Today is National Library Workers Day! Library workers are crucial in defending everyone’s right to access information. Here are five stories of amazing librarians who stood up against censorship.
The first task of information warfare is to recognize when you’re in one, because you might not be fighting the information war, but the information war is fighting you. This essay revisits the wartime writing of Archibald MacLeish, poet-warrior, playwright-propagandist, and Librarian of Congress from 1939 through 1944. It explores whether we’re experiencing an information war now, and how the library community can respond.
The Republican Right humiliated and punished all but its true believers, in a purge that left it less responsive to a changing world, and undercut broad support. Is the Left repeating the play?
Highlight Holding Space: A national conversation series with libraries Privacy and Cybersecurity Private ways to access books on sensitive subjects at Tiffin-Seneca Public Library | Advertiser-Tribune (OH) Building Anti-Surveillance Ed-Tech […]
William Marden, NYPL Director of Privacy and Compliance, gives advice about privacy as we move online during COVID-19 pandemic.
The most cited reason for challenging library materials and services is because of LGBTQIA+ content. In the free webinar, GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis and banned illustrator Stevie Lewis (Prince & Knight) will be joined by censorship experts (OIF Director Deborah Caldwell-Stone, associate professor Shannon Oltmann) and librarians who have defended LGBTQIA+ titles (Stephanie Beverage, Tom Taylor) for a can’t-miss conversation that explores this censorship issue.
By: IFC Chair Julia Warga. The ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee formed the Facial Recognition Working Group in order to better understand the issues relating to this evolving technology and how it would impact the privacy of library users. We believe the work is urgent given that there are libraries and educational institutions who are beginning to adopt facial recognition software as a means of identifying authorized users and students.
I can see the appeal – why not cut down to interviewing only the very best candidates? But until we thoroughly address potential privacy and bias issues, and thoroughly consider the impact on potential employees, I think this is one use of AI I am not excited to experience.
In Common Sense Media’s reviews, conflating the the amount of “inappropriate” content and the value of the messages within the same five-star rating system does a disservice to parents, youth, and art as a whole.
Over the last several years, the state of academic freedom around the world has ushered renewed scrutiny. Yet how often do we consider how remarkable it is to engage in dialogue and debate about the key concept that protects the very space that allows us to do so?