Elections can rile people up. It’s smart for librarians to take a good look around before there’s trouble — starting with library policy.
OIF condemns the attempt to silence the scientific community. The people pay for the EPA, and are entitled to hear from it, unfiltered by the biases of the current administration.
An uncomfortable truth is that hate speech is also free speech. It’s not illegal for people to say stupid, ignorant, or even deliberately hurtful things. A hate crime, however, is about more than speech; it is about specific criminal behavior. Library incidents that we’re trying to track falls into two broad categories: vandalism or harassment.
By: James LaRue Librarianship faces a crisis, resulting from the intersection of five trends: the rise of challenges to diverse content, the demand for more diverse content, the failure of […]
MCPL breaks down an intellectual freedom barrier by offering tools and programs to make it easier for local authors to successfully self-publish.
The University of Chicago’s letter ignited a discussion about trigger warnings. What’s the difference between being polite and promoting censorship?
Award-winning poet Dunya Mikhail — who has written during wars in Iraq and the United States — shares her thoughts on restricted writing.
Katie Chamberlain Kritikos: The impetus for this talkback was the controversy surrounding the publication in January of this year of a children’s book called A Birthday Cake for George Washington. Because critics instantly condemned the book for its depiction of smiling slaves, publisher Scholastic Press withdrew the book and halted its distribution.
This withdrawal encapsulates the shifting social context of intellectual freedom in the United States. Traditionally, free speech advocates decry any attempt to suppress expression. A growing emphasis on social justice creates tension between the foundation and the future of intellectual freedom. This post considers the recent controversies over children’s books, trigger warnings, and free speech online to explore this crossroads of information policy.
Judith Platt: Let me begin by saying that, not surprisingly I’m pretty close to a free speech absolutist. I believe our First Amendment and what it represents and encompasses is the basis of every other human and civil right. I do not believe we can ever hope for social justice in the absence of unfettered free speech.
For those of us in the Intellectual Freedom community, it’s easy to take the rattle of pitchforks at the gate as broad popular sentiment. But the truth is, the data prove, most Americans actually believe in, actually value, free speech. They just tend not to be so noisy about it.