Showing posts with label FTRF. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FTRF. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 12, 2024

ALA Details Bribes to Convince Governments to Sell Out Children

In all my decades of writing about the American Library Association, I've never before seen ALA detail the bribes used in local communities to convince local officials or legislators to sell out their own interests to those of ALA in Chicago, IL.  Chicago is such a paragon of a city—not—that ALA has to bribe locals into getting their own governments to implement The Chicago Way instead of applying common sense, community standards, and the law.  

The bribery is becoming so widespread I suppose ALA feels there's no further need to hide it, so now it's essentially advertising it.  With a Marxist fist, no less.

The details are provided by a crypto ALA organization called EveryLibrary.  It is structured as a separate organization from ALA but it most certainly is not, as I detail here directly from an ALA source:

The American Library Association as a separate 501c3 cannot provide direct support to the new 501c4, and the governance will be by definition not under any control by ALA. We want to make sure that ALA members with a comprehensive understanding of ALA's s mission and advocacy goals are involved in EveryLibrary mission development, governance and ongoing work, and that the activities of the new 501c4 complement the work of the ALA Office for Library Advocacy, Chapter Relations Office and Development Office (in the area of fund raising for advocacy and public awareness).

Kleinman, Dan. “Library Boards Trained to Lie by ALA; Banned Books Wedge Issue Adopted by White House.” SafeLibraries®, June 21, 2023. https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2023/06/library-boards-trained-to-lie-by-ala.html.

Just to illustrate how deeply tied together are these two supposedly separate organizations, ALA and EveryLibrary, here is FOIA evidence that librarians who defy their own administrations to report things directly to organizations seeking to maximize exposure of children to inappropriate material will report them to ALA/EveryLibrary: "Have we reported our challenges to ala or everylibrary?  Just curious."  "Yes," is the response.  This is from St. Tammany Parish Library in Louisiana:


So ALA (via its EveryLibrary organization) details the bribes used in local communities in a series of EveryLibrary posts on X.  Note the use of the Marxist fist for this "fund raising for advocacy and public awareness," pictured top right.

Here is the text of those posts followed by graphics:

Nearly 100 communities have launched campaigns against book bans on http://fightforthefirst.org

Over 70,000 Americans have signed their petitions

They've rallied thousands of Americans into action

They've won in communities across the country

Launch your campaign today!

We'll support your campaign against book bans with:  

1)  Up to $1k in funding 

2) Pro-bono consulting 

3) Digital tools like http://fundlibraries.org

4) Media attention 

5) Training and resources for the skills and knowledge that you need to win.  

And more!



And here's EveryLibrary saying something similar almost a year ago, only without spelling it out, other than "email and organize":


Well will you look at that.  The EveryLibrary 990 for 2023 states it CREATED and funded 18 LOCAL library ALLIANCES, spending $1611 on average for each one, so I guess the "alliance" ALA "created" is with ALA against the "locals":
  • $28,999 - "Created and supported 18 local library Alliances to conduct public education and outreach about the First Amendment in Libraries, along with research into book bans."
And ALA got directly involved in political matters, only through its EveryLibrary crypto subgroup so as not to upset the IRS apple cart, this time averaging $5200 per library:
  • $52,000 - "Provided direct support to 10 public library ballot measure campaigns through financial contributions consulting, and advising."
And just to sink the hook with ALA propaganda, ALA via EveryLibrary spent a chuck of change writing false documentation:
  • $12,479 - "Wrote, published, and syndicated numerous public education and informational articles about libraries, librarians, and current events."
Sounds like a boondoggle to me.  A whistleblower sent me EveryLibrary documentation and it is false line by line and exactly the same message as ALA, as I detail here:


What a coincidence, the 990 Schedule B list of contributors is, "RESTRICTED," emphasis in original.  What a coincidence.  Ditto for total contributions.  The free speech people are suddenly silent.

One group, "Citizens for Patmos Library," let alone that it should be called "Chicago for Patmos Library," got a whopping $25,000, per the EveryLibrary 990, Schedule I:
  • $25,000 - "To fund the work of Citizens for Patmos Library in supporting the Patmos Public Library levy on the November 8, 2022 ballot.  The Citizens for Patmos Library is a registered local ballot committee dedicated to passing the November 8, 2022 levy election for the Patmos Library.  Michigan Registration ID - 96365"
Look at this, especially people in Wyoming and New Jersey:
  • "Other Programs included grants to sponsor regional library conferences, revenue from supporting a Wyoming Statewide Campaign and consulting on a candidate questionnaire for New Jersey Association of School Librarians, program expenses for staff time allocated to various smaller programs."
Various odds and sods from the EveryLibrary 990, Schedule O, showing the infrastructure brought to bear on local communities by the local entities created, funded, and supported by the ALA:
  • "Payment to Megan O'Conner for internship stipend $500, payments to Tiffany Wilson for social media management $1,650, payments to Megan Blair for services as the Policy and Advocacy Strategist $11,800, Payments to Martha McGehee for Editorial and social media Management $23,832, payment to Charity Lounsbery for internship stipend $500, payments to Century Plant for article writing $1,000, payment to Megan Mullen for article writing $1,100, Payments to Joyce Johnson for database cleanup $5,651, payment to William Engquist for article writing $100, payments to Tasslyn Magnusson for services as a policy specialist in censorship issues $10,948, payments to Paula Younger for article writing $840, payment to Joseph Wimberly for services as Digital Coordinator $1,120, payment to Harry Brake for article writing $200, payment to Chloe Santiago for Capstone Project stipend $500, payments to Sophie Brookover for Campaign Training Standardization $5,000, payments to Kosi Harris for media relations $11,250, payment to Kevin Moore for article writing $1,600"
I have seen ALA bribe communities before, $1000 here (Wisconsin), $5000 there (Texas), I've just never seen it so out in the open before.  

Here's the Wisconsin example, uncovered only during a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and never revealed by ALA or the library or the local acolyte.  In my opinion it's a bribe since money changed hands to sway governmental decisions and the public was never informed.  Only luck and a little bragging uncovered the truth.  It says, in an email from a local acolyte to a public library that was defending ALA policy regarding children's exposure to inappropriate material, "We got good news on Friday that West Bend Parents for Free Speech received a grant of $1,000 for our expenses from the Freedom to Read Foundation," and the FTRF is another part of ALA:


"I sent an email to Kristin yesterday asking her to track down my $30 check (room deposit) and put it towards the summer reading program fund.  I also put a post our website forum asking people to donate (funds or prizes) for the program."  

Do you see how ALA, libraries, and certain local citizens collude with each other to convince people to choose The Chicago Way over any wishes of local citizenry?  "Kristin," by the way, left her librarian job to join ALA to use her experience in pushing The Chicago Way and training others to do the same.  What a small world.  She has since left ALA. 

Here's the $5,000 Texas example (hyperlinks in original, archived if needed, emphasis in original):
Grants 
The FTRF Board authorized a $5,000 grant to HP Kids – a group of concerned parents and community members in Highland Park, Texas, who have been advocating against censorship efforts in the public school system.  See more about the group on their Facebook page.  ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom has been working to support the community members’ efforts in a number of ways, including writing a letter to the school board opposing a move to use ALA’s annual list of Top Ten most frequently challenged books as a guide to restricting books, and providing advice and logistical support.

You know, if ALA is bribing local acolytes with money to affect local political issues, shouldn't the public be able to obtain Freedom of Information Act requests from ALA, FTRF, EveryLibrary even if they aren't government bodies?  It's Sunshine Week, so I'm asking.  Anyone know?  All this money is being spent to sway public law.  Isn't the public entitled to see this?

Nowadays the method of bribery (but not the bribes themselves) is out in the open, and its detailed.  Money.  Consulting.  Online fundraising tools.  Media attention.  Training and resources "that you need to win."  And by "win," ALA means the community loses.  All free.  

It's all a fake facade, all astroturf.  "Nearly 100 communities have launched campaigns against book bans."  Click on the links in the ALA/EveryLibrary tweets to see if your own community has been corrupted with ALA bribery.  Mine has.

I've written about this astroturfing before.  See:


Here's more on ALA astroturfing, from "Report to Council and Executive Board," by Keith Michael Fiels, Executive Director of ALA, December 11, 2014, page 1 (hyperlinks omitted):
Pro-Privacy Library Letters Let Loose on Congress 
As the “lame duck” Congress opened in mid-November, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid surprised his colleagues by immediately maneuvering procedurally to bring the ALA-backed USA FREEDOM Act to the Senate floor for debate and, it was hoped, an “up or down” vote.  The Office of Government Relations immediately crafted and emailed an alert to more than 110,000 librarians and library supporters linked to ALA’s Legislative Action Center from where pre-drafted letters of support to individual recipients’ Members of Congress in both chambers could quickly and easily be sent.  The email alert was “clicked” open by more than 13% of all recipients, 2,000 of whom generated a total of 7,000 letters to Congress virtually overnight.  While Senator Reid’s attempt to move USA FREEDOM failed to garner the necessary 60 votes, the campaign showed the capacity of library supporters to respond quickly to legislative opportunities. 
So if you are a school board member or a county or parish board member or a state legislator or governor and a local group supports keeping school children exposed to educationally unsuitable and pervasively vulgar material that violates common sense, community standards, and the law, there's a very good chance that local group is just ALA itself astroturfing.  It's as if ALA flew in from Chicago and told you what to do, only they got local acolytes to do the talking, yelling, bullying, and especially the community organizing.

Such groups and their threats of lawsuits (I've been in three) and demands for acceptance of The Chicago Way (they lost and one is still ongoing) can be safely ignored just as equally as if ALA's own leadership from Chicago, Illinois, strolled into your community and demanded you follow their Chicago Way "Library Bill of Rights" that makes it age discrimination to keep anything from anyone, especially children, because that's what ALA has wanted for over 50 years.

Now that you know the above, you can easily tell local groups astroturfing for ALA and taking bribes to sell out children to take their Marxist fist-funded phoniness and, well, you can just ignore them as easily as you can ignore the Chicago Way from ALA.


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Chicago, IL, USA

Monday, December 5, 2022

School Librarians Train to Violate FOIA Law to Keep Parents In the Dark About Sexualizing Children

School librarians are trained to violate Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] laws so as to keep parents in the dark about sexually inappropriate materials in public schools and libraries.  They train to use personal resources to evade open public records laws, then say the records do not exist.  That's dishonest.  It's lying.  It’s illegal.  That we are talking about innocent-acting librarians doesn’t make it suddenly legal.

Should a parent file a FOIA request, they may be informed no documents exist.  Oh there are documents, librarians are just trained to conduct public business in a way they think circumvents FOIA and other laws (such as record retention laws).  

As a result, future FOIA requests should include special language to deal with this lawlessness, and perhaps FOIA laws themselves should be amended to account for this specific subterfuge by an entire government job classification: librarian.  

For example, private text messages were obtained via FOIA that proved an elementary school librarian at the Blackshear Elementary School in Austin, TX, set up a drag queen to "read" to students at his school with a Texas Library Association [TLA] officer of the "Queers and Allies Roundtable," was informed the drag queen had a criminal record, then guided the convicted drag queen to fool the required background check—and the librarian was himself a BSDM fetish performer at night:

Shannon, Tracy. “Unbelievable: Austin, Texas, Elementary School Librarian is a BDSM ‘Leatherman’ by Night; Invited Convicted Male Prostitute Drag Queen to Read to Schoolchildren.” MassResistance, April 26, 2020. https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/20b/Austin-TX-Blackshear-library/index.html.
 
Here is the evidence.  In Texas, an executive board member of TLA (the largest state-based library association) and board member of the American Library Association’s [ALA] Freedom to Read Foundation [FTRF] has provided essentially that very training to Texas librarians in a published podcast of the TLA.  Generally, FOIA laws can be viewed at National Freedom of Information Coalition (NFOIC).  Texas FOIA laws can be viewed at the NFOIC site at https://www.nfoic.org/texas-foia-laws/.

Former school librarian Dorcas Hand, pictured above right, is the TLA executive board member and the FTRF board member who spills the beans.  

She admits librarians are not lawyers and are trained to reach out for help from ALA, TLA, and other librarians and, importantly, to use personal email addresses precisely to prevent parents from getting the records under the state's open public records act.  The TLA website directs them to submit an online Google form with the basics of the problem, then someone having experience in that type of challenge is selected by Dorcas Hand herself.  These are public records and any subsequent communications are as well, but the subterfuge essentially makes them nearly impossible to get.  

Here is a transcript of what Dorcas Hand said, emphasis in original:
20:34 "Once the match is made the volunteer reaches out by email.  Uh, volunteers never use their professional email, and they work hard to have their conversations with, um, people who are looking for help on personal devices and WiFi.  We don't want anybody who's involved in this caught by a FOIA request.  And, and we know that's happening.  So we, we try to be very careful.  Um, and, and those two people make their own arrangements.  Once I've connected them I am not a part of the conversation, unless somebody comes back to me and they need more something.  Um, we never give legal advice.  We are not lawyers.  Um, we might point people in the direction of resources that may suggest how they get legal advice, um, we certainly use all of the ALA resources, and, um, some of those, I mean there's case law that you can look at, specific cases that may relate to what you're talking about, and that can be helpful when you're talking to people, but we don't say this is how you solve this problem, because we don't know, if it's going to court, we don't know all kinds of things, and it's not our job to do any of that.  Um, we have put together an internal wealth of resources to answer questions.  The volunteers share whichever ones they think are most useful.  Um, we did go back once and build a tip sheet to support a specific question because that question seemed to come three or four times...." 22:00
Here is the source of information upon the above is based so you can see/hear this yourselves and in full context: 

Sweeney, Cate, and Dorcus Hand. “Banned Books Week 2022, Part I; Libraries Transform Texas Podcast.” Texas Library Association, September 12, 2022. https://anchor.fm/texas-library-association/episodes/Banned-Books-Week-2022--part-I-e1m8rvv.
Let's celebrate Banned Books Week!  Our featured guest for this podcast is Dorcas Hand, school library advocate and coordinator of the Intellectual Freedom Helpline for the Texas Library Association. Cate Sweeney, vice-chair of TLA's PR and Marketing Committee, hosts this episode. In Part I, we'll hear from Dorcas about three different book challenges she faced as a school librarian; as well as what the Helpline does and how it can help you.
"Libraries Transform Texas Podcast"?  Libraries transform Texas—into what?  Apparently, a lawless place where school librarians actively defy law so as to keep parents in the dark about how they are sexualizing school children with sexually inappropriate material.

Does anyone think this is harmless, kids reading sexually inappropriate material?  Just kids reading about "lived experiences"?  Does anyone think this is "diversity" or "inclusion"?  Or LGBT allyship?  Exposure to sexualized material directly harms children:

Lin, Wen-Hsu, Chia-Hua Liu, and Chin-Chun Yi. “Exposure to Sexually Explicit Media in Early Adolescence Is Related to Risky Sexual Behavior in Emerging Adulthood.” PLoS ONE 15, no. 4 (April 10, 2020): e0230242. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230242.

Ross MD MPH, Carolyn C. “Overexposed and Under-Prepared: The Effects of Early Exposure to Sexual Content; Is the Internet Impacting Sexual Development?” Psychology Today, August 13, 2012. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/real-healing/201208/overexposed-and-under-prepared-the-effects-early-exposure-sexual-content.

Rodenhizer, Kara Anne E., and Katie M. Edwards. “The Impacts of Sexual Media Exposure on Adolescent and Emerging Adults’ Dating and Sexual Violence Attitudes and Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Literature.” Trauma, Violence & Abuse 20, no. 4 (October 2019): 439–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838017717745.


V., Juliette. “6 Subtle Ways Child Predators ‘Groom’ Their Victims.” The Mighty, July 12, 2019. https://themighty.com/2019/07/grooming-signs-child-sexual-abuse/.

Jeglic PhD, Elizabeth L. “How Sexual Abusers Try to Groom Children; 99 Percent of Child Sexual Abuse Involves Grooming.” Psychology Today, April 18, 2022. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children.

So Texas parents may want to spread the word about this and act accordingly.  These school librarians are grooming your children with sexually inappropriate material, they know they are doing that, so they are knowingly and purposefully violating Texas law to get it done by any means, whatever it takes, in a way designed to prevent you from knowing.  Now you know.


By the way, when librarians “report a book challenge, book ban, book removal” to ALA or to state library associations like TLA, that document is a public document, as well as all that follows as a result, even if made from a private device on private time to try to circumvent FOIA.  Such reports are not proprietary to ALA or TLA despite their claims of confidentiality.  They cannot disclaim the law.  They are made by public employees acting on public time addressing public issues subject to FOIA laws that as we have seen above they do not want to reveal to the public.  FOIA laws supersede ALA/TLA diktat.  Be sure your FOIA requests include these challenge/ban/removal reports as well.  Give no quarter to librarians intent on violating the law to maximize the sexualization of children, even if they call themselves @FReadomFighters.  There’s no “FReadom” to sexualize children.  When @FReadomFighters gets people to tweet #FReadom on Fridays to #txlege, they are essentially trying to groom the legislators to allow school librarians to have the freedom to continue to sexualize more children in more schools.  Groomers don't just operate on the children.




The following documents are from the Texas Library Association—they show TLA acting upon the recommendation of Dorcas Hand to guide public employees to evade FOIA laws.











As Texas legislators seek to pass legislation due to circumstances caused by librarians trained to violate Texas law, I'm sure they will be happy to see how Texas librarians operate secretly to violate law so as to better groom more Texas children, including those legislators listed here in this typically pro librarian slanted story ("this book-banning era"):

Thompson, Maggie Q. “Austin Libraries Prepare for a Barrage of Book-Banning Bills; Rating Books, Jailing Librarians, and More.” The Austin Chronicle, December 2, 2022. https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2022-12-02/austin-libraries-prepare-for-a-barrage-of-book-banning-bills/.

Librarians are breaking the law specifically to sexualize more children.  Children are being directly harmed.  Why would anyone give librarians any credence at all?  They literally gang up on you behind your backs—to target the most vulnerable, our children.  

—

NOTE ADDED 15 DECEMBER 2022:

Likely as a result of the above reporting, the Texas Library Association has locked its @TXLA Twitter account.  Could there be a bigger admission of guilt?  I've never seen any library association ever lock their account.  Does anyone know if they are being officially investigated?

Here's more:


NOTE ADDED 16 DECEMBER 2022:

Assumption:
@TXLA
locked its Twitter account to delete tweets showing child grooming by #librarians, so
@TXAG
etc. won’t see them. Prediction: When open again, #TXLA will accuse me of defamation saying no such evidence exists.
@ALALibrary
@OIF
uses this trick.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: 3420 Executive Center Dr, Austin, TX 78731, USA

Thursday, August 23, 2018

EBSCO Advertises 'P-rn and S-x Toys' to K-12 School Kids

EBSCO advertises porn and sex toys to school children, reports Concerned Citizens for School Databases, "p*rn and 's*x toys' are ADVERTISED TO KIDS thru #EBSCO K-12 DATABASES!":

"Easy access to porn on school devices creates a culture of sexual harassment #BackToSchool https://bit.ly/2Plcmlh  https://endsexualexploitation.org/?p=22658  via @ncose":

"Learn the truth about porn in schools #BackToSchool":

Here's guidance from Safe Schools, Safe Libraries, brought to you by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), including detailed examples of what EBSCO serves to children:

Send this packet of information to your local Parent Teacher Association:
Lest we think school librarians are not directly involved in ensuring school children remain exposed to inappropriate material provided by EBSCO and similar school database companies, I am reporting that the American Library Association is actively working to silence parental opposition to the porn industry indoctrination by claiming, like it does with Me Too, Times Up sexual harassment it calls "dubious," that the problem doesn't exist—it's an "unsupported belief."

None other than the so-called "Freedom to Read Foundation," a part of the American Library Association, is proud to report that its "trustees and liaisons" strategized about "a new movement calling for censorship or filtering of research databases, arising from an unsupported belief that the databases allow children to access pornography...."
....


Lastly, here are related tweets and a video from a number of sources:





—
URL of this page: 
safelibraries.blogspot.com/2018/08/ebsco.html

On Twitter: 
@ALALibrary @CCSDConvo @FTRF @EBSCO @NCOSE #BackToSchool

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Chicago, IL, USA

Sunday, July 3, 2011

Is the ALA Harmful to Minors?

The American Library Association [ALA] works hard to eliminate "harmful to minors" laws and legislation.  Why?  What does that have to do with libraries?


The ALA Claims to Promote Libraries

According to the ALA Constitution, "The object of the American Library Association shall be to promote library service and librarianship."

According to the ALA Mission, the ALA is to "provide leadership for the development, promotion, and improvement of library and information services and the profession of librarianship in order to enhance learning and ensure access to information for all."

Where does eliminating "harmful to minors" laws fit into that?  


The ALA's Top Mission Now is Defeating Harmful to Minors Laws

FTRF Logo
The ALA uses the organization it created called the Freedom to Read Foundation [FTRF] to oppose "harmful to minors" laws.  The FTRF just made opposing "harmful to minors" law its top priority.  See for yourself:

2010–2011 ALA CD#22.1

(2011 ALA Annual Conference)
Freedom to Read Foundation
REPORT TO COUNCIL
2011 Annual Conference — New Orleans, Louisiana

As President of the Freedom to Read Foundation, it is my privilege to report on the Foundation’s activities since the 2011 Midwinter Meeting:


FACING THE FUTURE

At the Midwinter Meeting in San Diego, the FTRF Board of Trustees began to set new priorities for the Freedom to Read Foundation, with the goal of firmly establishing FTRF as the premier legal advocate for intellectual freedom in libraries.  The trustees took a number of concrete steps toward that goal here in New Orleans, identifying key action areas and approving elements of a strategic plan that will secure FTRF’s financial future, expand its membership, and make it possible for FTRF to take the lead in litigation that protects the right to access information.  We look forward to concluding the strategic planning process at the 2012 Midwinter Meeting in Dallas.

DEFENDING THE FREEDOM TO READ

The Freedom to Read Foundation’s core mission remains the vindication of the public’s right to hear what is spoken and to read what is written, no matter how the message is communicated to the public.  Laws that aim to restrict publication of constitutionally protected materials—such as state laws that criminalize the distribution of legal materials deemed “harmful to minors” over the Internet—fall squarely within that mission.  FTRF is currently participating as a plaintiff in two different lawsuits that are intended to ensure our freedom to read information published via the Internet without restriction or government interference.

The first lawsuit, Florence v. Shurtleff, is a long-standing challenge to Utah’s “harmful to minors” statute that would impair access to lawful Internet content and allow the state’s attorney general to create an Adult Content Registry that could sweep in any site the attorney general deems unacceptable.  For several months, counsel for the Freedom to Read Foundation sought to reach an agreement with the Utah attorney general that would restrict application of the “harmful to minors” law to those individuals who have one-on-one contact with a viewer and who subsequently disseminate “harmful to minors” materials to that viewer when the individual knows or believes the viewer is a minor.  These negotiations failed, and FTRF and its co-plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on June 8, 2011.

The second lawsuit, ABFFE, et al. v. Burns, challenges Alaska’s newly adopted “harmful to minors” statute that criminalizes the distribution of certain material to minors under the age of 16.  Under the new law, a crime is committed if the material distributed fits within the law’s definition of “harmful to minors” and is distributed to a person under 16 years of age or to a person the distributor believes is under 16 years of age.

As I reported earlier, the federal district court hearing the lawsuit issued a preliminary injunction in October 2010, forbidding enforcement of the Alaska statute during the pendency of the lawsuit.  Subsequently, FTRF and its co-plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment that sought a final declaration that the law violated the First Amendment.  The state attorney general responded by filing both a cross-motion for summary judgment and a motion asking that the lawsuit be certified to the Alaska Supreme Court for an interpretation of the statute.  On June 8, 2011, the Alaska Supreme Court declined the request for certification.  The case will now return to the district court for a decision on the motions for summary judgment filed by both parties.

The Foundation continues to monitor with interest Sarah Bradburn et al v. North Central Library District, a suit filed by the ACLU of Washington against the North Central Library District on behalf of three library patrons and the Second Amendment Foundation.  The suit alleges that the library violated the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights by refusing to disable Internet filters at the request of adult patrons, consistent with standards established in the opinion rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Children’s Internet Protection Act case.  The Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the North Central Library System policy and actions did not violate the state constitution.  We are currently awaiting a decision from the district court judge, who will decide whether the library’s policy and actions violates the U.S. Constitution.

Finally, like many other First Amendment organizations, we are anxiously waiting for the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (formerly Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association).  FTRF joined an amicus brief in support of EMA arguing that there are no exceptions to First Amendment protection for depictions or descriptions of violence.  The brief also took the position that California’s statute is content-based, subjective, and relies on an extremely broad and unconstitutionally vague definition of violence.  The implications for library material content and access to currently constitutionally protected information, should the Supreme Court decide in California’s favor, are significant.  The last scheduled day for decisions from the Supreme Court this term is June 27, 2011; we will make a full report on the decision at the Midwinter Meeting in Dallas.

.... 
Respectfully submitted,
Kent Oliver

President, Freedom to Read Foundation

Look at all that time and effort and ALA member dues going into defeating "harmful to minors" laws.  Does the FTRF work as hard on any other issues?  How about on library issues, as opposed to "harmful to minors" laws?


Evident Display by the FTRF of Disdain for Local Interests 

And that one matter he mentioned about the Bradburn case?  That was a loser for the likes of the FTRF but a winner for communities.  See, "Library Porn Removal Roadmap; NCRL Director Dean Marney Details How to Legally Remove Legal Porn from Public Library Computers and Advises that the ALA Relies on Outdated Dogma."

Notice how the ALA interests were defeated in the state, so it is taking the case to the feds.  "The Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the North Central Library System policy and actions did not violate the state constitution.  We are currently awaiting a decision from the district court judge, who will decide whether the library’s policy and actions violates the U.S. Constitution."  The disdain for local control over public libraries is evident.


Alaska State Harmful to Minors Law Overturned and Librarians Gloat

To be clear, protecting civil liberties vis-à-vis "harmful to minors" legislation is very important.  There are a number of organizations doing that.  But should library associations that claim to "promote library service and librarianship" "to enhance learning and ensure access to information for all" work to defeat "harmful to minors" legislation?  Then gloat about it?

The FTRF and the Alaska Library Association [AkLA] were part of a lawsuit seeking to overturn a "harmful to minors" act in Alaska.  Indeed the law was invalidated:
Then the Alaska Library Association celebrated with this email from the AkLA "Intellectual Freedom Committee" leader dated 1 July 2011:
Greetings -

You may remember that AkLA signed on to the lawsuit challenging the law that criminalized "indecent" speech on the Internet that minors might view.  I'm happy to announce that the Federal District Court agreed with us and found the law unconstitutional.  Here's the press announcement.

An appropriate victory for free speech on July 4th weekend!

June Pinnell-Stephens
Sue Sherif
To add to the gloating, Sue Sherif, the AkLA's ALA Representative and Alaska State Head of Library Development, added the following comment:
Hooray for our court and their decision, although I have to say that when I read your subject line I had a little scare because it looked like the court had struck down an statute that was intended to protect First Amendment rights!  I hope I’m the only one who scanned it incorrectly.

Yea, team!
So we have an Alaska state government employee publicly gloating over the removal of an Alaska state "harmful to minors" law.  And what does that have to do with "promot[ing] library service and librarianship" "to enhance learning and ensure access to information for all"?


Communities Must Weigh ALA Efforts to Oppose Harmful to Minors Laws

When people evaluate whether to be guided by the diktat of the ALA in their own public libraries, there is now one more thing to consider, setting aside the evident disdain for local control over libraries—the ALA's FTRF has made defeating "harmful to minors" laws its top priority.

I can see the ACLU doing that, and it does, but not a library association stepping outside the library world it defines for itself to take on yet another non-library issue, particularly one that may literally be harmful to minors.

Is the ALA harmful to minors?  Since it exceeds its mission, that is a legitimate concern.

Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)