[Libs-Or] Editorial Response to OLAQ 25(2)

[Meredith Farkas]

Thank you, Lori; you took the words right out of my mouth. :-)

I also want to add something about intellectual freedom. There are many in
our profession who feel that intellectual freedom is the most important
professional value we hold and that when it comes into conflict with other
library values around diversity, accessibility, and inclusivity,
intellectual freedom should always dominate. This was recently the case
with the Toronto Public Library
<https://krisjoseph.ca/2019/10/23/tpl-mm-part-one/> which allowed a speaker
who does not recognize that transwomen are women and was banned from
Twitter for her anti-trans rhetoric to speak on the topic of "gender
identity and its legislation ramifications on women." While for many of us,
this is an academic discussion, for transpeople, the question is
existential and the speakers' arguments support a denial of their existence
and civil rights. How can we say as librarians that we welcome everyone
into our libraries if we welcome folks who explicitly make people from
marginalized groups feel unwelcome or unsafe? When it's a choice between
harming people from historically marginalized groups and intellectual
freedom dogmatism, an increasing number of library workers are starting to
question the hegemony of intellectual freedom.

While discussions of whether diversity has gone too far similarly are
academic for white people of privilege, they are truly hurtful and harmful
to our colleagues of color and are a barometer for how inclusive our
profession really is. In a profession that is embarrassingly homogenous, we
need to think deeply about how welcome we make library workers from
historically marginalized groups feel through our professional
communication. When Max Maxias, Dr. Debbie Reese, and other library
professionals from underrepresented groups in our profession are saying
that this article is *harmful*, we white library workers would be
irresponsible to dismiss them out-of-hand or say that it doesn't matter
because intellectual freedom matters more.


Meredith Farkas, Faculty Librarian, Library SAC Chair
Pronouns: she/her
*#YESSToAFairContract* <https://pccffap.org/>
Portland Community College Library, Sylvania Campus
971-722-4966
meredith.farkas at pcc.edu
www.pcc.edu/library


On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:25 PM Lori Van Deman <LoriV at wccls.org> wrote:

> Several folks (including the editor) have already pointed out the problems
> with Heather McNeil’s piece.
>
>
>
> “Both sides” can apply when we’re discussing a concrete issue or
> difference of opinion. It does not apply when we’re talking about the
> inclusion of people who libraries and many, many others have excluded and
> injured repeatedly throughout history. “Both sides” should not be used as a
> ticket to ignore the pain caused by racism and to thereby continue it. The
> idea that Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion work has gone “too far” is not
> worth debating or publishing in our professional literature while
> librarianship is still *vastly* disproportionately white.
>
>
>
>
>
> Lori Van Deman
>
> Head of Technical Services
>
> [image: cid:image001.jpg at 01D4EEDD.B8AF8240]
>
> 12505 NW Cornell Road  Suite 13
>
> Portland, OR 97229
>
> 503.644.0043 x 127
>
> Library.CedarMill.org <https://library.cedarmill.org/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Libs-Or [mailto:libs-or-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] *On
> Behalf Of *Max Macias
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 13, 2019 10:58 AM
> *To:* Judy Anderson <JuAnderson at cu-portland.edu>
> *Cc:* libs-or <libs-or at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
> *Subject:* Re: [Libs-Or] Editorial Response to OLAQ 25(2)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If BIPOC had freedom of speech I would respond.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Max
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 10:47 AM Judy Anderson <JuAnderson at cu-portland.edu>
> wrote:
>
> I would like to thank editor, Elaine Hirsch, for including Heather
> McNeil’s piece in the OLA Quarterly.  It gives perception and positive
> suggestions for rectifying past wrongs and offers a different perspective.
> It is a valuable piece in solving the balance needed to ensure we serve all
> of our clientele.  The recent historical attempts to begin rectifying the
> past show how awareness of an issue is needed to correct past mistakes and
> prevent future blunders on all sides. Silencing that voice only harms the
> dialog for finding solutions.
>
>
>
> We information professionals consider helping our clients find varied
> opinions and viewpoints to assist their learning as a treasured
> responsibility. In our work, we have taken that duty very seriously.  When
> our public space policies are challenged because community members oppose
> the content that is being shared, we stand up for the right for all sides
> to be heard.  Why are we abandoning that principle within our own local
> organization?  Heather McNeil prefaced her well thought out article (*Yes,
> but … One Librarian’s Thoughts about Doing It Right*) with reservations
> about bringing up her areas of concern to her colleagues.  *That should
> alarm each of us*. Self-censorship is as deadly to freedom of speech as
> the external forces in censorship.  Had the piece been poorly written or
> grossly inflammatory, exclusion from the OLA Quarterly might have been
> appropriate. That was not the case
>
> Heather’s work is a positive, well written piece designed to inform by
> chronicling some of the progress that has occurred to address diversity
> concerns and provide awareness for an issue of concern that impedes
> rectifying under representation in our collections.  She goes on to suggest
> positive ways to move the cause forward, i.e., she has examined the issue
> and taken the time to find some ways to recognize and encourage
> improvement, not just condemn and dwell on past behavior.  The reaction of
> some of our members to the work is a concrete illustration of the type of
> negativity briefly addressed in Heather’s article. A negativity that stands
> in the way of progress for all sides of the spectrum.
>
>
>
> Organizations have the right to set editorial policy for their
> publications.  I hope the editors of OLA Quarterly will continue to provide
> varying opinions in their selection of articles for publication.
> Encouraging a variety of viewpoints on topics illustrates to our readers
> that we practice our belief in non-censorship among our colleagues as well
> as championing that right for clients.  It shows that we are interested in
> making the future better through honest dialog and respectful consideration
> for the ideas and concerns of all of our members.
>
>
>
> Judy Anderson
>
> Past co-Chair of the OLA Intellectual Freedom Committee
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Libs-Or <libs-or-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us> on behalf of
> OLA President <olapresident at olaweb.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 4, 2019 7:59 AM
> *To:* libs-or <libs-or at listsmart.osl.state.or.us>
> *Subject:* [Libs-Or] Editorial Response to OLAQ 25(2)
>
>
>
> Dear OLA Colleagues,
>
>
>
> I am writing in response to the conversation surrounding the Oregon
> Library Association Quarterly (OLAQ) Summer issue, 25(2).  I understand the
> concerns Max Macias, Meredith Farkas, and others have expressed about the
> final article in the issue, “Yes, but … One Librarian’s Thoughts About
> Doing It Right” and agree with the valid criticism that the OLAQ editorial
> standards need to be strengthened.
>
>
>
> As the guest editor of this issue, I take responsibility for choosing the
> theme, reviewing proposals, selecting contributors, and reading the first
> draft of the authors' submissions before passing them on to the editorial
> team.  My goal is to provide a forum for a variety of voices on the topic
> of equity, diversity and inclusion in Oregon libraries, including library
> type, career experience, and geographic location within the state. I missed
> my responsibility to more critically reflect on the article by Heather
> McNeil and engage the author in an editorial conversation, particularly in
> relation to her commentary on Dr. Debbie Reese’s 2018 May Hill Arbuthnot
> Lecture, *An Indigenous Critique of Whiteness in Children’s Literature*.
> I am sorry for the impact and distress it has caused.
>
>
>
> I want to thank Meredith Farkas for her letter to the OLAQ editorial
> board, which has provided an opportunity for critical reflection which will
> strengthen the OLAQ, one of OLA’s most important venues for professional
> discourse.  Yes, the editorial team of the OLAQ needs to better develop the
> journal’s editorial standards and are already beginning to address them.
>
>
>
> The conversations we are having surrounding equity, diversity, and
> inclusion are challenging and necessary. The Oregon Library Association has
> much to learn as an organization and understands open dialogue and
> constructive criticism help OLA grow as an association.  I look forward to
> our continuing dialogue on equity, diversity, and inclusion.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Elaine Hirsch
>
> OLAQ 25(2) Guest Editor
>
> OLA President, 2019-2020
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20191113/4d665289/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 12490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20191113/4d665289/attachment.jpg>