge issue. My own feelings on matters of intellectual freedom ought to be pretty clear by now—to put it briefly, I don't believe that any subset of the population should be allowed to dictate what the rest of the population may or may not read, or limit access to those materials, no matter how good its intentions—but below I'm going to stick to the facts.

Here are some of the major players, listed in alphabetical order:

  • American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression (ABFFE)
    Mission statement:

    Founded by the American Booksellers Association in 1990, ABFFE’s mission is to promote and protect the free exchange of ideas, particularly those contained in books, by opposing restrictions on the freedom of speech; issuing statements on significant free expression controversies; participating in legal cases involving First Amendment rights; collaborating with other groups with an interest in free speech; and providing education about the importance of free expression to booksellers, other members of the book industry, politicians, the press and the public.

    The ABFFE's website includes news, action alerts, materials, and Banned Books Week handbook, from a bookseller's perspective. You can buy banned book/intellectual freedom themed merchandise in their store.

  • American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
    Relevant portion of mission statement:

    The mission of the ACLU is to preserve all of these protections and guarantees: Your First Amendment rights - freedom of speech, association and assembly; freedom of the press, and freedom of religion.

    The ACLU offers documentation of legal precedent and information about current court cases dealing with censorship.

  • American Library Association, Office for Intellectual Freedom
    Statement of purpose:

    Established December 1, 1967, the Office for Intellectual Freedom is charged with implementing ALA policies concerning the concept of intellectual freedom as embodied in the Library Bill of Rights, the Association’s basic policy on free access to libraries and library materials. The goal of the office is to educate librarians and the general public about the nature and importance of intellectual freedom in libraries.

    Here's the Library Bill of Rights. One of the big take-away ideas is that libraries exist to provide free access to materials representing all sides of an issue, not just the views of one person or group.

    The ALA is revamping its website, and I can't locate the page on handling challenges. (I'll try to remember to add the link here when it's restored.) In the meantime, here's the American Association of School Librarians' list of intellectual freedom resources. You can also check out the Center for Children's Books at UIUC's guide What to Do When a Book is Being Challenged in Your Library.

  • Authors Support Intellectual Freedom (AS IF!)
    Mission statement:

    AS IF! (Authors Supporting Intellectual Freedom) champions those who stand against censorship, especially of books for and about teens.

    AS IF! is a collective of published authors, largely of children's/YA books. Members share and editorialize on news items about book challenges.

  • Family Friendly Libraries
    Statement of purpose:

    Our goal is to keep libraries accountable to the taxpayers in the communities they serve by providing tools, information, and networking resources to citizens across the nation.

    Family Friendly Libraries is a Virginia-based grassroots organization that focuses on "the growing problem of internet pornography and age-inappropriate materials in school and public libraries." It has developed its own standards for K-12 schools and public libraries. It also offers advice on affecting library policy at the local level.

  • National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC)
    The NCAC is "an alliance of 50 national non-profit organizations, including literary, artistic, religious, educational, professional, labor, and civil liberties groups." Its statement of purpose:

    • To promote and defend First Amendment values of freedom of thought, inquiry and expression.
    • To oppose restraints on open communication and to support access to information.
    • To encourage, support and coordinate activities of national organizations in opposition to censorship.
    • To encourage understanding that restrictions on the free interchange of ideas threaten religious, moral, political, artistic and intellectual freedom.

    Its website offers news, a Book Censorship Toolkit for schools facing challenges, and resources for forming a local coalition.

  • Parents Against Bad Books in Schools (PABBIS)
    Statement of purpose:

    The main purpose of this webpage is to identify some books that might be considered bad and why someone might consider them bad. Another purpose of this webpage is to provide information related to bad books in schools.

    PABBIS offers advice on how to challenge a book as well as various children's book passages found to be objectionable for easy reference. For information about local groups, visit their links page.

  • SafeLibraries.org
    This website run by New Jersey resident Dan Kleinman examines ALA policy and action as it relates to intellectual freedom, pornography, and other content deemed objectionable, on the Internet and in books. From the home page:

    SafeLibraries.org is certified in Internet safety training and we wrote "LMIRL" (you'll never guess what it means) to provide information and excellent exhibits on how to protect children in cyberspace. We wrote "P-rn Pushers" to present evidence from people of all political stripes about the downward spiral in books written for children (not necessarily p-rn) and how the ALA encourages this. "Value Voters" details what's wrong, why, and what can be done about it. Also exposed is the ALA's admitted media manipulation to ensure ALA policy controls local libraries.

ETA, 9/30/08:
If anyone has suggestions of additional organizations that should be added to this list, please leave me a comment with a link to that organization. Thanks!

Comments

This blog has been linked at LISNews:
http://www.lisnews.org/book_challenges_whos_who

Thanks for the head's up, Dan!

To see the range of pro-censorship movements with a presence on the web, visit

Citizens for Literary Standards in Schools
http://www.classkc.org

Know Your Library (Group currently trying to restrict YA titles in the St. Louis County Public Library)
http://knowyourlibrary.org
formerly at http://www.orgsites.com/mo/librarywatch/

Plan2Succeed
http://www.plan2succeed.org (Dan Kleinman's orginal site)

Grassroots American Values
http://www.plan2succeed.org/grassroots/

Citizens for Positive Education
www.safelibraries.org/cope

Parents Protecting the Minds of Children
http://www.myppmc.com/index.htm

Also found at School Library Porn in Arkansas
http://www.myppmc.com/Books%20-%20Pornographic%20in%20Sch.%20Library.htm

Thanks so much for sharing these!

Lisa,

My old site is old. I don't recommend it for anything but the source material it links.

I know you are making an honest effort to evaluate the issue. That being the case, be careful when someone says, "To see the range of pro-censorship movements with a presence on the web."

SafeLibraries is not "pro-censorship." Should your final product include biased and conclusory statements like "anonymous" just left here on your blog, your work may not be taken seriously, except by people like "anonymous."

Keeping inappropriate material from children is common sense and is constitutionally allowed, for example as discussed in various US Supreme Court cases. It is not censorship. SafeLibraries, for example, seeks to educate communities that the ALA point of view is biased and communities may legally keep children from inappropriate material. For example, when a community seeks to remove a book from school that contains bestiality and the ALA claims the parents are actually racist because the author is "black," I have every right to speak up in that community. It is not censorship to follow Board of Education v. Pico and remove pervasively vulgar books from public schools. SafeLibraries opposes censorship, but keeping inappropriate materials from children is legal, it is not censorship.

Now maybe the other groups listed are "pro-censorship," I don't know, but somehow I seriously doubt it. Groups like mine start up when the ALA view is forced on communities and people with HTML skills try to do something about it.

For example, SafeLibraries got its start trying to prevent children from accessing Playboy magazine in the Oak Lawn Public Library in Illinois. Despite community efforts to stop this, even including a letter from the town government to the library, the ALA policies prevailed and children remain to this day, so far as I know, able to access and read Playboy magazine. Now is it censorship for a community to decide to keep its children from reading Playboy in the public library where all the corners stores keep the magazine up high or covered to prevent children from seeing them? Is that censorship? Is that community "pro-censorship"? Is SafeLibraries "pro-censorship" for publishing how the ALA colluded to prevent local control over the Oak Lawn public library in the Oak Lawn community, leaving children open access to Playboy?

Is any group that opposes ALA policy "pro-censorship"? Your final work product will be worthless if you come to that conclusion.

Dan, I appreciate what you're saying, and I agree that the "pro-censorship" label is misleading, given that book challenges are not a binary issue. However, do keep in mind that this is my personal blog, not a work of scholarship, and I don't pretend otherwise. Commenters are welcome to share their opinions, and I'll thank them for it without putting them through the wringer—if only because I don't have the time to do so. You're welcome, of course, to respectfully refute other comments as you've done here, and I'll thank you for that as well!

Actually, I'll stand by my comment that these groups are pro-censorship. It's not Dan Kleinman's job, or the job of any of the other organizations, to parent other people's children; when they ask school boards or library boards to suppress, remove, and hide works from other people's children because they personally disapprove of the content of those works they are practicing a form of censorship.

And when I use the work "censorship," I mean any action by any government agency to suppress a book because someone disapproves of the viewpoint or ideas in the book. That action, alone, violates the First Amendment, and is censorship, especially when it functions to keep a particular group of persons from freely reading the book. In reading Kleinman's websites (he seems to be responsible for at least four, based on the URLS) it's clear that in his doublespeak world, censorship only occurs when no one can buy the book anywhere in the country. That's neither the legal standard or the truth.

In general, I agree with you on that definition of censorship. That said, I'm uneasy about a unilateral "pro-censorship" label, especially where it concerns book challenges in schools (which many of these groups focus on). Schools are entrusted to act in loco parentis, which complicates the situation; how does one teacher/school serve the needs of 20-40 families? Imperfectly. Books are purchased at the discretion of librarians and teachers, and I believe that errors in judgment occur.

For example, take the 2005 case of a sixth grader checking out The Perks of Being a Wallflower from her school library. Perks was consistently reviewed as being for teens and adults, with a grade 9+ recommendation from SLJ. Do many sixth graders read "worse" things than Perks? Of course. Do I think reading Perks would scar a sixth grader for life? Of course not. Do I think one sixth grader having an unfortunate experience with Perks means that the book should be removed from all school shelves in the district/state? Absolutely not. But as someone who carefully studies book reviews before buying paperbacks for my library's middle school collection, I have to wonder if someone goofed. It's a possibility that bears examination.

In public libraries, on the other hand, I think the distinction is more easily made. All responsibility reverts to the parents.