Hi. I’m working on a short light-hearted article about OPAC improvement. I’ve set up a wiki for collective brainstorming. If you’ve got ideas for what you’d like to see in your OPAC [short and sweet please] email or IM me and I’ll let you in on the wiki. Meanwhile, ironically, I’m in the process of gutting my librarian.net inbox which had reached embarassing proportions lately. I can always tell when I’ve been out of town because there’s a spate of unanswered messages in those date ranges. If you sent me an email before August and you haven’t heard back from me, you might want to ping me again. To those who requested postcards, I’ve found a novel way to fulfill your request which should be in the mail this week.
Author: jessamyn
LISCareer has a blog!
Great news, LISCareer has a new blog where you can get updates on articles added to LISCareer. Priscilla’s also getting some help from new assistant editor Rich Murray.
more on inaccurate books and their place in banned books week
This article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer gets at what I was talking about yesterday regarding inaccurate books, and includes some quotes from ALA president Carol Brey-Casiano. [link o’day]
sticky issues surround banned books
According to ALA, the three top reasons for book challenges are: the book is “sexually explicit,” the book contains “offensive language,” or the books is “unsuited to age group.” Please note that one of the most challenged books for 2003 “Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture” by Michael A. Bellesiles, was challenged for inaccuracy. A cursory amount of research will show that according to many the book has been discredited. The original publisher, when faced with the evidence against the author, ceased publication of the book. A smaller press is now re-issuing it, but in a revised edition, with a 50 page addendum. The author resigned from his university job.
Where does this leave librarians? I know this is a sticky issue. I’m just wondering if it’s possible that there are appropriate reasons to challenge a book? Not a storybook about raging-hormone teens or the antebellum South, but a true book about history. A book that many, including its publisher, believe to have errors of fact and conclusions based on poor or inaccurate research. Do you keep it for historical balance? Do you include a note saying “this book has been found to be untrue in parts?” Do you include a book about the errant book, setting the record straight? This seems to be the week to talk about this. On the one hand, we as a profession defend people’s rights to the privacy of what they read, and say “Just because someone is reading about bombs, it doesn’t make them a bomber.” on the other hand, we say that “Reading changes lives.” and view every challenged book — challenged for whatever reason — as an injury to the profession. As usual, I have more questions than answers on this one. Oddly, the ACLUs list of the “most banned books” doesn’t include Arming America while the ALA list, and their press release clearly does.
banned books week, get your wallets out
Happy [Buy] Banned Books Week. I think ALA really says it best on their Banned Books web page which, if you check the URL out in Google says
Online Order Form. If you want your BBW kit to arrive by…