INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM—FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
“Intellectual Freedom is the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. It provides for free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause, or movement may be explored.” -Intellectual Freedom and Censorship Q & A
As put by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, “All human beings have the fundamental right to have access to all expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity, and to express their thoughts in public.”
Very basically, Intellectual Freedom is the opposite of censorship, but it goes much deeper than that. It encompasses laws and rights that we in America sometimes take for granted. We are assured through the First Amendment that we can say and print what we want with only a few limitations. [Included in the list of unprotected materials are obscenity, fighting words, defamation, child pornography, perjury, blackmail, incitement to imminent lawless behaviors, true threats, solicitations to commit crimes, plagiarism, and arguably, verbal treason). See First Amendment Center.] The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, in pertinent part, that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . .” This is the ultimate foundation for Intellectual Freedom as viewed by library professionals in the United States, and is applicable to federal governments as well as state governments via the Fourteenth Amendment (American Library Association. Office for Intellectual Freedom., 2002).
Globally, different nations and cultures have different viewpoints on the subject of Intellectual Freedom. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” This evidences the global opinion for the right to free expression of thoughts and ideas. Many nations have similar provisions as the First Amendment to protect the freedom of expression. For example, the Article 35 of the Chinese Constitution provides Chinese citizens the right to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. (See Congressional Executive Commission on China). Yet, government censorship in China has extremely limited that basic freedom, including blocks on certain Websites and television/radio broadcasts, such as those from the British Broadcasting Corporation, Radio Free Asia, and the Voice of America. Knowing that oppression of thought continues to exist in certain countries, what value do you place on your own ability to freely express yourself?
9 comments:
The first amendment does guarantee the right to free speech. Every person is entitled to their own ideas and opinions, even though some may disagree with them. In the realm of free speech in the library one question that comes to mind is the issue with internet use by patrons especially, those under 18 years of age. The Children’s Internet Protection Act was not considered to be a violation of the library Bill of Rights. However, if libraries filter internet use does that violate the right of speech?
Knowing that censorship is so restricting in other countries outside of the United States does make me appreciate my personal freedom of knowledge and expression. However, as Nate noted, a library's ability to filter internet use threatens a patron's freedom of speech, as well as his/her freedom of knowledge and expression. As librarian and author Joyce Saricks of Booklist says, "Libraries have become many things to our patrons, but one of our mainstays is the civility with which patrons are treated." Based on our readings from Greer, Grover and Fowler, who stress the focus for information professionals on "the users and human element of the information infrastructure" (98), I wonder how, with any restrictions whatsoever, librarians could justify obstructing a patron's method of researching whatever body of information they choose?
Freedom of expression is priceless. I must say I am glad you mentioned how people can take such a freedom for granted. China is a fantastic example of how great we have it in terms of vocal freedom this can be seen in a fantastic book called Almost A Revolution: The Story of a Chinese Student's Journey from Boyhood to Leadership in Tiananmen Square. The book also shows the true value in the power of the written word (this is seen in the impact the book has had on society) and the need to protect this right.
I put an enormous amount of value on intellectual freedom as well. It seems that a good, well-funtioning society must be based on this principle. It is based on the idea that if all ideas are presented to a society that engages in continual dialogue, then there will be no need for censorship because the very process of dialogue will weed out absurd ideas (e.g. violence). Censorship, to me, seems to create a suppressed society that will simply want that which is censored, don't you think?
Freely expressing oneself is the only way to be free at all. Censorship is generally based on fear; the fear that if an idea is known, it will cause an action to occur. Governments that still censor their citizens (and most of them in the world do) do so out of fear that if a different way of life is learned of, that government will no longer have power. As long as we continue to freely express ourselves in this country, and allow all other citizens to do the same, we won't be at the mercy of our government.
I am glad that Nate has mentioned the use of the Internet filters here. It was another topic we wanted to touch on but thought we were getting a bit lengthy.
So the ALA stance on the use of internet filters in the library can be found at this website:
http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=IF_Resolutions&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=13076
Similar to the ALA's stance on intellectual freedom, basically, becuse the material is constitutionally protected, noting that the US Supreme Court has affirmed that internet communications are entitled to protection under the First Amendment, then use of filtering software by libraries to block access to constitutionally protected speech violates the Library Bill of Rights.
My thinking is this . . . . If it is constitutionally protected material, then it should not be censored. This includes internet filters. Next problem though, what do you do to block Internet materials that are not constitutionally protected?
I think this is a freedom that we may even take for granted.... which can happen when you have never been without that freedom. Librarianship is a profession that is much more highly tuned to freedom of speech and intellectual freedom- so I do feel as someone who has selected this field, that I strongly value my freedoms and now, in the field of librarianship, I will have the opportunity to be a ensure these freedoms have a remain in the minds and hearts of Americans.
I have to agree with Laurie, that our freedom of speech is something too many of us take for granted because we haven’t had to live without it. I think it is important for us as future librarians to preserve this freedom for future generations. One way we can do this is by not letting scared patrons or groups strong arm us in to removing material from our shelves that they feel is taboo or unacceptable.
I am grateful to live in a country where the first amendment guarantees me free speech. As I stated on the discussion board, how could restricting others’ ideas and views possibly benefit a society of free thinking individuals? I place paramount importance on free speech. We must not lose site of the hypocritical nature of the countries that have provisions for, yet limit free expression. These nations serve as reminders of how fortunate we are, and that we (as librarians and citizens) must always stand up against censorship, regardless if it comes from a local public interest group, or government.
I found this interesting announcement on freedominfo.org (http://www.freedominfo.org/news/20080805.htm)
AUGUST 2008
President Carter Disseminates Atlanta Declaration to Advance Right to Information Worldwide
“Last month, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter forwarded the Atlanta Declaration and Plan of Action for the Advancement of the Right to Information to all heads of state and leaders of the major international organizations and financial institutions. President Carter urged these leaders to ensure the right of access to information and its implementation and enforcement...
The Atlanta Declaration and Plan of Action, serving as a framework for advancing this human right, finds that access to information is fundamental to dignity, equity and peace with justice, and that a lack of access to information disproportionately affects the poor, women and other vulnerable and marginalized societies. The Declaration calls on all states and intergovernmental organizations to enact legislation and instruments for the exercise, full implementation and effective enforcement of this right. It further encourages all stakeholders to take concrete steps to establish, develop, protect and promote the right of access to information."
Post a Comment