Several days ago ACRLog posted a story about charges of harassment filed against a reference librarian named Scott Savage over controversial books he suggested for the institution’s common book reading experience for freshman. On Friday, April 21 The Columbus Dispatch reported that OSU investigator T. Glenn Hill found that the charges of harassment had no merit. Savage was quoted saying “I was making a point. I want us to be aware of our biases.” Now exonerated, Savage is filing a complaint against his accusers.
The several other reports I read on this incident seemed to be in favor of Savage. Although many considered his choice of books reprehensible, they thought the filing of harassment charges against him were even worse. Perhaps his motives and methods were questionable, but others defended Savage’s right to express his opinion and choices – and that in higher education we should be free do to so without fear of becoming a target.
All Scott Savage did was request that books written from a conservative perspective also be added to the library collection. His request is about balance. One of the books he recommended “The Marketing of Evil” is labelled as being “anti-gay”. In fact, this book discusses many issues and how radical changes in society have been packaged and marketed to the American people to make them acceptable. This is not a hate book; it expresses a perspective that is legitimate and which deserves its place on library shelves along with the many other books already on our shelves which champion these changes. Those who sought to harass Savage and reject his book recommendation are themselves guilty of censorship. They cannot tolerate any books being added to libraries which question homosexual marriage, the sexual revolution and other revolutionary changes in our society being promoted by many militant groups.
This is just one more example of the far left polarization of most state university campuses. Anything that remotely disagrees with the utopian PC vision is relentlessly attacked.
Some posters at Inside Higher Education are upset that he consulted with a conservative org. for legal defense for legal defense. WTF was he supposed to do, the university was about to terminate his career with a big black mark – sexual harrassment.
If you can’t discuss “offensive” books at a university, where can you?
I’m considering addressing this incident at the next “Banned Books Week”. Though, of course, I would like more information on the story.
It’s funny how what were many cooments here — there are now only three.