3 ms·

You can't compare a for-profit corporation with a public library. You also can't compare a TV station (which offers fixed programming) with a library (which all

by tjohns 4y ago

You can't compare a for-profit corporation with a public library. You also can't compare a TV station (which offers fixed programming) with a library (which allows users to browse titles on request). Libraries are not supposed to editorialize their collection. Consider the library as a physical version of the internet. Nobody is forcing users to read a specific page online, but we generally agree that ISPs shouldn't censor content that the user has requested.

slt2021 4y ago
I'd like to pushback against your argument. Librarians absolutely do curate content, it is their main responsibility. The main principle in curating library content is adding value. If content does not add value to readers, it is useless. "Give the people what they want" is another principle (https://www.forbes.com/sites/avaseave/2014/01/17/the-process-of-curating-for-curators-who-do-librarians-consult/?sh=409b1df26696 https://www.forbes.com/sites/avaseave/2014/01/17/the-process...)
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  One one hand, it seems impossible to run a library without curation. If nothing else, space is limited. On the other hand, the American Librarian Association's Library Bill of Rights says that libraries should have books presenting all points of view on current and historical issues, neither proscribed nor removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill List of document interpreting those rights: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpre... Some choice quotes from https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/politics https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpre... : > Thus there is no justification for the exclusion of opinions deemed to be unpopular or offensive by some segments of society no matter how vocal or influential their opponents may be at any particular time in any particular place. > A balanced collection need not and cannot contain an equal number of resources representing every possible viewpoint on every issue. A balanced collection should include the variety of views that surround any given issue. It all seems broadly reasonable; a library need not and cannot give equal shelf space to both sides of every issue. Nevertheless, a library should not categorically exclude one side of an issue, no matter how offensive.
  - jmfayard 4y ago
    Very few issues have both sides. Booleans yes, they have exactly two equally valid values. Coins also have both sides. But most issues are neither coins nor booleans.

by tjohns 4y ago

slt2021 4y ago

I'd like to pushback against your argument. Librarians absolutely do curate content, it is their main responsibility. The main principle in curating library content is adding value. If content does not add value to readers, it is useless. "Give the people what they want" is another principle (https://www.forbes.com/sites/avaseave/2014/01/17/the-process-of-curating-for-curators-who-do-librarians-consult/?sh=409b1df26696 https://www.forbes.com/sites/avaseave/2014/01/17/the-process...)

MichaelCollins 4y ago
One one hand, it seems impossible to run a library without curation. If nothing else, space is limited. On the other hand, the American Librarian Association's Library Bill of Rights says that libraries should have books presenting all points of view on current and historical issues, neither proscribed nor removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill List of document interpreting those rights: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpre... Some choice quotes from https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/politics https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpre... : > Thus there is no justification for the exclusion of opinions deemed to be unpopular or offensive by some segments of society no matter how vocal or influential their opponents may be at any particular time in any particular place. > A balanced collection need not and cannot contain an equal number of resources representing every possible viewpoint on every issue. A balanced collection should include the variety of views that surround any given issue. It all seems broadly reasonable; a library need not and cannot give equal shelf space to both sides of every issue. Nevertheless, a library should not categorically exclude one side of an issue, no matter how offensive.
- jmfayard 4y ago
  Very few issues have both sides. Booleans yes, they have exactly two equally valid values. Coins also have both sides. But most issues are neither coins nor booleans.