What is censorship?
Let me put on my librarian hat for a bit.
Scenario: A grad student in a subject area approaches the subject librarian to ask why the library holds a certain journal. She says the journal in question is racist. It's an academic, peer-reviewed journal, but she says that is used to shield the racist thought behind the journal. The librarian looks into and decides the journal does have racist undertones. It's not flat-out propaganda, but it seems questionable. What do you do when the student asks why the library is spending money on a racist journal? Do you cancel it? If you do, is it censorship?
To me, it goes against everything we stand for. It goes against everything an academic institution stands for. Our job as librarians is to present information in a non-judgmental manner. It is our job to present information that covers all sides. It's not our call to say an opinion is right or wrong. I purchase all kinds of things I find personally distasteful and offensive. I purchase items I don't agree with. I have my opinions and I share them regularly (ask anyone), but when it comes to presenting resources and ideas? No.
Let's add another layer to this. If a librarian used this example--an example from another school--as a reason to discourage students from using this journal, is that wrong? Is it censorship? Is it academically dishonest? Would you, as a librarian, say anything about it? Speak up and call it censorship?
Our role as librarians and educators means exposing students to differing opinions and ideas--even if they are offensive. It's up to the individual to decide what is right and wrong, not ours. But is telling someone not to use a source censorship? Or is it some outdated sense of protectionism? The idea that the "common man" is too stupid to decide what is right and wrong; therefore, the smart people, the academics on the hill, need to shield them from this information.
Thing is, while I think the first instance, the canceling of a journal because a librarian disagrees with it, is so very wrong and is censorship, plain and simple. The second idea, discouraging use of a source because you find it wrong, is downright offensive. It offends me as a person and as a librarian. But more than that, it is an offense to all of our users because it assumes they can't tell right from wrong.
Anyone else have an opinions on this?
4 comments:
Maybe the faculty in that field should be consulted to see if there is any academic consensus on the merits of the journal in question? If its contents are patently dismissable (or worse), subscribing to it might raise some legitimate questions. If it presents something of value, it might need to be better contextualized to students by the experts who are teaching them. I guess it's always going to be difficult drawing the line, but I wouldn't want my library providing journals dedicated to Holocaust denial (for example), no matter how peer-reviewed they might be.
I can understand that (holocaust denials and all that), but I also think that denying these views don't exist, we're giving them power. Exposing them for what they are and proving they are wrong is a way to combat them. Plus, I believe to truly understand something you need to know the opposing side as well.
I think the fact of peer review is significant here. There are plenty of instances in which the scholarship being presented does not comport with current day thought, but is in fact true to the discipline of which it is part. If, however, the peers are not academically qualified to judge either the disciplinary or scholarly merits of the work under consideration, then their views should not be elevated to that of scholarly research. I look at it this way: limited budgets require cautious buying. If your library is overlooking a more academically meaningful journal in order to appear open minded to the rantings of a bunch of racists, then it is making poor choices for its scholarly community.
Thanks for the thoughtful posting!
Thank you for your responses. You both made excellent points. See, despite the fact that I mainly blog about trash and crap, I can post smart-ish things, too.
Post a Comment