Analyzing Challenges to Library Materials: An Incomplete Picture

Abstract

This research project used Freedom of Information requests to obtain public records from Alabama institutions about challenges to materials in public schools and public libraries. Challenges occur when a patron objects to certain content. In this analysis, we examine the records of challenges. The research questions were as follows: How many challenges occur in public schools and libraries? What is the nature of these challenges? Are there institutional or demographic factors that are correlated to the occurrence of challenges? In this exploratory study, the number of reported challenges was surprisingly low. We investigated whether reported challenges were related to certain institutional or demographic factors, but did not find any discernible relationships. The data suggest that most challenged material is retained, but that librarians may be self-censoring to reduce controversy in their collections.

Demography of Censorship: Examining Correlations Between Community Demographics and Materials Challenges in Canadian Libraries

“…These worldviews include beliefs that challenged materials contribute to the moral decay of society, that the library's collections inaccurately represent the community, and that the inclusion of challenged materials contradicts common sense. Additional research has attempted to determine if any demographic or institutional factors contribute to challenges but (perhaps due to a limited geographic focus) no conclusions could be drawn (Oltmann et al, 2017). Saltman's (2016) research on challenges to children's books in Canada differentiated between challenges stemming from a liberal or conservative worldview.…”

Information Injustice and Intellectual Freedom: Polarizing Concepts for a Polarizing Time

“…Access to information—facilitating access through organization, management, storage, retrieval, and dissemination—is the foundation of library and information science (Oltmann, Knox, & Peterson, 2021; Jaeger, 2007). The rhetoric of library and information science (LIS) has focused on unfettered information access (also known as intellectual freedom) and resistance to censorship for several decades.…”

“…In her seminal work on information poverty, Chatman (1996) described four aspects of information poverty: lack of sources, association with social class, use of self‐protective behaviors (secrecy and deception), and benefits outweighed by negative consequences. Gibson and Martin (2019) argue that these information poverty behaviors are “red flags” signaling the presence of systemic inequalities and structural marginalization (p. 485; see also Oltmann, Knox, & Peterson, 2021). Furthermore, these authors suggest that we use a critical approach to uncover “the development of systemic, contextual barriers to information access” (p. 477).…”