SLIC - Letter from the Guest Editor (extended length)

Toni Samek is Associate Professor at the School of Library and Information Studies, University of Alberta. Her teaching, research, and service focus on intellectual freedom. For more information, see http://www.ualberta.ca/~asamek/toni.htm

I cannot and will not cut my conscience to fit this year's fashions.
-- Lillian Hellman, subpoenaed to appear before the House Un-American Activities Committee, 1952.

The books that the world calls immoral are the books that show the world its own shame.
-- Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891.

Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is the hallmark of an authoritarian regime.
-- Justice Potter Stewart, dissenting Ginzberg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966)

Free societies...are societies in motion, and with motion comes tension, dissent, friction. Free people strike sparks, and those sparks are the best evidence of freedom's existence.
-- Salman Rushdie

WARNING: I would like to extend my deep thanks to this issue’s contributors. Their collective words are raw and piercing, evoke powerful images, question assumptions, trigger deep thought, raise needling questions, present challenges, and compel action. That’s precisely why they were selected! I encourage you to read their words – and then to read them again!

As librarians, educators, and citizens of the 21^st century we are not unaccustomed to issues of information and ideas, such as intellectual property, the global tightening of information and border controls; and censorship powers of national customs departments. But historical antecedents to the present context are equally important to recognize. For example, in light of “the pillage and burning of Iraq’s National Library in Spring 2003”, the October 2005 Library History Seminar XI: Libraries in Times of War, Revolution & Social Change (sponsored by the Library History Round Table of the American Library Association (ALA)), will examine “urgent historical issues” such as “books and libraries as agents of cultural memory to be protected, appropriated or obliterated; library collections and services as instruments of political power in providing, restricting or withholding access to information; libraries as places of refuge, solace and practical help in times of social disruption; libraries and their contents as cultural heritage and as booty; the nature of the revolutionary cultural and political regimes in which libraries are situated with regard to literacy and learning; [and,] the responsibilities of the international community in creating and enforcing policies and procedures of protection, reconstitution and restitution of cultural artifacts, including books and libraries.”[i] These issues raise implications for library work, intellectual freedom, social responsibility, and human rights.

Issues of human rights violations have received increased attention in the 21^st century and the events of September 11, 2001 , which “triggered the adoption of legislation, policies, and practices in the United States and around the world, including Canada , the European Union, China , Russia and various African countries. The consequences of such initiatives are relevant not only to individuals and institutions in those countries but have broader and more far-reaching impacts as well. In particular, such legislation, policies, and practices have tremendous implications for such issues as access to information, privacy, civil liberties, and intellectual freedom.”[ii]

The inherent connection between human rights, librarianship, and freedom of expression is underscored in the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions’ (IFLA) Statement on Libraries and Intellectual Freedom (approved by the Executive Board on 25 March 1999), which references Article 19 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR). Article 19 states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”.[iii] Through its Free Access to Information and Freedom of Expression Committee (FAIFE), launched in 1997, IFLA aims to promote and further intellectual freedom “in all aspects, directly or indirectly, related to libraries and librarianship.” FAIFE “monitors the state of intellectual freedom within the library community worldwide, supports IFLA policy development, co-operates with other international human rights organisations, and responds to violations of free access to information and freedom of expression.” In recent years, this has had a heavy emphasis on technology and the information society.[iv] Furthermore, as Shiraz Durani noted, “the rules developed at the World Trade Organisation, especially in the context of TRIPS (trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights),” caused IFLA to express concerns over threats to "not for profit libraries", intellectual property, and cultural diversity.[v]

As such, FAIFE “helped advocate the role of libraries in the information society and the inclusion of Article 19 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights as a core value of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) declaration.” Two key IFLA policy statements prepared by FAIFE: (1) The Glasgow Declaration on Libraries, Information Services and Intellectual Freedom and (2) the Internet Manifesto are referred to in IFLA’s WSIS contributions underlining the federations’ commitment to intellectual freedom.[vi] Both documents push for human rights and emphasize the inherent connection between human rights and intellectual freedom.[vii] The Internet Manifesto, for example, states that “unhindered access to information is essential to freedom, equality, global understanding and peace”, pushes for “richness of human expression and cultural diversity in all media”, demands that “access to the Internet and all of its resources should be consistent with Article 19, and that “access should neither be subject to any form of ideological, political or religious censorship, nor to economic barriers.”[viii] These aims are also reflected in UNESCO’s Public Library Manifesto[ix], which in turn reinforces UNESCO’s statement on Human Rights Research. This latter statement emphasizes “the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights, especially the right to education, the right to take part in cultural life and the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications.” In essence, it stresses “the indivisibility, interdependence, interrelation and equal importance of all human rights (civil, cultural, economic, political, and social).”[x]

By extension, and in light of contemporary library core values (such as those expressed by ALA (e.g., Access, Confidentiality/Privacy, Democracy, Diversity, Education and Lifelong Learning, Intellectual Freedom, Preservation, The Public Good, Professionalism, Service, Social Responsibility [xi]), it is librarianship’s responsibility to promote and defend Article 19, but also other UNDHR articles of particular relevance to information work. The International Center for Information Ethics (ICIE), equally draws attention to: Respect for the dignity of human beings (Art. 1); Confidentiality (Art. 1, 2, 3, 6); Equality of opportunity (Art. 2, 7); Privacy (Art. 3, 12); Right to participate in the cultural life of the community (Art. 27); and, Right to the protection of the moral and material interests concerning any scientific, literary or artistic production (Art. 27).

Rhetoric and policy development on librarianship and human rights is of great value to librarians in their opposition to threats to intellectual freedom and their commitment to the protection of civil liberties and civic identities. It opens doors for them to: (1) take a stand in the enduring dilemma about what constitutes library work; (2) use the concept of intellectual freedom as a viable means to taking a professional interest in social and political issues such as war and peace, torture, destruction of cultural resources, and government intimidation”[xii]; and, (3) conceive the library as a point of resistance.[xiii] Our CLA Statement on Intellectual Freedom (1974-) directs that “Libraries should resist all efforts to limit the exercise of [our] responsibilities while recognizing the right of criticism by individuals and groups.”[xiv] In my reading, the phrase “should resist” implies an activist agenda.

Librarians around the world urge information society to be mindful of the interrelated contexts (e.g., historical, epistemological, political, social, ideological, legal, economic) of information, recorded texts, cultural records, and ideas used both formally and informally, both consciously and unconsciously, in institutions of civil society such as schools, libraries, archives, museums, and media centers. As such, librarians act on threats to intellectual freedom in the local, national and international arena. In recent years, for example, librarians have “taken part in protest actions at World Trade Organization summits; taken positions against expanding copyright legislation, threats to free access to libraries, and the privatization of education; resisted censorship and apartheid … other issues include patents, vigorous attacks on fair use copying, impermanent and restricted access to purchased electronic resources, restrictions on end-users and facilitation of electronic micropayments, also termed “daylight robbery”.[xv] In essence, librarians struggle for “unfettered cultural records” for all people within the powerful contexts of globalization; heightened legalistic atmospheres; competing ideological, political and economic agendas; and emergent communications technologies.

In these contexts, an ever-expanding set of issues reads like a catalogue: post 9-11 surveillance; library disaster relief; cultural destruction; hate speech; Internet access and child protection; pressures arising from family values and community standards; censorship; imposed technologies (e.g. RFIDs); public access to government information; privatization; self censorship (or inside censorship); negative catalogue entries and descriptors; media conglomeration; the politics of public space; attacks on fair use copying; legislation; information rights; right to read anonymously; impermanent and restricted access to purchased electronic records; academic freedom; freedom of expression on professional and policy issues, systemic racism; international relations; labour; outsourcing; GATS; cutting of teachers librarian positions; intellectual property; serving the poor, homeless, and people living on fixed income; socially responsible investing; anonymity, privacy, and confidentiality; humane library space; human security; national security policies; the global tightening of information and border controls; transborder data flow; censorship powers of national customs departments; and so on.

In closing, Will Weaver (Professor of English, Bemidji State University , Minnesota ) recently posted the following to American Library Association’s SRRT listserv:

“The Bemidji , Minnesota , school board hearing on Plainsong was held last night. A packed house, a three hour meeting, lots of passionate testimony. It was a general victory for free access to reading, though with some loss: the book was removed from the 9th grade classroom but retained for 10-12. Its place in the school library was secured as well. However, the book challenge was a wake up call to those of us in this community who take good books--and freedom to teach them--for granted. Nowadays everything is political and ideological. Past freedoms that we assumed must be re-visited and re-articulated. This whole incident has had a galvanizing effect on we who write and teach. We will be increasingly watchful of candidates for ANY elected office–especially school and library boards.”[xvi]

These words are an important reminder that library work is part and parcel of its social context. How we negotiate issues of intellectual freedom and social responsibility is deeply enmeshed in the politically charged and enduring debate about what actually constitutes ‘library work”. What I believe, from studying library activism worldwide, is that our potential for the development of human rights depends upon such conditions as:

intention,
ability to publicly finance our work,
freedom of expression within our own ranks,
increased support for teacher and librarian employees who take risks in the defense of academic freedom and intellectual freedom,
respect for cultural distinctiveness, cultural literacy (in all its forms), and cultural democracy,
desire to redress omissions, absences, and negations in history, memory, human legacy, and cultural and civic identities, and
progress in opposing commodification of information, “corporate globalization, privatization of social services, monopolization of information resources, profit-driven destruction (or private appropriation and control) of cultural artifacts and the human record.”[xvii]

If your library is not 'unsafe', it probably isn't doing its job.
-- John Berry, Library Journal, October 1999.

[ii] Dr. Nadia Caidi, Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto . Call for Papers: Special Issue of Government Information Quarterly on “National Security Policies and Implications for Information Flow”.

[v] Submission to Culture, Media and Sport Committee. Session 2003-04. 26 October 2004. New Inquiry: Public Libraries. By Shiraz Durrani. 19 November 2004.

[viii] Ibid., pages 1-2. (“IFLA is an organization of worldwide scope representing more than 1600 members in almost 150 countries all over the world. IFLA was founded in Edinburgh in 1927. It is the first and largest international non-profit, non-governmental organization aiming to further the cause of librarianship.”)

[ix] Hellen Niegarrd, “UNESCO’s 1994 Public Library Manifesto”, page X. 60^th IFLA General Conference – Conference Proceedings – August 21-27, 1994. http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla60/60-nieh.htm. pages 6-7.