ALA: jenny doesn’t speak here anymore

Jenny gives great presentations, is not full of herself, and knows what she’s talking about. She’s well prepared, gracious and charming. When she gets pissed off about something, I generally give her the benefit of the doubt that her rancor is completely justified and probably even understated compared to whatever offense she or her patrons have endured. This is just a long-winded way of saying that her objections to crazy ALA policies seem right on target to me. Keep in mind that when it comes to the topics she works on — blogging, digital rights management, gaming, audio content in libraries — she’s not just an expert she is one of the authorities and I’m frankly a little suprised even that she has to deal with this sort of thing. Maybe it’s the sort of thing we can sort out on Council… my Council position that I am not re-upping for, for somewhat similar reasons.

I will never accept another invitation to speak at an ALA-related conference until they reverse this ludicrous policy of CHARGING THEIR SPEAKERS TO SPEAK. It’s insane, absurd, surreal, and unethical. You don’t have a conference without your speakers. I understand they can’t reimburse speakers for travel expenses, but the very least they can do is comp their speakers’ conference registration fees. And the whole conference, too, not just a day. You either value your own professionals or you don’t, and the current policy tells me you don’t.

radical militant librarians

I’ve been messing a bit with possible commenting options. My apologies for people who saw non-functional comment links. This was in my inbox a few times whn I got back from a weekend trip to Western MA: At F.B.I., Frustration Over Limits on an Antiterror Law

One internal F.B.I. message, sent in October 2003, criticized the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review at the Justice Department, which reviews and approves terrorist warrants, as regularly blocking requests from the F.B.I. to use a section of the antiterrorism law that gave the bureau broader authority to demand records from institutions like banks, Internet providers and libraries.

“While radical militant librarians kick us around, true terrorists benefit from OIPR’s failure to let us use the tools given to us,” read the e-mail message, which was sent by an unidentified F.B.I. official. “This should be an OIPR priority!!!”

I’m sure it’s lousy to be one of the people who have to use and implement policies that are controversial and/or of questionable legality. However, the pullquote made me smile just the same.