Wisconsin State Journal article: "Library welcomes controversy"
An article in the Wisconsin State Journal today discusses the way the Sun Prairie library has functioned as a forum of sorts for debate over the proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriages and civil unions:
Front and center as patrons enter the city's library are pictures of happy couples and families along with a sign urging voters to support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages and civil unions.
The political message by Vote Yes for Marriage at the Sun Prairie Public Library is in response to a September display advocating against the ban by Fair Wisconsin, which held a similar space in the library's entrance.
While the library offers the space as a public forum and has posted displays on controversial issues such as school referendums, these most recent messages have been the most political the library has displayed.
'(The displays have) been a very popular way for the community to share all kinds of information about itself,' said Sharon Zindar, the library's director. 'This is the first time we've had such a political message in our (display) case. It could turn out that's all the case becomes.'
Complaints about both displays have prompted the library board to consider changing its policy - not to end the practice but possibly to remove the signs further in advance of an election, since the library is also a polling place.
As it is, the pro-amendment group's sign is due to stay up until just a week before the Nov. 7 election.
The atticle continues for those who would like to read the rest of it. What do LIS 450 students think about this debate in light of what we have been reading and discussing in class? For those of you who currently work in area libraries, what has been the policy on displaying political speech or encouraging political debate at your sites?
posted by Greg Downey @ 4:56 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
I think it's a good thing to encourage people to be active in politics. I'm not sure, however, if it's a good thing to provide a forum for activism that lends itself to giving the impression that the library has vetted or approved the items posted. Perhaps the board should be for more "neutral" items (I know, nothing is without a bit of politics or bias), and for those who would like to comment on more "charged" issues, the library could perhaps offer space or time for a lecture or debate. That assumes, of course, that they have the staff and room. Perhaps providing an online Wiki or blog, like this one, could be a good way to do this without having to have a physical room. Librarians might have to monitor for salty language, but this would be a way for people to stomp for their causes without the cause being linked as strongly to the library as a poster on a bulletin board is.
If the library is to be a successful information "ecology", it has to be careful not to alienate parts of the community. At the same time, I think displays about relevant topics are a vital part of keeping the library current and active (and keeping members involved), so some sort of balance needs to be reached. It seems to me that it would be ideal for the library to focus on one issue at a time and invite all sides to participate in a display simultaneously. So October could be the topic of "marriage", for example. Logistically more complex, but perhaps also a way for the library to continue to be active in the community without appearing like it's taking sides.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
"The display spaces are reserved on a first-come, first-served basis, and the displays are put up on the first of the month and taken down on the last day of the month." Perhaps the library board should include a clause regarding election time. A week before election time is really close; but then again, them's the rules and they are being followed. I'm kinda surprised this is the first report of such uses for display cases in public forums.
I agree with Julia and Frances, libraries are public and should reflect the debates that are relevant to their patrons. However, I think the simultaneous display is a better idea. That way, the library prevents someone from seeing only the currently posted view and mistaking it for the library's opinion.
I also think the blog idea is a good one. It leaves more room for the kind of in depth discussions that politics engenders. A cautionary note on those, however. Blogs are really new (for some people), so expect to see a very computer savvy crowd and not a big slice of the average population.
I think it's wonderful for a library to encourage not just fact-and-fiction finding, but discussion and even debate. Simultaneous display would have been wiser, to remove the impression of an endorsement.
I agree with Ginny that you can't always cover both sides. For many topics, just deciding which views to represent would require picking sides. This particular issue seems a good one, though, since it's discussing a yes/no vote. Of course, there could be judgment calls in deciding who gets to represent each side...
Post a Comment
<< Home