You may have read recent articles that indicate that state attorneys general are censoring the CDs that libraries got in a recent settlement agreement with the RIAA.
Well, that's not entirely accurate. The settlement agreement was between the music industry and the State Attorneys General for 43 states and territories to end a lawsuit regarding pricefixing and antitrust violations. State Attorneys General -- not librarians -- had legal authority over both the decision to settle the lawsuit and the materials selected.
Part of the settlement agreement stated that libraries would be receiving CDs from a select list of materials:
"Here, each individual State, Commonwealth or Territory will receive a pro rata share (according to population) of the 5.6 millions CDs (1,960 negotiated titles), and will distribute the CDs in accordance with its own particular plan for public use (these have all been filed with the court and provide, for the most part, distribution to libraries and schools)."
It was up to each State Attorney General's office to handle the distribution. For example, in Iowa:
"for the estimated 57,436 CDs that it will receive calls for the allocation of the CDs to Iowa public and academic libraries, Iowa college and university nonprofit radio stations, nine residential institutions or facilities operated by the Iowa Department of Human Services, and the Iowa Braille and Sight Saving School."
In Washington "titles were selected by music experts and educators for their lasting significance, and aren't just warehouse rejects or overstock."
The Attorneys General of Indiana and Kansas decided to not select CDs that they thought contained objectionable material. The CDs removed from the list in Kansas include those by OutKast, Rage Against the Machine, Alice in Chains, Lou Reed, and Devo.
Kansas' Attorney General, Phill Kline, stated that the CDs were removed from the list because they contained harmful content -- supporting violence and illegal activities.
"It was a decision by the attorneys general that we would not do anything that promotes violence against women, drug violence and violence against law enforcement. I see the results of that every day."
Kline spokesman Whitney Watson said the office's consumer-protection and antitrust division vetted the list. In some cases, they were familiar enough with the albums to determine if they had questionable content. In others, they looked at Internet databases of lyrics.
"It was very unscientific, but our intention was we were not promoting gun violence or violence against women or drug use," Watson said. "Obviously we may not have caught all of the titles. We don't have the manpower to look at every album and every song lyric. But we feel we removed most of the albums that did not mesh with the values of a majority of Kansans."
Roseanne Siemens, the executive director of the Kansas Library Association says the situation is different from the reports in news articles. One article reported that she said, "They did libraries a big favor by selecting these CDs because there's no way libraries could have said what they wanted."
Yet if you read her words directly, posted on the Librarian's Rant blog, Siemens says:
The settlement stipulated that record labels prepare lists of a "diversity of music" from which states' attorneys general selected CDs. The reporter did not state that all AGO's (not just Phil Kline) selected from a HUGE list and they selected based on what they thought libraries would want and use. Yes, it would have been wonderful if libraries had been invited to help decide, but they were not, that is not what the court ruled. It also would have been nice if the reporter, who called twice "bating" me to call it censorship, would have accurately reported what I said in the second phone call after I researched the facts and came to agreement with KLA leadership what I should convey...A cash settlement would have been much preferred so that each library could have determined what to purchase at the local level, and what was best for its community. No one is saying libraries in Kansas can not offer these titles.
According to the spokesperson for South Carolina's governor, South Carolina, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada and Virginia are conducting "appropriateness" reviews. Very few states have consulted libraries or librarians either at the settlement agreement stage -- to create the original list of CDs or at the selection of specific CDs stage.
The lack of librarian input has also led to the CDs shipped to libraries to not suit patron needs -- often through massive numbers of duplicates. It is highly unfortunate that librarians have been excluded from the decision-making process concerning the appropriateness of these CDs for their collections. Participating in collection development decisions is one of the most important roles of librarians. If librarians had been included, they would have been able to select CDs which would increase their collections in a way that would better serve the needs of their patrons.
Comments