As I sit here in the deep dread and horror of the U.S. results we woke up to, literally fighting the urge to throw up, I am thinking about the National Archives. Why? U.S. Archivist, Colleen Shogan, appointed by President Biden, is a textbook example of obeying in advance. She has “sought to de-emphasize negative parts of U.S. history” (Wall Street Journal article by Ballhaus and Restuccia). References to America’s history of displacing indigenous people and the incarceration of Japanese Americans are just two examples of what has been removed from National Archive exhibits.
We as a profession, especially those of us who are white, need to resist that urge with every fiber of our being, particularly with the pressure that will be applied to all libraries. If you’re white and straight passing, it would be easy to just take the books off the shelf, to leave out histories in exhibits, to fall in line, to no longer buy books with any inkling of a “woke” agenda. Do not give up something that hasn’t been taken from you.
Academic libraries are not immune to the extremist hate that we are seeing in public and school library settings, though I do feel that some of my fellow academic librarians think that way. Books of any sort can be justified as “intellectual freedom,” right? In states like Texas and Florida, where the New College of Florida Gender and Diversity Center was shuttered and its collection of books, plus more from their Main Library, were thrown away, we see that is decidedly not the case. Academic libraries need to update their collection development policies and create ones that address challenges, because they’re going to come. With this coming administration, it is better to be prepared. Do not obey in advance, and do not leave things up to chance.
Another item I keep thinking about is the literacy rates of America’s citizens. Not information literacy – though, as an instruction librarian, that will become crucial and is perhaps a post to be made in the coming months – no, I’m talking about reading levels. Half of all adult Americans are reading below a 6th-grade level. And what’s the first sentence of Project 2025’s section on the Department of Education? “… ultimately, the Department of Education should be eliminated.” So how are we to know our history, America’s real, gruesome, traumatic history, if it is written in books not only beyond someone’s literacy level but also a book that’s been removed from the library all together? We must know what happened in order to create a better future.
Back in August, Amanda Jones wrote an essay for Time on the fact that this election will determine the fate of libraries – and unfortunately, we will be seeing that come to fruition in the coming years. I’m not writing this post to be all doom; I simply believe that time to grieve and feel the emotions that come is key to moving towards next steps. To be frank, this felt like something I could do rather than sit in my office, feeling the dread pile higher and higher in my stomach. I want to caution us as librarians to not seat ourselves as some last bastion of democracy – please be mindful of vocational awe. That’s also not just librarians; that is everyone doing the work and who will continue to fight.
Thank you for this crucial post!
Freedom of speech and removing censorship has long been a main tenant of the Right; while the Left often believes in political correctness and preservation of feelings over truth. Universities (often run by left-leaning leaders) are the ones responsible for removal of “offensive” educational materials. The election, if anything, will actually have the exact opposite consequences that you call out in this short article.
The connection between removal of the Department of Education and literacy rates is nonsensical. Quality of education is determined by schools at the local and state level, as the DOE has little actual control or influence. This is why we see massive inequality of education between schools that are close together geographically. Around 11 percent (on average) of a school’s funding comes from the federal DOE, with around 45 percent coming locally and around 45 percent coming from the state. Any funding that the DOE does provide is typically for programs largely unrelated to improving literacy rates, and are more often allocated towards things like security and building upgrades, special ed programs, etc. The DOEs main purpose is to provide guidance, but executing its guidance is overseen on the local level.
The opinions expressed in this article are confusing and alarming. Please include non-biased, well researched, and subjective opinions when writing in a forum such as this.
Hi, Anna. Thank you for taking the time to reply to this blog post. I cannot help but note that you do not cite any sources here, where at least in my blog post – which is clearly notated as such, I do not pretend to be publishing something like a peer reviewed journal article – I have linked sources.
As far as free speech and removing censorship are concerned, let’s take a look at book challenges and bans. It is overwhelmingly groups such as Moms for Liberty that are spearheading the banning of books in libraries across the country; last year alone, there were 1,247 challenges to books and other resources, the majority of which are centered on BIPOC and LGBTQIA+ experiences. In contrast to a group like the ACLU that has been fighting censorship for a long time (here’s an ACLU article from 2013 about Banned Books Week). That number and information about the sources comes directly from the American Library Association’s Banned Books Week website.
The “Stop W.O.K.E. Act” from Florida is another example beyond book banning efforts. It was ultimately stopped because it was unconstitutional, as it targeted ideas. Professors could have faced disciplinary action, including termination, for teaching certain ideas like critical race theory. That sounds like censorship and limiting free speech to me.
As far as your point about University leaders censoring “offensive” materials, that is also not the case. It is important for us to learn from the history that has come before us, and some of those books are deemed offensive by today’s standards. At least in my university library, where the collection has grown for almost 100 years at this point, there are books with words in the titles we no longer use in everyday conversation. We teach them in conjunction with the authors of today.
I have to disagree with you about my connection of literacy rates with the Department of Education. That connection seems clear as day to me, actually. The Department does so much more than funding – which you do note one part, guidance – they also provide things like assessment, which is how we discover what students are struggling with and what we need to address. This is of course done at the state and local levels as well for things like reading and math. Their well-rounded education grant program directly funds efforts in literacy, as well as things like art education. You can read through the awarded applications, if you’d like, to see what that grant money has done. Related to the pandemic and the devastating effects that it had on education in this country, the Department of Education also has an Education Stabilization Fund to help the country’s schools recover. You can look at those grantees too. I could go on, but isn’t it so much more rewarding to keep researching yourself?
Have the best day possible.