Showing posts with label PatrickSweeney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PatrickSweeney. Show all posts

Thursday, August 1, 2019

Fulfilling FOIA Requests Is 'Disruptive,' Says Public Library Director

Fulfilling FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests is "disruptive," says St. Mary's County Library Director Michael Blackwell: "My time is valuable.  I am not inclined to disrupt other library operations by giving it away."  Maryland Public Information Act compliance is part of a public servant's job—it's not a "disruption."  This public servant has open hostility to the law.

Further, he will not waive fees for me to report publicly on his possible facilitation of so-called "Drag Queen Story Hour," and will instead charge me $50 an hour, basically ensuring I will refuse to pay the price and the public will not get the public records.  (Someone want to start a GoFundMe page for this?)

Now this is a matter where a man has been charged with trespass for attempting to attend a public meeting in a public library that the library director said was private, where the library director may have lied to the County Commissioners—that's part of what I am investigating, and where the county government has ordered the library to pay for security services that were used essentially to put on a circus in a matter that may have been illegal in the first place.  The ACLU and secular humanists are threatening to sue the county government as a result.  So this is a matter of great public interest, I am a reporter digging for information to shed light on what happened, and the library director—who may be part of the problem—is suppressing production of public documentation by charging me what is certain to amount to hundreds of dollars, perhaps even a thousand.

And this is not the first arrest of a patron under Michael Blackwell's watch.  It is now a pattern.  I suspect it is part of the circus he puts on to help promote what the library is doing.  Let's look at this in Michael's own words as he gleefully promotes what he has done and reports 23 May 2017 to thousands of ALA librarians, even with details about the arrest:
Hi, Michael Blackwell, Director of St Mary's County Library here. Thanks to all for your kind words of support for our library. I am very proud of our Trustees and staff for standing strong in a challenge that threatened First Amendment rights to assemble and engage in free speech. We took no stand on the program itself: it is not a library program. Our concern is fair use of our meeting rooms. [Teens attending said they greatly enjoyed the program, however, and found it more honest and informative than anything they learned in school.] We are glad that except for one person who chose to be arrested (she is 55 but claimed to "self-identify" as 17 in order to gain access to the teen-only event, and refused offers to attend the open forum, go into the library, or even just leave), the event was peaceful and both sides of the controversy could express their views as they saw fit outside the library. Freedom to assemble and educate won that day. May they always. 
[Source.  Notably, the librarians to whom he reported commented to attack me personally and wished I would die in a cruel and unusual fashion.  It's no wonder the director is hostile to me.]
Whatever, see his response for yourself, and see my original FOIA request to which he responded, both below.


Just remember, my experience tells me 90% of libraries respond in a timely and substantive manner to FOIA requests, and of the 10% that do not, 100% have something to hide, are hiding it, and it eventually comes out.  So as far as St. Mary's County Library goes, open government laws are "disruptive" and will be ignored—it's hiding something.

And no, I did not imply he was destroying documents, only to be aware that American Library Association 1) uses personal emails for work reasons, illustrating that librarians use personal emails for work reasons so they are subject to FOIA as well, and 2) orders librarians to destroy documents precisely to defeat FOIA responses.  Since St. Mary's County Library librarians are communicating directly with ALA, like children's librarian Tess Goldwasser who wrote for ALA how to "sneakily" push an agenda on children and for which a County Commissioner called her a "liar," it is highly likely they are being told how to subvert FOIA laws as this is an established pattern of ALA.  The library trustees should be aware of this so they can prevent it.  But, based on the library director's open hostility to me and defiance of the open government law, it is more likely we will pitch in on the effort to hide documentation.  The unprofessional hostility and the charging of a huge fee to a member of the media is just part of that effort.

By the way, I will amend my FOIA request to ameliorate his concerns for now, but I may raise them again in the future.  Still, it's shocking to see a library director so blatantly say open government laws can go to hell.



Library Director's Response:


Re: FOIA Request - St. Mary's County Library - #01

From: Michael Blackwell Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 4:36 PM

To: Safe Libraries
Cc: "csmc@stmarysmd.com" , smclboard , Joshua Brewster

Dear Mr. Kleinman,

Fulfilling these requests will require substantial time and effort.

Under Maryland law, you are granted two hours of library time to fulfil [sic] you [sic] requests. After that, we may, and will, charge.  I do not waive fees.  After two hours, I shall charge you $50 per hour.  This is a fair and reasonable rate, for I am our Public Information Officer and responsible for all such requests and must attend to them personally. No documents will be provided to you after the two free hours of time spent searching, redacting the records to be in compliance with Maryland’s strict privacy laws, and preparing the records to be sent to you, until payment is received. Keep in mind that the information you seek involves me searching all emails to and from all St. Mary’s County Library employees—simply making queries to the whole lot and reviewing results to determine relevance takes substantial time. I shall tell you what each reply would cost and send them once payment is received.

I will happily negotiate with you through Maryland’s PIO Ombudsman, who will ensure that our dealings are fair. Let me know if you wish to exercise this option.

I have copied our attorney, Joshua Brewster, and request that any correspondence from you include him.

Your implication that I would destroy or withhold any records if so directed by the American Library Association is offensive. I am well aware of my duties, which [sic] require me to redact or withhold records as required by Maryland law (and not an outside agency) but never to destroy them. I have, furthermore, never received any such request from the American Library Association.

I will tell you upfront that point # 3 will get you nothing.  I have never received any communication in the period you mention, or any other period for that matter, from Leonardtown PFLAG. I doubt any of our employees will have received any such communication related to this matter in this time frame.

Since any communications on points 1 – 5, exclusive of #3 as already discussed, would have been addressed to me or to an online system for reserving meeting rooms, or involve payments made to us, I can probably prepare responses to them in two hours.  I offer you those, even if they exceed two hours. All other requests would require much more time.  If you do not wish points 1, 2, 4, and 5 addressed, as I have offered, I suggest you prioritize other requests and be prepared to pay.  My time is valuable.  I am not inclined to disrupt other library operations by giving it away.

Michael Blackwell
Director, St Mary’s County Library
23250 Hollywood Road
Leonardtown, MD 20650
301-475-2846 x5013
mblackwell@stmalib.org


Original FOIA Request:


FOIA Request - St. Mary's County Library - #01

From: Safe Libraries Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 3:35 PM

To: smclboard
Cc: csmc@stmarysmd.com, Michael Blackwell , info@stmalib.org

Dear St. Mary’s County Library Board of Trustees,

This is a FOIA request.  Under the Maryland Public Information Act Title 4, I request copies of public records.

Please waive all fees since the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of how the library is managed and whether it acts in compliance with the law and its own policies.  This has become a concern ever since the County Commissioners have acted to require the library trustees to pay for police services provided to the library board so that it could facilitate a so-called “Drag Queen Story Hour” on June 23, 2019.  It raises the issue that the library may have acted outside the law, and the County Commissioners acted to force compliance with the law.  I have been reporting on libraries violating various laws and policies for almost two decades and this request is related to news gathering purposes.  This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.  Should you refuse to provide free records to the media for disclosure to the public in a noncommercial fashion, then if there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $25.

The Maryland Public Information Act requires a response to this request within 30 days.  If the records I am requesting for ultimate public disclosure will take longer than this amount of time, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies of the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this request, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you for considering my request.

Here are the documents for which copies are requested, all limited in scope to 2019 unless otherwise stated, and keep in mind County Times reported on 27 June 2019, page 3, “Blackwell confirmed that the two non-profits eventually rented the space, making it a private event”:

1) All documents to or from SMASH (Southern Maryland Area Secular Humanists) or any of its representatives or anyone claiming to represent SMASH.

2) All documents to or from WASH (Washington Area Secular Humanists) or any of its representatives or anyone claiming to represent WASH.

3) All documents to or from PFLAG of Leonardtown (Parents and Friends of Lesbians And Gays; Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) or any of its representatives or anyone claiming to represent PFLAG of Leonardtown.

4) All applications made for use of the public meeting room, limited to those that set up “Drag Queen Story Hour.”

5) All payments made to the library for the use of the public meeting room for “Drag Queen Story Hour”

6) All documentation of communications about “Drag Queen Story Hour” with the American Library Association, and especially ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom.

7) All documentation of communications about “Drag Queen Story Hour” with the American Library Association, and especially ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom.

8) All documentation of communications by children’s librarian Tess Goldwasser with the American Library Association, and especially ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, during 2019 and during 2017.

9) All documentation of policies relating to performing background checks on people presenting programs at the library, whether sponsored by the library or by someone who arranged for use of the public meeting room.

10) All documentation of the results of said background checks having been performed.

Where emails are involved, also provide the BCC as well as the CC and the TO. As you know, BCC is for the convenience of the sender, not for circumventing public information laws. If senders/recipients include distribution lists the library created, then please provide the document that lists the individual recipient email addresses in any distribution list; again, distribution lists are for the convenience of the sender, not for circumventing the law. Further, if library business has been conducted via the use of personal emails or text messages—even on personal phones, then please provide those emails and text messages as well. Conducting library business on personal emails or phones is not a valid means for circumventing MPIA.

Any document written or recorded is included as well. That includes voice mails, audio recordings, transcripts or minutes of any public meeting. Library board executive session recordings or minutes are not included in my request if they have not already been made public.

Written or recorded documents also include those made in any telephonic, electronic, or physical meeting with anyone acting on behalf of any library association such as the American Library Association. ALA trains librarians that written or recorded documents from ALA-provided trainings, meetings, conferences, etc., are ALA proprietary and may not be released publicly. That ALA claim is false. MPIA controls, not ALA. If a public employee attended anything at public expense, then anything learned/recorded at such an event or as a result thereof has been made public and is discoverable under MPIA no matter what ALA claims. The public has a right to know what business has been conducted at public expense.

Be clear ALA top leadership uses personal email to direct librarians to destroy public documents precisely to prevent production under state sunshine laws like MPIA. Example from the private email of the current Interim Director and Deputy Director Deborah Caldwell-Stone, Esq., of the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom: “Subject: URGENT -­ must delete all documents related to 17 Dec crisis communications workshop .… Remove these from your servers today and destroy hard copies. This is an attempt by two individuals to obtain privileged information …. we cannot allow anything from 17 Dec to be produced in response to FOIA.” Source published here:
“Librarians Ordered to Destroy Public Documents Revealing Homophobia at American Library Association and Crime in Libraries,” by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 26 April 2018, https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2018/04/librarians-ordered-to-destroy.html

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.

Source of County Times article cited:
https://countytimes.somd.com/archive/2019/06-jun/2019-06-27.pdf

[NOTE: If any librarian wishes to contact me privately/confidentially, perhaps to provide some of this documentation, use SafeLibraries@pm.me.]

Sincerely,

Dan Kleinman
SafeLibraries® brand library educational services
641 Shunpike Rd #123
Chatham, NJ 07928
973-610-8296


UPDATE 1 AUGUST 2019:

I amended my FOIA request, and the library director responded again, again with the nastiest, most unprofessional manner possible, actually telling me he won't read any more of my messages, yet he is the person responsible for FOIA requests!  He even implied I was unreasonable.  And he's going to make me wait a full 30 days before he will deny almost everything I requested.  So much for freedom of information.

In all my years of filing FOIA requests on libraries, most are fine, some are contentious yet professional, but none are ever this outright nasty.  When this man appeared before the County Commissioners, he presented as the friendliest of men who would never hurt a fly.  The reality is a major eye opener.  He's hiding something.  And he's hiding it from the public.



My Amended FOIA Request:


Dear St. Mary’s County Library Director Blackwell,

In light of your response to my FOIA request, I hereby amend my initial request to the following, dropping 6-10 and amending 3 to add PFLAG national, and as before, just during 2019:

1) All documents to or from SMASH (Southern Maryland Area Secular Humanists) or any of its representatives or anyone claiming to represent SMASH.

2) All documents to or from WASH (Washington Area Secular Humanists) or any of its representatives or anyone claiming to represent WASH.

3) All documents to or from PFLAG of Leonardtown and PFLAG national (Parents and Friends of Lesbians And Gays; Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) or any of its representatives or anyone claiming to represent PFLAG of Leonardtown and PFLAG national.

4) All applications made for use of the public meeting room, limited to those that set up “Drag Queen Story Hour.”

5) All payments made to the library for the use of the public meeting room for “Drag Queen Story Hour”

Given the amended request, it appears no fee will be due, and there will be no need for the services of Maryland’s PIO Ombudsman.

I may raise the removed public document requests again if I raise enough money to pay the fee you require but MPIA law does not, so do not allow them to be deleted in the interim.  It’s interesting that an investigative reporter would be charged such fees in light of your own complaint of having been charged fees by your county government.  It smacks of a double standard, let alone disdain for open government laws.

Also, please note I have published the following newsworthy report:
Thank you.

Dan Kleinman


The Unprofessional Library Director's Unprofessional Response:


Dear Sir,

I have no interest in your posts and will not bother to consult them.  You may post my entire email for all I care. Reasonable people will understand my position.

Please be aware of the following:
Maryland Code, General Provisions § 4-308 
(a) Subject to subsection (b) of this section, a custodian shall prohibit inspection, use, or disclosure of a circulation record of a public library or any other item, collection, or grouping of information about an individual that: 
(1) is maintained by a library; 
(2) contains an individual's name or the identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual;  and 
(3) identifies the use a patron makes of that library's materials, services, or facilities. 
(b) A custodian shall allow inspection, use, or disclosure of a circulation record of a public library only: 
(1) in connection with the library's ordinary business;  and 
(2) for the purposes for which the record was created.
I am prohibited by Maryland law from disclosing any record of any transaction at the library involving an individual. If an individual member of SMASH or PFLAG has made any request of the library, including use of its meeting rooms, I am prohibited from disclosing it and I shall not. The Maryland Public Information Ombudsman will confirm my reading of the law.

I shall review library records to see if SMASH or PFLAG as a group has corresponded with or made requests of us.

Applications for our meeting rooms are made via online registration and are simply confirmed or denied. I can confirm any uses of the meeting room by SMASH or PFLAG from January 1 through today’s date.

I can confirm the date and amount of any payment for reserving our meeting room on June 23rd.  If the payment was made by an individual, I am prohibited from disclosing that record itself but can send information about our processing of the payment.

You will have my response to your request by 30 days, August 31st.

In the interim, I shall not respond to communications from you.


NOTE ADDED 5 AUGUST 2019:

I have filed a second FOIA on the library and have published it here:


NOTE ADDED 8 AUGUST 2019:

Today I received a substantive response to this FOIA request and I now consider it closed.  Below is that response and accompanying explanatory email.  I have no open FOIA requests with the library at this time.

From the provided documentation, I found the following is troubling:

Michael Blackwell says, "Our meeting rooms have been, and will remain, open to all.  Our policy is firmly grounded in First Amendment rights—rights we are proud to stand for.  We remain, as much as any organization can be, apolitical (as Maryland law on libraries clearly establishes) and eager to serve all."
  1. The meeting room was not open to all and indeed a man was arrested after he entered the room.  Michael Blackwell even sat in the front room of the trial of the man.  The meeting rooms are not open to all.  And if I recall, the police blocked the man from attending saying this room was privately rented, and the FOIA response contains a transfer of $100 for room rental.
  2. First Amendment rights are nice but public libraries may restrict certain things despite the First Amendment, as proven by US v. American Library Association, 539 U.S. 194 (2003).  The law that created that library requires the library "benefit" the people, as shown in the response to my second FOIA request, and gender theory is harmful and thus not allowed in the library, despite the First Amendment, just like in the US v. ALA case where Internet pronography was involved—legal outside the library, just not inside.
  3. The library does not stand for First Amendment rights.  Libraries routinely block materials and even people and groups that they view as false or as hate groups.  A number of law suits have gone against the libraries that do this, but it doesn't stop the vast majority.  For example, to this day, positive books about ex-gays or reparative therapy are routinely censored, only the librarians call it "selection," not censorship.  Somehow such books are never selected.  Adherence to the First Amendment is selective and selectively applied.
  4. The library is not "apolitical."  First, its own children's librarian Tess Goldwasser coordinated with ALA to provide training to librarians nationwide on how to "sneakily" push ALA's agenda into public libraries.  Second, ALA's top goal, its stated top goal, is so-called "social justice."  That is to be pushed into libraries nationwide, and the library's own Tess Goldwasser is helping to do that.  Third, the "apolitical" language to which the library director refers pertains to how the County Commissioners must by law deal with the library board of trustees, it does not refer to the library itself.  So the library director is misleading here.  This library is extremely political and is partly responsible for "sneakily" pushing things that violate the library law into the library notwithstanding the law.
  5. Eager to serve all?  Let me remind everyone of the title of this publication: "Fulfilling FOIA Requests Is 'Disruptive,' Says Public Library Director."
Then there's this statement that's at least eyebrow raising: "Officially, we must remain neutral on the event."  That likely explains a number of things, including the pretty good language below.

The following is pretty good:

Michael Blackwell states to the people who rented the room for the event, 
Your statement that "The undersigned write to advise ... the Library of their obligations..." is ... unwarranted and offensive, especially in light of the attacks that the library and I myself have undergone defending SMASH and PFLAG's use of our meeting room. I have spent quite enough time being taken to task from callers across this county and Canada and being bashed like a Piñata in public meetings and letters to local media simply for standing up for the fair use of our meeting rooms to establish my commitment to Maryland law and the First Amendment, thank you.
Lastly, here is the payment for the room, and it appears PayPal ate some of the library's fees, by the way, but I digress:


Below is the substantive FOIA response including the attached document.



Substantive FOIA Response:


FOIA Request - St. Mary's County Library - #01

From: Michael Blackwell Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 3:44 PM

To: Safe Libraries

Cc: "csmc@stmarysmd.com" , smclboard , Joshua Brewster

Please find attached a PDF with all the documents that are responsive to your FOIA request.

Answering your request has required a comprehensive search of all records and speaking with employees about how reservations and payment were arranged for the use of a meeting room by outside groups on 6/23/2019. It also required speaking with Maryland’s PIO Ombudsman to get an interpretation of if one document was allowable. More than two hours were spent, inclusive of the preparation of documents.

On Page 1, find an email dating 5/28/19 containing, first, a request from a member of SMASH addressed to me, asking me to arrange posting of a flier for an upcoming event, and second, my reply that the flier must be treated like all such requests and brought into the library for consideration by employees. The name of the individual has been redacted in accordance with Maryland law on library records, but it is responsive because the person sending it was representing SMASH. This was the first notice anyone at the library had that there was going to be a drag queen story time.

On Page 2, find an email to me and County Commissioner President Randy Guy, “concerning the decision to partially defund the library.” It had an attachment, which I include later. It is from Geoffrey Blackwell of the American Atheist Legal Center and is responsive because representatives SMASH and Leonardtown PFLAG have co-signed. As I point out in my reply, (appearing on next page), Mr. Blackwell and I are, despite sharing a last name, in no way connected. I had never heard of him until receiving this email.

On Pages 3-4, find my reply to Mr. Blackwell’s email.

On pages 5-9, find the document that was attached to Mr. Blackwell’s email. It was hand-delivered as well as attached in PDF.  Because the two documents were identical, I include only one version here rather than scanning two copies of the same thing. You will find that his ideas on the legality of using library meeting rooms directly contradict your own. He is an attorney and member of the bar. I have had to consider his arguments carefully.

On page 6, find an email I sent to a generic address for Leonardtown PFLAG, explaining that a package intended for them had been mistakenly mailed to the library. Mailing a package to our address was an error on the part of the sender.  We have no affiliation with PFLAG Leonardtown or PFLAG National. I left the package at the Customer Service Desk in Leonardtown Library.  Employees tell me that somebody picked it up. I have no idea what was in it and retain no record of it other than this email.

This finishes the records responding to your request 1 – 3. We move on to 4 -5:  use of and payment for the library meeting room.

On page 7, you will find record of reservation for use of the meeting room on 6/23, made on 3/2/19.  The individual’s name has been redacted. Strictly speaking, this document is not responsive to your request.  You ask for all records related to “Drag Queen Story Hour.” You will see that this reservation makes no mention of that term.  I provide it to save us both time.  I could say I have no record of a reservation made for “Drag Queen Story Hour,” and you would then have to reformulate your request. The room was reserved for a “Special Event.”

Library meeting rooms may be reserved through an online system called Evanced.  This reservation was made though the system.  We have no direct or even email contact with the group making the reservation.  One of our employees reviews the reservation and simply approves the request in the online system.  A form response is then sent through the system, in this case on 3/4/19.  We have no record of these responses, other than what you see here. They do not go through our email system.  On page 8, I have given you the form and you can see roughly what the person making the request would have seen. If you wish to see exactly what was sent, you would have to apply to the group making the reservation. Because the room was originally reserved by a non-profit group and open to the public, no payment was required at the time.

On June 20th, one of our employees received a phone call asking to make payment for the room reservation. The caller was directed to pay online via credit card through our Paypal account. We have no phone or email record of this conversation, but you may see the receipt of the transaction on page 9:  $100 for 4 hours, at our regular rate of $25 per hour.

St Mary’s County Library has only these records that are responsive to your request and no others.



Michael Blackwell
Director, St Mary’s County Library
23250 Hollywood Road
Leonardtown, MD 20650
301-475-2846 x5013
mblackwell@stmalib.org





Monday, December 12, 2016

Librarians Guide to Defeating Parents By EveryLibrary

Responding to Opposition: Training Guide by EveryLibrary

So how do we stay on message in the face of our critics? You should realize that, no matter how great your campaign message, your library campaign is going to have its critics.  It doesn’t matter how much the library is loved, the anti-library groups will almost always have some voice in your community.

Responding to Opposition

There are most likely groups of people in your community with the opinion that the library isn’t needed.  There are people who will think that the library should be run by volunteers.  There are people who will believe that the library is doing something malicious with their money.  Finally, there are most likely groups of people who just plain and simply don’t want to pay more taxes no matter what for.

While you should expect to always have opposition, you shouldn’t always expect to have a fight on your hands.  There are ways to quiet the opposition enough that they don’t pose a risk for your campaign.  Remember, you don’t need them to be completely quiet, you don’t need them to love the library, you don’t even need them to vote for the library.  You just need them to not get in the way, vote against, or sabotage the campaign.  Your goal is only to turn them from an active opposition to a passive opposition.

Online or IRL?

Before we begin, I should point out that many of these techniques work for oppositional messages in the comments of blog posts or news articles as well as in real life.  It’s the way that you structure your response that is important and it works across media platforms.  In either case, I want to make sure to note that you should never directly attack your opposition by calling them out by name or specifically responding to just them. Instead of directly attacking your opponent, you should build a message that can be repeated often enough that their message simply gets buried.  You can have your supporters post variations of the same counter message or dozens of positive stories on a blog post until the negative comments are buried.  Whatever you do, don’t validate them or fuel their anger, mistrust, or hatred by attacking them.

Sources of Opposition

It’s extremely important to know who your opposition is and why they don’t support the library.  This is something that should ideally be done during the surfacing phase of your campaign but new opposition can show up at any time.  Luckily, in the case of libraries, you have something up your sleeve.  We at EveryLibrary have heard just about every possible opposition message to libraries, from the most ridiculous, to the most reasonable.  Here are some of the most heard opposition messages that we have heard;
  • The library tax will be yet another tax that (homeowners/small business owners/residents) can’t afford to pay.
  • The internet has everything that I could just find at the library
  • I don’t want to pay more taxes
  • We don’t need a new library
  • The library can be run by volunteers
  • Libraries are irrelevant because I never use them
What you also need to recognize is that some people will never change their view or opinion no matter what you say or do.  Attempting to convince them otherwise will be a huge waste of resources and not something that your campaign can not afford to do.  It is far more important to go out and engage the people who are already on your side and get those voters to the polls in greater numbers than the opposition can. You can be much more effective talking to people who are on the fence than those who have already made up their mind.

The desire to respond to the opposition directly can be difficult to resist.  Instead there are ways that you can use the opposition to build your supporter base.  You can actually turn your opposition’s messages against them and use those messages to convince your supporters to get to the polls.  You can use the public debate to educate the public about the issues and build greater support.  This paper will outline how to do just that.

Listen

The first thing that you should always do when handling discussions from people who have concerns about library ballot measures is listen to them.  Since nearly all opposition stems from a place of fear, you need to handle their concerns with respect and show a concern and understanding about what they are afraid of.  Don’t directly oppose their position as that will give them a sense of validation and you will remain actively opposed.  Instead, you should listen and respect their opinion and don’t be afraid to ask meaningful questions.  Once you have their source of fear, you can alleviate it.

Repeat

Once you know what their fear is, the first thing you should do is repeat it.  You should not directly counter their argument with an opposing viewpoint since this will be perceived as combative and people will fight back until they feel that they won.  By repeating their concerns or fears you prove that you understand them and that you respect their ideals and the repetition will be almost immediately calming.
  • The library tax will be yet another tax that small business owners can’t afford to pay.
  • I understand the great burden placed on small business owners….
  • The internet has everything that I could just find at the library
  • The internet is a great source of information…
  • I don’t want to pay more taxes
  • I understand that taxes are high…
  • We don’t need a new library.
  • We know that people love the old library and everything that it provided to the community…
  • The library can be run by volunteers
  • That’s an excellent suggestion and our volunteers are very valuable…

Question

Sometimes the opposition is unclear about their messaging, or what they are saying doesn’t make sense.  If you can’t figure out what their fear is, don’t be afraid to ask questions.  You can usually get to the root of the issue by kindly asking questions and addressing the root issue.  Most people will feel that you genuinely care if you are asking questions and you can help move them over from active to passive opposition.

Get back to the message

Here is where that message box comes in and where you can see how useful it is.  Since you should have already brainstormed and/or recorded as many of the opposition’s messages, you will be able to develop “and” statements to craft your counter message.  The “and” statement is what you use after repeating their concern.  This is how you are working to solve the same issue that they are concerned about.  This is how you show that you are actually on their side and that you both have the same concerns.  It is very important that you use an “and” statement and not a “but” or a “yes but” statement.  You should never use a “no” statement because you are not disagreeing with them.  You are trying to show that you agree and that you are both actually on the same side.
  • The library tax will be yet another tax that small business owners can’t afford to pay.
  • I understand the great burden placed on small business owners AND that’s why we provide so many resources that make being a small business owner easier
  • The internet has everything that I could just find at the library
  • The internet is a great source of information AND that’s why we want to increase the community’s access to it and add value to what you get from it.
  • I don’t want to pay more taxes
  • I understand that taxes are high AND that is why it’s so important to me to provide services to the community that help bring the cost of living down and the value of the community up.
  • We don’t need a new library.
  • We know that people love the old library and everything that it provides to the community AND that’s why it’s so important to us that we continue to provide the services of the old library and the kinds of services that you deserve in a modern age.
  • The library can be run by volunteers
  • That’s an excellent suggestion and we love our volunteers AND that’s why the library uses as many volunteers as we can to streamline our processes and free up our paid staff to provide the best services we possibly can

Reinforce Your Message

You can reinforce your message by using examples of how you’re achieving your “and” statement.  These examples should be concrete and provable.  You should never lie and say that your library provides something that it doesn’t or something that you can’t prove that it provides.  This is also where that message box comes back into play. You can use your opposition’s messages to research your examples so that you have them in mind before the discussion even begins.  It’s always best to give more than one example, but you should probably never offer more than three in order to avoid the appearance of “I gotcha.”
  • The library tax will be yet another tax that small business owners can’t afford to pay.
  • I understand the great burden placed on small business owners AND that’s why we provide so many resources that make being a small business owner easier. FOR EXAMPLE, we often have programming on hiring staff for small business owners and we offer patent and trademark classes to teach small business owners to protect their property.
  • The internet has everything that I could just find at the library
  • The internet is a great source of information AND that’s why we want to increase the community’s access to it and add value to what you get from it.  FOR EXAMPLE, we offer high speed internet access along with databases that provide a level of well researched and scientifically supported articles that you just can’t find for free on the internet.
  • I don’t want to pay more taxes
  • I understand that taxes are high AND that is why it’s so important to me to provide services to the community that help bring the cost of living down and the value of the community up. FOR EXAMPLE, we provide opportunities for teens and youth to volunteer and become engaged citizens and we provide storytimes for new parents to help the children with early literacy and get them ready for school.
  • We don’t need a new library.
  • We know that people love the old library and everything that it provides to the community AND that’s why it’s so important to us that we continue to provide the services of the old library and the kinds of services that you deserve in a modern age. FOR EXAMPLE, with a new library, we can provide for programming space to support our growing community and we can provide access to even more materials.
  • The library can be run by volunteers
  • That’s an excellent suggestion AND that’s why the library uses as many volunteers as we can to streamline our processes and free up our paid staff to provide the best services we possibly can.  FOR EXAMPLE, we love having our volunteers take on roles that free up staff to work on higher level tasks such as budgets, training, and working with high level technology issues.

Arm Your Campaign

These counter messages are your campaign’s weapons against the opposition so while these answers work well, they are not formatted for your community of voters and you will need the right weapon at the right time.  Everything that we have used here are simply common examples and you will need to do some opposition research and continuously revisit and use your message box with any of the opposition messages that you come across.  Most importantly, you need to practice with your weapons to get back on message.  This means taking some time with your campaign committee and volunteers and doing role playing games where one person plays the opposition and you respond to their claims by getting back to your message using the correct format.  Record some of the best responses, distribute them to your campaign members, and make sure that everyone has them memorized and is well trained on responding to the opposition.

The Opposition’s Outright Lies

Sometimes the opposition lies.  There is not a whole lot you can do about that.  We have seen it happen in a number of campaigns and the problem with lies is that because they are not based on fact, there is very little evidence to the contrary.  But there are a few things that you can do about it in order to simply pacify the opposition until the campaign is over.  Remember that you are simply trying to win the election and you don’t need to discredit or prove the liars wrong, you just need them to be quiet until the campaign is over.

One of the biggest lies that we have seen crop up around election time is that of porn in the library.  Often, these library detractors will try to use examples of porn issues in other libraries, a lack of filters on the computers, and language and content in YA materials to “prove” that the library WANTS to expose kids to porn.  Of course, we know that there is no truth to this ideology but there is typically very little you can do to disprove it.

Solutions for Opposition

While you’ll find that there are people in the community who are serious in their opposition to your library, there are a few things you can try to do to either get them to quiet down or get out of the way.  We are going to use the porn in the library discussion as our example in the these three solutions.
  1. One technique would be to simply use the same Agree, And, For Example format that we discussed earlier.  In the example of the individuals concerned about porn we can use this-
-Thank you for bringing this to our attention, we also want our children to be safe and secure while they are in the library so we take your claim very seriously AND we are going to do something about it. FOR EXAMPLE, we are going to look into a committee to seriously look into the exposure of porn to children in the community.
  1. You can invite them more into the campaign to be a part of the solution.  You can talk about how the library really needs the resources that the win for the library would bring in order to ensure that the library can protect the kids.  With the money you can purchase better filters and take staff time to look at the collection development policy or build a committee specifically to protect the children.  Of course, if you make these campaign promises, you will need to deliver on them if you win.
  2. Another solution is to side-step the campaign and form a committee to look into the issue.  In this case, you might even invite the detractor to be a part of the committee.  You can set the schedule of meetings and the timing of the outcomes of the committee to occur AFTER the Election Day.  This is a very common political ploy used often in campaigns that utilizes a diversion and delay technique to work around election days or long enough until the voters have forgotten about the issue.

Build Your Story

Sometimes you might find that you can build your story.  What this means is that you find people in your community who can tell the opposite story.  You will need to identify community members who can show up to meetings and tell a personal account of the opposite experience.  In the case of porn in the library, you can have community members show up to meetings and talk about how their kids are not exposed to adult material on the computers or that their kids found value in the books they read at the library and that they could then have a meaningful conversation about the issue with their children.  They can tell stories of being responsible parents who monitor their children in public spaces.  If you use this technique, never mention or directly oppose or attack the person making the original claim.  Simply bury their claim in great stories that tell a counter account of their experience.

Ignore Them

The last technique you can use is to simply ignore them.  Sometimes, if you ignore the lie it simply doesn’t gain enough momentum and traction and goes away.  This is risky, but if you know enough about the detractor or who they know in the community, you can make an informed guess as to whether or not they can get enough support of their claim to become a problem.  The detractor may simply go find something else to lie about somewhere else in the community.  This is usually because they are trying to build a name for themselves or play a “hero” role in the community and they won’t be able to gain that role if nobody steps up to be the villain.

One thing that you should never do is openly debate, criticize, or demean the person bringing up the lie.  They can use your open debate to validate themselves and their claim.  If you criticize or publicly demean them, they can make the claim that you are simply trying to put them down because they are close to “the truth.”  You will become the villain that they are looking for and they will make the case that they are the hero.



Source of above (except the title):
  • "Responding to Opposition: Training Guide," by Patrick Sweeney or Andrew Woodworth, EveryLibrary, 21 October 2015 (free subscription required to view; republished under Fair Use Copyright rules for educational, nonprofit purposes).
Note:  The title of this post, "Librarians Guide to Defeating Parents By EveryLibrary," was written by SafeLibraries.  The "guide" itself was written by EveryLibrary and labels parents as "biggest liars" and "detractors":
One of the biggest lies that we have seen crop up around election time is that of porn in the library.  Often, these library detractors will try to use examples of porn issues in other libraries, a lack of filters on the computers, and language and content in YA materials to “prove” that the library WANTS to expose kids to porn.  Of course, we know that there is no truth to this ideology but there is typically very little you can do to disprove it.
Previously, the American Library Association's "Office for Intellectual Freedom" labeled any parent who ever complained about anything as a "censor":
So whether parents are labeled as "liars," "detractors," or "censors," librarians as being trained, as this EveryLibrary "guide" proves again, to defeat parents.

By the way, ALA opposes labeling books—but labeling parents is a useful means for bullying, ridicule, and sending the message to other parents that they should not themselves dare challenge anything whatsoever.  It's a propaganda technique called "jamming."

The last section of the above "guide" called "Ignore Them" is about SafeLibraries as just months before one of the authors besmirched my efforts to stop the sexual harassment of librarians and convinced other librarians to ignore me.  He is an "ignore them" expert:
EveryLibrary even actively censors me to hide my exposing how ALA is involved in the sexual harassment of librarians, child pornography, and homophobia.  Yes, EveryLibrary deleted proof ALA hides its homophobia.  See 1) before, 2) after censorship.

EveryLibrary is a federally registered 501(c)(4) "Social Welfare Organization."  One wonders what attacking every single parent who complains about anything such as pornography in libraries has to do with "Social Welfare":

Source: EveryLibrary at YouTube:
https://youtu.be/4p9qcPmgrZk?t=3m50s
Indeed, since EveryLibrary assists in attacking parents who seek libraries that comply with the law and/or community standards instead of with ALA diktat, such as allowing Internet porn including child pornography in public libraries despite the law, then EveryLibrary may be in violation of 501(c)(4) "because planning and sponsoring illegal acts are in themselves inconsistent with charity and social welfare...."

If you are helping to spread Internet pornography and child pornography in public libraries and school libraries by organizing attacks on those seeking to end such things, where's the charity and social welfare in that?  Why should the public subsidize that?

SafeLibraries is happy to present EveryLibrary's "guide" for librarians on how to defeat parents.  Knowing the tricks of the librarians seeking to enable libraries to violate the law, the identity of the tricksters, and the potential for influence on local librarians may help parents who seek redress of their government in accordance with the law and despite the diktat of ALA or the organized bullying of EveryLibrary.


NOTE ADDED 17 JANUARY 2020:

As EveryLibrary has grown, it still leads librarians and others on how to defeat parents.  However, it appears to have censored "Responding to Opposition: Training Guide," by Patrick Sweeney or Andrew Woodworth, EveryLibrary, 21 October 2015.  I can no longer find it on the Internet.  That is a tactic American Library Association itself uses, such as when its so-called Office for Intellectual Freedom, with which Andy Woodworth collaborated on Banned Books Week, removed a model policy telling librarians to ignore child pronography, after I and others exposed it, of course.

So EveryLibrary has something to hide.  I just happened to have made the only remaining copy about three years ago, shown above.

Anyone or any politician getting pressure from EveryLibrary AstroTurfed campaigns should know EveryLibrary acts with dirty hands:



Sunday, June 12, 2016

ALA Blames Guns, NRA for Terrorism at Orlando Gay Bar

American Library Association [ALA] leaders are blaming guns for the Islamic terrorism at the gay bar Pulse in Orlando.  ALA "Councilor" Patrick Sweeney even used the Orlando "gun violence" to fundraise [source link]:
Whenever something like this happens, I always feel like people need something to bring some balance back and take some action against this kind of horrific violence. Gun violence is a very real and terrible thing in this country. We need to take a stand and make sure that we love each other and gather together to do what is right whenever we can.  That was why we were having a fundraiser....

Another librarian specifically blames the National Rifle Association [NRA].  It's the first target of blame, as shown in this graphic [source link]:


ALA has in the past so strongly supported opposition to the Second Amendment that, when the Florida Library Association [FLA] refused to follow ALA diktat to oppose Stand Your Ground laws in Florida, ALA then began building infrastructure to force FLA to comply.  Resistance is futile:
ALA is scheduled to have an annual convention in Orlando, FL, in 2016.  As a result, ALA Council is now discussing whether to move the convention out of Florida or to use the event to oppose Florida's gun laws and guns generally.
Of course the thought never occurs that if the citizens were armed, someone might have disabled or killed the terrorist before he killed so many.

Also completely silent is the matter of ALA's support for homophobia.  We are talking about Islamic mass murder at a gay nightclub, after all.

ALA's "Office for Intellectual Freedom" [OIF] hired someone to train librarians how to thwart child pornography whistleblowers.  Her training included asking why a woman would let her small children around a gay man (both the woman and the gay man were the whistleblowers).

After the homophobic training became clear to OIF, it hired the same person to train again for ALA.  That's homophobia, in my opinion.  If ran a company and had a trainer spreading homophobia during training, I would never hire that person again and would immediately cancel all existing contracts and sever all ties no matter the costs.  Homophobia must never be tolerated nor condoned—except at ALA where it can be used to stop child porn whistleblowers.

When OIF learned of efforts to collect evidence of its homophobia, its Deputy Director (and former Acting Director) used her personal email to order public librarians who saw the homophobic training to destroy all evidence of the training (in violation of state record retention laws—and if any librarians still have this evidence, please send it to me). That's also homophobia, in my opinion.  Read the private email here:
See generally:
ALA and absolutely all of its foot soldiers have continued to maintain a wall of silence to hide OIF's promotion of homophobia.  It's been going on for years.  In the rare instance anyone is finally forced to speak on the subject, it is invariably to malign those trying to expose the homophobia, including even the gay man who committed the sin of being a public library child pornography whistleblower.

Indeed, even a federal lawsuit had been launched and lost to attempt to silence me and the authors of the book I linked immediately above.  They tried to force us to delete evidence of homophobia, including "Gay Hate @ Your Library" and "2014-07-08 = OPPL Spokesperson commits Disorderly Conduct/Breach of Peace according to Ofc. Schmidt":

"I don't like gays, ok? ASSHOLES!"
So here's the same homophobic ALA absolutely overlooking the issues of terrorism, the killing of gays within the terrorist community, and the Islamic terror in the Orlando gay nightclub to blame guns.  It's "gun violence," not religious hated of freedom and gays.

To me, when people hide evidence of homophobia and overlook evidence of homophobia—to blame guns, no less—that's just more homophobia, more silence.

I come to no other conclusion than ALA blames guns, NRA for terrorism at the Orlando gay bar.

On Monday ALA will make an announcement about this.  I predict it will officially blame guns.


NOTE ADDED 13 JUNE 2016:

ALA's President Sari Feldman has her response published.  While it does not openly blame guns, the matter of this being the second most deadly Islamic terror attack in the USA is completely absent.  Rather, it's "tragic" and must be addressed with "diversity and inclusion resources" due to "fear, ignorance and intolerance."

"We will work collaboratively with the leaders of ALA’s Task Force on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Round Table (GLBTRT); ethnic caucuses; and executive office to discuss our expressions of support."  And that means blaming guns, as ALA has done in the past.  Here's ALA's response:
If ALA were truly interested in the truth instead of using the slaughter as a means for political gain, it would recognize the issue of Islamic terror and the role libraries play in encouraging that, like when former ALA de facto leader Judith Krug told the New York Times she wished the Delray, FL, librarian had protected a 9/11 terrorist's privacy instead of reporting him to the police.

If ALA were truly interested in the truth it would recognize the terror threat and order libraries to stop deleting browser search histories in violation of state record retention laws.  Yes, privacy is important so browser histories should not be made public, but they should be stored for a time for retrieval by law enforcement sources having a properly executed subpoena.

But truth is not the goal here.  The goal is to set up "[l]ibrarians and library workers [as] community leaders, motivators and social change agents."  Social change agents?  They don't see the second largest Islamic terror attack in the USA for what it is and instead blame "intolerance" and "gun violence," and they what to change our communities?

And here's ALA's Internet filtering expert who fakes that filters do not work, censors comments saying otherwise, and destroyed a man's career, never apologizing for false "sexual predator" accusations though the rest of Team Harpy did.  This is a typical "change agent" ALA wants in our communities:


NOTE ADDED 18 JUNE 2016:

Here's an example of the hatred librarians hold for free speech and opinions differing from their own. They will force their opinions down your throat even if it means being the nastiest censors themselves:
Librarians hate free speech if it varies from
librarianship's political correctness.

NOTE ADDED 9 JANUARY 2018:

Nothing says I was spot on accurate like being publicly attacked by James LaRue, ALA's leader of the Office for Intellectual Freedom—so much for intellectual freedom:


The above is a graphic of Jamie LaRue's tweet about this publication from @jaslar that I include in case he deletes the tweet so it will not show below:


URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2016/06/ala-blames-guns-for-orlando.html

On Twitter: @ALALibrary @HillBuzz @MeganFoxWriter @NRA +National Rifle Association @OIF @PCSweeney @PulseOrlando @TweetFLAlibrary

Friday, October 5, 2012

Librarians Discuss Banned Books Week on Twitter #Libchat; ALA Councilor Attacks Me

@NatalieBinder,
#libchat moderator
This week is the American Library Association's 30th edition of its Banned Books Week hoax.  As a volunteer librarian, I partake in the weekly #libchat on Twitter, 8 - 9:30 pm EST Wednesdays, moderated by @NatalieBinder.

So I sent the following messages to the moderator about Banned Books Week as she seeks such input:

SafeLibraries
@nataliebinder for #libchat: "Why the @OIF Can’t be Taken Seriously" #BannedBooksWeek #censorship http://blog.libraryjournal.com/annoyedlibrarian/2010/10/06/why-the-oif-cant-be-taken-seriously/
10/3/12 7:55 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

SafeLibraries
@nataliebinder, why doesn't@OIF oppose banning of ex-gay books on #BannedBooksWeek http://pfox-exgays.blogspot.com/2012/10/american-library-association-must.html
10/3/12 8:09 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

This apparently precipitated the following discussion, with some people saying the ALA should be more radical and others saying less, essentially agreeing with me in principle that the ALA has gone too far in some areas and not enough in others:

nataliebinder
Q3 This week is Banned Books Week. Do libraries (or the ALA) sometimes take the definition of censorship too far? (1/2) #libchat
10/3/12 8:30 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

nataliebinder
Q3 continued: Is it appropriate to focus on challenged books during Banned Books week? (2/2) #libchat
10/3/12 8:31 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

LibraryPadawan
Q3 I do. A better name would be Intellectual Freedom Week, as that's what it's really about, reminding folks [cont.] #libchat
10/3/12 8:34 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

LibraryPadawan
Q3 cont. ...it's not illegal to think unpopular thoughts. But Banned Books Week is more soundbite-able to the general public. #libchat
10/3/12 8:35 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

cathy_library
q3 I think ALA doesn't take the censorship debate far enough- they don't disallow internet filtering. [cont] #libchat
10/3/12 8:35 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

jessf600
@LibraryPadawan Agreed. Freedom to not have others judge what is appropriate for each individual to read/learn. #libchat
10/3/12 8:35 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

cathy_library
q3 Banned Books Week is a good media/pr/awareness raising event, but it needs to go further-raise more issues around censorship #libchat
10/3/12 8:36 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

BibliosaurusRex
Q3 I like the name "Banned Books Week". It's a very jarring & attention grabbing name for an issue people often forget still exists #libchat
10/3/12 8:36 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

BibliosaurusRex
@cathy_library I agree. I think many libraries get a good conversation started that gets dropped until the next Banned Books Week #libchat
10/3/12 8:37 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

TomiHerold
@LibraryPadawan I like that. It better reflects what we're actually trying to accomplish. #libchat
10/3/12 8:37 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

GHookerMLS
Q3 #libchat At times it seems that if a book is thrown out of something that is not a library, it's not a banned book..
10/3/12 8:38 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

GHookerMLS
Q3 #libchat ...and even if the book is retained in the collection, it's still banned
10/3/12 8:38 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

BibliosaurusRex
Q3 My favorite is when people get confused and think the library is trying to ban books. Let's call it a teachable moment. #libchat
10/3/12 8:39 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

GHookerMLS
Q3 #libchat (unless a librarian decides to take it out of the collection himself cf. @awfullibbooks)
10/3/12 8:40 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

GHookerMLS
Q3 #libchat Books that get you arrested, killed, or deported, are missing from the list because Americans do have the freedom to read them
10/3/12 8:43 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

The above discussion is not necessarily news, but I thought it was interesting enough to publish here to show that not all librarians march to the ALA's tune.


ALA Councilor Patrick Sweeney Attacks Me

Patrick
Sweeney
As an aside, here's a supposed free speech advocate calling me "that one typical crazy guy," even as they speak on the issue I raised.  I know he's talking about me because he has made similar comments about me in other fora in the past, and in a similar manner.

Notice in his first #libchat comment ever, he uses the opportunity to make an ad hominem remark about me.  He's one of my few personal trolls:

pcsweeney
Checking out #libchat for the first time. I'm wondering about how many non-libs participate? Besides that one typical crazy guy.
10/3/12 8:36 PM-Wednesday, 3October2012

And what a coincidence this free speech troll blocks me on Twitter.  Oh my, he is "the Branch Manager of the East Palo Alto Library in California" identified as an "ALA Emerging Leader."

He is now an ALA Councilor!  "The Council is the governing body of ALA."  Model behavior for an ALA Councilor to behave in such a fashion, no?  Attack someone on Twitter but be sure he's blocked first so he can't respond.

To whom may I appeal if someone on the governing body of the ALA is attacking me in various settings?  He's on the ALA Ethics Committee, so the answer is nowhere.  But he does help to illustrate the ALA's commitment to free speech goes only one way.


The Banned Books Week Acolytes Block Free Speech

Notice other supposed free speech advocates who support Banned Books Week in the conversation above have also blocked me:
  • @jessf600 - Jessica - public librarian in Ventura County, CA.
  • @BibliosaurusRex - Lauren Bradley, MLIS, Judaica Systems Librarian and ALA Committee Intern, New York City, NY, ALA's Public and Cultural Programs Advisory Committee.
  • @lochwouters - Marge Loch-Wouters - Youth Services Coordinator, La Crosse Public Library, immediate past Wisconsin's Chapter Councilor on the ALA Council - she joined the conversation too late to comment on the issue, but she's another ALA Councilor who has blocked me.
And most seem to be ALA acolytes.  And they block free speech.  Free speech advocates blocking free speech.  Remarkable.  No big deal as this is just Twitter, but I thought it interesting nevertheless.

It sheds a little bit of light on why, for example, certain free speech advocates do not mind the censorship of books with which they disagree, such as those about ex-gays:

Conclusion on Banned Books Week, Free Speech, and Twitter Behavior

So the librarians who seek to move Banned Books Week away from being a hoax such as by calling it "Intellectual Freedom Week" do not block me, and the librarians who are happy to see Banned Books Week continue to be "very jarring" block my free speech on Twitter.  Very interesting.  It's no coincidence.


NOTE ADDED EVEN DATE:

Contrast the behavior of the ALA Councilor with that of teacher/writer Trudy J. Morgan-Cole.  She addresses the issues, not the people raising the issues (though she swoons over John Green and not me!!!), and she does so in a truly thoughtful manner:



She references the following tweets:

trudymorgancole
During #bannedbooksweek I loaned a student Looking for Alaska by @realjohngreen . Was that ever banned anywhere?
10/4/12 8:40 PM-Thursday, 4October2012


realjohngreen
@trudymorgancole many times.
10/4/12 8:46 PM-Thursday, 4October2012


SafeLibraries
No: http://tinyurl.com/Sowell MT @trudymorgancole: "#bannedbooksweek Was Looking for Alaska by @realjohngreen ever banned anywhere?”
10/4/12 10:58 PM-Thursday, 4October2012


I recommend following @TrudyMorganCole.


NOTE ADDED 4 NOVEMBER 2012:

ALA Councilor Sweeney commented below to attack me further, even saying, "I also have heard from a number of New Jersey librarians (where you live) that you used to put playboys and penthouses in the stacks and then try to get the libraries in trouble to drum up some press. Is that true? Yet another reason why you’re blocked."  I respond to this unprofessionalism and more also in comments below.  Please read them.