Content deleted Content added
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Altered pages. Added doi. Formatted dashes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Abductive | Category:Use American English from October 2019 | #UCB_Category 662/669 |
|||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 5:
==The Library Bill of Rights==
The Library Bill of Rights was adopted by the [[American Library Association]] Council on June 19, 1939. It was amended in 1944, 1948, 1961, 1967, and 1980. The inclusion of 'age' was reaffirmed in 1996.<ref>{{cite web |title=Library Bill of Rights |publisher=American Library Association |date=June 30, 2006 |url= http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill |access-date = 2018-04-25}}</ref> ALA added a seventh article addressing privacy in 2019.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Price |first1=Gary |title=ALA: "New Library Bill of Rights Provision Recognizes and Defends Library
{{quote|I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.
Line 32:
During the [[Cold War]] period, the Library Bill of Rights supported opponents of censorship of materials interpreted as communist propaganda. In 1948, the association adopted a major revision of the document, which strengthened it significantly to address the new wave of censorship attempts that marked the beginning of the [[Second Red Scare]], better known as [[McCarthyism]], and was subsequently attacked in newspapers as "leftist," a "red front," and a "Communist organization."{{ref|hist}}
===Race, Religion, National Origin and Political Views===
An amendment to the Library Bill of Rights was passed in 1961 that made clear that an individual's library use should not be denied or abridged because of race, religion, national origin, or political views. Some communities decided to close their doors rather than desegregate.<ref>Rubin, R. E. (2010). Foundations of library and information science (3rd edn). New York: Neal-Schuman, p.294</ref>
===Language Revisions and Age===
A 1967 revision shortened the document and removed rhetorical flourishes, also removing the qualification "of sound factual authority," which it was felt could have been used to justify censorship; also, "age" (along with background, origin, and views) was added to the attributes that should not be a basis for denying access to information.{{ref|age}} The document was revised again in 1980.
Line 44:
David Woolwine of [[Hofstra University]] has criticized the philosophical underpinnings of the Library Bill of Rights, specifically objecting to the use of [[utilitarianism]] and "rights discourse" in defense of the principles. The "moral calculus" of the utilitarian argument that free access of information produces the greatest good for the greatest number can also be used to argue in support of restrictions for the purposes of safety and national security. Rights discourse relies on the assertion of rights with minimal referencing, while neglecting detailed argumentation. Woolwine asserts that utilitarianism and rights discourse need to be replaced by a synthesis of [[modernism|''modern'']] and [[postmodernism|''post-modern'']] philosophy to coherently and soundly justify the principles of the Library Bill of Rights.{{ref|woolwine}}
[[Wayne A. Wiegand]], [[Library scholar|library historian]], and retired Professor of Library and Information Studies and [[American Studies]] at [[Florida State University]], expanded on his as well as his spouse's earlier work concerning the Library Bill of Rights, asserting that it has principally been a tool Librarianship has used to control the narrative surrounding libraries and their defense of intellectual freedom without actual legal accountability for those principles. This view, Wiegand argues, is evidenced by specific historical contradictions within the profession since the adoption of the Library Bill of Rights such as the controversy around the legacy of [[Melvil Dewey]] and the renaming of the [[ALA Medal of Excellence]], the lack of ALA support for civil rights protestors following the [[Alexandria Library sit-in]] despite the then-recent adoption of the Library Bill of Rights by the ALA, lack of support from the ALA for librarians working against the ban of materials targeted by the [[California Senate Factfinding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities]] in the 1950s, and others, before concluding that the profession and its organizing bodies must have a reconciliation with this history before more meaningful frameworks for library rights and their protection can be produced.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Wiegand |first=Wayne A. |date=April 2020 |title=Sanitizing American Library History: Reflections of a Library Historian |url=https://doi-org.proxy-um.researchport.umd.edu/10.1086/707669 |journal=The Library Quarterly |volume=90 |issue=2 |pages=108–120 |doi=10.1086/707669 |via=The University of Chicago Press Journals}}</ref>
==Further reading==
| |||