This last week in my class, I was surprised by how much politics is involved with libraries and librarians. I just wanted to note a few of my thoughts about this here.
My instructor brought to our attention a recent piece of news: privatizing libraries. In this story, we hear about LSSI--a privately-owned and run company--taking over public libraries in order to deal with the budget crisis that many libraries are facing. While this may come from good intentions, it really leaves a lot of questions unanswered. How will the libraries be run? Will the libraries still follow the value systems and credos inherent in the public library system? What about privacy--will the private company be as active in protecting its "customers" (patrons) as public libraries are now? I also find several of Mr. Pezzanite's comments to be very misleading, specifically those discussing the work ethic of librarians. "You can go to a library for 35 years and never have to do anything and then have your retirement." Despite what many people may think, librarians work hard. They have to in order to meet the needs of the patrons--and now more so than ever with the recession. Librarians assist patrons in a multitude of ways--and on many levels--while also often managing the administrative side of the library like building collections, managing budgets (which often includes grant-writing), and planning for future development. Many librarians publish in journals and/or teach on top of that. Mr. Pezzanite's practice of automatically getting rid of unionized employees just because they belong to a union isn't ethical either. Employees should be hired/fired based on ability (or lack thereof) and performance. It's not a guarantee that anyone the private company brings in has the level of training that librarians go through either. And I seriously question any company that won't discuss its profitability, especially in this case--it's too close to acting like there's something to hide.
The other hot topic in my class right now is the presence of homeless in public libraries. Some public libraries around the nation are enacting things like "odor policies" and other regulations that, in the end, exclude the homeless from public library services. Putting those policies/regulations on top of other laws that have been put into place, it's turned into a situation where we are criminalizing the poor/homeless by punishing them for something that's out of their control. We've taken their dignity by no longer treating them as human. In one of my posts to my class, I likened them to the Untouchables of the pre-modern Indian caste system. Many times, the local public library is the only sanctuary these folks have to rest, relax, and feel safe. To this end, I would like to see more social workers connected with libraries or groups of libraries (like those that are part of the same county system, for example) in order to provide services to the homeless and the poor that frequent the buildings (we learned that San Francisco Public Library is one of the few--if not the only--libraries that has a social worker on at the library for this reason). I've also decided that my first large-scale (grant) project will be to develop a directory of public libraries that offer any programs that focus on the poor and/or homeless and what those programs are. Librarians have become de facto social workers, but lack the training to effectively help these people. My instructor helped explain why this is--she said that often, this topic isn't taught in MLIS or MLS programs because it's thought to be too radical. I'm hoping the directory can provide guidance to those libraries that have no programs already in place. And maybe something even bigger will come out of it.
There are a lot more political topics in librarianship--censorship (Banned Book Week just went by recently), freedom of information, open access, and others--but I'll leave these other topics for another day.
No comments:
Post a Comment