From Mary Hastler, Director, Harford County Public Library:
June 4, 2012
Dear Ms. Baker,
Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts regarding the book, Fifty Shades of Grey. Harford County Public Library does not condone censorship or self-censorship of any definition. Harford County Public Library serves all of the Harford County community, and as a result its collections are diverse and reflect multiple viewpoints. The Library supports the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, Intellectual Freedom and access to these materials and strives to build, through the selection process, a strong and vibrant collection. We are strong advocates against censorship—a critical and essential role of a public library in any community.
The Library does not purchase every book that is published and follows a Library Board of Trustees approved Materials Selection Policy. This policy details criteria used in making purchasing decisions. Professional reviews are used to support purchasing decisions and also when not to purchase materials. The decision to not purchase the book was made after careful review and research following the materials selection process. The professional reviews characterized the content of Fifty Shades of Grey as pornography. The Harford County Public Library does not purchase pornography and therefore did not purchase the book in print.
Harford County Public Library participates in the statewide library eBook consortium and the book is available through eBook format to our customers Maryland public library systems rotate selecting titles to add to the eBook collection based on their own Board approved selection policy. In addition, it is available in print through the statewide reciprocal borrowing program and customers may place a request through the Harford County Public Library website using their library card. However, not all public libraries in Maryland own the book in print and the book will not be sent until it has been on the shelf at the loaning library for six months.
The purpose of following a Board approved Materials Selection Policy and process is to prevent any type of censorship and to build a collection, that as you state, “serves its mission of providing a broad diversity of points of view and subject matter.” The decision to not purchase the book is a result of selection—not censorship. The book, based on multiple and consistent reviews, did not meet the selection policy criteria. Censorship would be denying the purchase IF the book met the selection policy and criteria. I encourage you to visit any of the branches of the Harford County Public Library and explore the diverse collection.
Thank you again for sharing your concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary Hastler, Director
Harford County Public Library
So we (citizens)can buy several copies of the book, donate them to all the branches in Harford? Who knows maybe the author would even like to donate them herself. I won’t read the book, no intentions but don’t like censorship!!!
You could donate them, but that would not force the library to accept them into their collection. I bet a stack or two would be great fund raisers though.
So HCPL should have copies of Hustler, Playboy and the like and make them available in the name of free speech and non-censorship?
How about we stock some man-boy love magazines? Where do you stop?
We always will need boundaries in society if you don’t put them in place society fails and falls – look further back in ancient history.
Bel Air Fed – Be realistic. The titles you mention are mainly known for their pictures and in no way compare to a novel.
So pictures of nude people are dirty, but written visualizations of bondage are okay?
If I published typed up instructions of how to make a bomb out of household cleaning supplies, would that be okay for the HCPL to circulate, so long as I didn’t include step by step pictures of the process?
So you are saying there might be fifty shades of gray in this censorship issue?
“The decision to not purchase the book is a result of selection—not censorship.”
Censorship by any other name smells as sour.
Dear Ms. Hastler,
Thank you for taking the time to reply to Ms. Baker’s concerns. I sincerely hope that you don’t have to waste another minute of your time defending this ‘arguement’. It is blaringly obvious to those of us that actually patronize and support HCPL, that there will never be enough money to purchase every book that gets published. A line needs to be drawn somewhere and I am glad it is drawn here rather than before a book with actual intellectual/social/educational value.
Whiners will always find something to whine about; some way to stir up the masses over some presumed violation of their ‘rights’.
I am very happy with the volume of material available at my local branch, as are my children. If the library doesn’t have what we’re looking for on occasion, we simply look elsewhere or wait. It’s that easy!
Keep up the good work!
What have other public libraries done about this book?
MOKENA,. IL What have other public libraries said about this book (Fifty Shades of Grey): “It’s been very popular,” said Michaelene Cervantes, Mokena Public Library’s director of collection development. “It’s gotten a lot of people to come and use our library. For us so far it’s been a positive.”
BREVARD COUNTY – FL. A controversial book is back on the library shelves in Brevard County. Earlier this month, we first told you about the library’s decision to pull copies of the erotic novel, “Fifty Shades of Grey.” Library directors said the book was too obscene, but the American Civil Liberties Union cried censorship and asked county commissioners to reconsider.
NEWBURYPORT MA. Since its release, the novel “Fifty Shades of Grey” has not only dominated best-seller lists, it has also become perhaps the most talked-about novel in recent years — and the hottest item on local library shelves. “People are free to check out whatever they want,” Marks said. DiTullio said the decision to purchase copies of the book came after she noticed the consortium waiting list for the book had reached 200 people.”Anything that gets people into the library is a good thing because hopefully they’ll see everything we have to offer,” DiTullio said.
CARBONDALE IL. The criteria for the selection of controversial materials are the same as for any other materials. Controversial materials have no distinguishing labels and are shelved in the general collection. Responsibility for the reading choices of children rests with their parents or legal guardians. Selection for the adult collection will not be inhibited by the possibility that materials may inadvertently fall into the hands of children. An open shelf policy will be followed at all times.
This is from Canada but it applies to us as well. “All persons in Canada have the fundamental right, as embodied in the nation’s Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to have access to all expressions of knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity, and to express their thoughts publicly. This right to intellectual freedom, under the law, is essential to the health and development of Canadian society. Libraries have a basic responsibility for the development and maintenance of intellectual freedom. It is the responsibility of libraries to guarantee and facilitate access to all expressions of knowledge and intellectual activity, including those which some elements of society may consider to be unconventional, unpopular or unacceptable. To this end, libraries shall acquire and make available the widest variety of materials.
Intellectual freedom is not always an easy principle to uphold, but libraries have a basic responsibility for the development and maintenance of this principle. For this reason, librarians have the responsibility to acquire and make available a wide range of books and materials, including those which express controversial or unpopular ideas. This responsibility means that librarians recognize the right of individuals and groups to criticize their selection. However, freedom of choice within the library cannot be limited by the personal views or any group or individual.”
Proud,
Scott Walker sends his regards.
Who cares what other library systems have done. Trash is trash. The library has an oversight mechanism that sets policy and the library followed it’s own policy. If you don’t like it then get involved and try to change the policy.
ALEX R: So you are against intellectual freedom for Harford County: Verrry Interesting.
Proud,
I’m against putting a book on the shelves that is trash and then allowing any young kid with a library card to come and check it out. Thre is all kinds of trash. Where do you draw the line, Proud? Are you okay with any publiction being on the shelves? Bel Air Fed wants copies of Playboy and Hustler on the shelves. Is that okay with you? Or do you just want to substitute your standards for the standards that the library already has? Where is your limit? Do you have one?
Scott Walker sends his regards. I guess MOM didn’t do Walker’s opponent any good. The people spoke and your views were rejected. More to come.
Maybe it’s about time books had a rating system? Movies do. So does music. So do video games. Everything else at the library has ratings.
Even comic books have ratings.
Sadly, maybe it’s time for books to get in line and have a standardized rating system.
ALEX R: Have you ever heard of the First Amendment? Have you ever heard of parents monitoring their children’s actions? Obviously you think YOUR standards are the correct standards. This is a PUBLIC library and, as such, it must provide ALL materials that are relevant and popular to the public. Freedoms are what keep us free. But I guess you are fine with censorship as long as you agree with it.
Hey Proud,
Although I am not Alex, I would love to respond.
“This is a PUBLIC library and, as such, it must provide ALL materials that are relevant and popular to the public.” – I would really love to see the case law that supports this assertion. Actually, there is no case law to support that. Also, it would be nearly impossible both logistically and financially for a library to to provide ALL materials. Now, the 1st does provide that a person has the right to view such materials, provided of course the material does not violate well-established law, but a library does not have to provide all material.
“Freedoms are what keep us free. But I guess you are fine with censorship as long as you agree with it.” – There is a fine line between censorship and making things available in a public format. There can be well-defined reasons for a book to not be available at a public library (i.e. Playboy). If this book rises to those reasons there is no legal reason why the library must have the book available.
Anyways, have a nice day.
PAUL: “I would really love to see the case law that supports this assertion.” What libraries follow is “The Library Bill of Rights”, as adopted by the American Library Association in 1939, revised in 1948, and amended in 1961, 1967, and 1980, reads:
“ I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.
II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.
III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.
IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.
V. A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.
VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use.
Since this book is controversial and popular it rises to these criteria. I am in favor of the availability of this book as a guarantee against government interference of my freedoms to read. I thought you people were against governments infringing freedoms? Try to be a little consistent guys.
Hey Proud,
You do realize the Library Bill of Rights is not law, right? It is not an enforceable document, has no standing with the courts and is, generally, a document that legally means nothing. I, or you, or anyone else, could write a document, call it the Paul MC Bill of Rights and cite that to what I post on the Dagger, but, unfortunately, it is not law.
Now, again, please show me any case law (or statute) that supports your assertion. I would love to see it.
Anyways, have a nice day.
PAUL: Are you really so obtuse that you cannot distinguish between the two? Why not explain how, on one hand, people are always whining about government interference of their freedoms yet are perfectly submissive to these infringements if it agrees with their beliefs? Freedom of expression must include those things with which we disagree as well as those that we do agree. However, the Constitution does have the force of law and that guarantees my right to read this, and any, book. This is the only way citizens will be able to access all information as, you see, if you can censor this book, then you can censor any book. “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson
Does that clarify my position for you?
Hey Proud,
“PAUL: Are you really so obtuse that you cannot distinguish between the two?” – I understand the difference, you seem to be the one that doesn’t. However, this isn’t about my understanding of the difference between the two. It is simply about you posting a statement that was untrue. You stated, “This is a PUBLIC library and, as such, it must provide ALL materials that are relevant and popular to the public.” That is not true at all. A library may provide such material, but there is no legal basis to compel it to do so.
“Why not explain how, on one hand, people are always whining about government interference of their freedoms yet are perfectly submissive to these infringements if it agrees with their beliefs?” – Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
“Freedom of expression must include those things with which we disagree as well as those that we do agree.” – No, it must not. It only must include those things which it is legally required to include.
“However, the Constitution does have the force of law and that guarantees my right to read this, and any, book.” – No 100% accurate, but close. There is selected material which it is against the law to read. However, that is neither here nor there. Reading/owning is not the same as having the book at the public library.
“This is the only way citizens will be able to access all information as, you see, if you can censor this book, then you can censor any book. “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson” – Restrictions are placed on freedoms all the time. You have the right to freedom of speech…with time, place, and manner restrictions. You have the right to assembly…again, with time, place, and manner restrictions. You have the right to travel…the government does not have to provide the means for you to do so. You have to keep and bear arms…not allowed everywhere.
“Does that clarify my position for you?” – So, there is no law to support your assertion?
Thanks.
Anyways, have a nice day.
PAUL: “Proud, you stated the Library must do something. In the context in which you posted, you made it appear to be a legal requirement.”
No Paul you made it a legal requirement then argued against it. You put words in my mouth and then attacked me using your own interpretation of those words.
You have, in effect, attacked a straw man; that is, to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.
I am aware of your tricks.
Hey Proud,
“No Paul you made it a legal requirement then argued against it.” – you are the one that first brought up the 1st Amendment, which is part of the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.
“You put words in my mouth and then attacked me using your own interpretation of those words.” – I put nothing in your mouth. I quoted what you said. If you did not mean what you said, why did you say it?
“You have, in effect, attacked a straw man; that is, to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.” – No. You specifically stated “Have you ever heard of the First Amendment?” and “This is a PUBLIC library and, as such, it must provide ALL materials that are relevant and popular to the public.” Again, the 1st Amendment is part of the constitution, a legal document. You brought that up, not me. I simply corrected you.
“I am aware of your tricks.” – Damn that tricky English language and meaning what I say and expecting what others say is actually what they mean. How dare I use such tricks.
By the way, Proud. I was content on letting you have the last word in your 12:03 posting, when you said, “Whatever Paul.” I wasn’t going to respond any further. However, as you seem to not only desire the last word, but more last words as well; including insinuating I use trickery, I believe I should reply to disprove you yet again.
Anyways, Proud. Have a nice day.
Poor Paul,
Grasping at straws,
Drowning in the sea of his own verbosity.
Sans reason, sans logic,
Fueled only by his anger and contempt.
He is at war
With anything not Paul.
His arguments are sophistic
And fail to impress.
So sorry Paul,
Go back to your lair
To stalk the Internet
Looking for someone to attack
With an irrelevant conclusion and
Always having the last word.
Hey Proud,
A poem just for me? I am flattered. However, your flattery will not get you into my pants. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Anyways, have a nice day.
PAUL: Is your obtuseness just a cover to argue with me? You really cannot see the difference between what the Harford County Public Library is required to do morally as opposed to legally? Fine, wallow in your determination to have the last word.
Hey Proud,
“PAUL: Is your obtuseness just a cover to argue with me?” – I am not having a difficulty in understanding anything. You wrote one thing. It was wrong. You are now attempting to change your argument. That is not me being obtuse, that is you utilizing a red herring fallacy.
“You really cannot see the difference between what the Harford County Public Library is required to do morally as opposed to legally?” – So now it is morally wrong. That isn’t what you stated before. However, if you now wish to change your argument from what is required to what is morally correct, then I must ask, Why is it we must abide by your morals? Are you the moral compass that guides the county? Again, Proud, you stated the Library must do something. In the context in which you posted, you made it appear to be a legal requirement. I responded with a legal argument. You now appear to be changing this to a morality argument. I can understand your need to do this, as you were legally incorrect. However, lets be real. Your initial argument was about the 1st Amendment and the requirements of the library, which is a legal argument. Change it now to suit your needs if you must. But, I respond to your statement in a manner that was appropriate and the response was on the subject of the statement you made.
“Fine, wallow in your determination to have the last word.” – So, you wish to post here, a blatant untruth, and you do not want anyone to respond? I don’t need the last word, Proud. I do take the last word at times. Furthermore, Proud, using the terms obtuse and wallow. Really, are not befitting a debate.
Anyways, have a nice day.
Whatever Paul.
PAUL: I can see that tricky English language is your bane. If you quote me, have the honesty to use the whole pertinent quote and not cherry pick the part that you attack. You stated “Proud, you stated the Library must do something. In the context in which you posted, you made it appear to be a legal requirement.” I repeat: “No Paul you made it a legal requirement then argued against it. You put words in my mouth and then attacked me using your own interpretation of those words.” You are the one who said”… you made it appear to be a legal requirement.” How did I make it appear to be a legal requirement except in your own mind? Where do you see a reference to the First Amendment in that statement?
Your whole argument is festooned with illogical statements. “ ‘Freedom of expression must include those things with which we disagree as well as those that we do agree.’ ”(said I) – “No, it must not. It only must include those things which it is legally required to include.” (said you) And what is a public library required to include?
There are no “laws” enumerating what a library MUST include. There are only professional standards. I tried to give you the guidelines under which public libraries operate, but you reject them as “…the Library Bill of Rights is not law.” Doctors practice under the Hippocratic Oath, but that is not “law.” Would you do without that? There are many profession standards that organizations follow and these are the ones that public libraries follow. I am sorry that your zeal to prove yourself as correct at all costs has blinded you to the morality of this discussion.
Now I am really done with your foolishness. You have a nice day.
Hey Proud,
“PAUL: I can see that tricky English language is your bane.” – Lying seems to be your bane.
“If you quote me, have the honesty to use the whole pertinent quote and not cherry pick the part that you attack.” – What I quoted was the pertinent part.
“You stated “Proud, you stated the Library must do something. In the context in which you posted, you made it appear to be a legal requirement.” I repeat: “No Paul you made it a legal requirement then argued against it. You put words in my mouth and then attacked me using your own interpretation of those words.”” – Your citing the 1st amendment made it the legal argument, Proud.
“You are the one who said”… you made it appear to be a legal requirement.” How did I make it appear to be a legal requirement except in your own mind?” – The 1st amendment, Proud. Stop citing things that don’t apply if you are going to complain about people using it against you.
“Where do you see a reference to the First Amendment in that statement?” – Your very first sentence, which is generally considered to be the topic sentence of a paragraph. However, I guess you really didn’t mean to type that sentence.
“Your whole argument is festooned with illogical statements. “ ‘Freedom of expression must include those things with which we disagree as well as those that we do agree.’ ”(said I) – “No, it must not. It only must include those things which it is legally required to include.” (said you) And what is a public library required to include?” – How is any of that illogical?
“There are no “laws” enumerating what a library MUST include.” – That was my point.
“There are only professional standards.” – Which don’t have to be followed. Only the law must be followed.
“I tried to give you the guidelines under which public libraries operate, but you reject them as “…the Library Bill of Rights is not law.”” – You gave them out in response to me asking for case law supporting your claim, thereby attempting to pass them off as laws, which I again disproved. Now, if you did not mean them to be laws, why would you have them in your answer to my request for case law?
“Doctors practice under the Hippocratic Oath, but that is not “law.”” – And this is not a library or a law requiring books. We can debate the doctor’s oath later if you like.
“Would you do without that? There are many profession standards that organizations follow and these are the ones that public libraries follow.” – Again, you stop making false claims and Ill stop proving you wrong.
“I am sorry that your zeal to prove yourself as correct at all costs has blinded you to the morality of this discussion.” Stop making false assertions and Ill stop calling you out on them.
“Now I am really done with your foolishness.” – So, according to you, lying is ok but calling someone out on it is foolishness…interesting.
“You have a nice day.” – I usually do.
Anyways, have a nice day.
PAUL: You are one sick puppy.
Hey Proud,
I guess you weren’t really done after all.
Anyways, have a nice day.
The library cannot possibly contain every book ever published, so it has to make choices. If people want the dirty book so badly, why don’t they just skip some fast food meals and use the cash to buy the book themselves?
Maybe we should post some quotes from the novel in all of our local media to do a sort of litmus test as to what is acceptable, and what is not.
Anyone who has the argument that any child could go in a check out Fifty Shade’s of Grey, so they shouldn’t have it should also know that there are plenty of other novels just like this one already in the library. Fifty Shades of Grey is just popular. The link below is to a book in the HCPL catalog. It is entitled, Bedding down : a collection of winter erotica
http://library.hcplonline.org/polaris/search/searchresults.aspx?ctx=3.1033.0.0.1&type=Keyword&term=alison%20tyler&by=KW&sort=RELEVANCE&limit=TOM=*&query=&page=0#__pos1
Good find. I am sure there are many others.
It’s also worth noting that both books retail for about $10 on Amazon, but while the library barely needs 1 copy of your find, it would probably need 25 at each branch of the book in question.
As I said before, I think there’s no compelling reason to carry this new release fiction title in our libraries, particularly, at this time.
New release fiction, of which inventory is already limited in libraries, just isn’t a compelling social concern.
Just because people want to read it is not a reason the library has to carry it.
My guess is in a few years after the books have been out and the movies are made, you’ll find 10 dusty copies on the shelf at your local library.
Seems like a stupid book that all of the disgruntled wives, ex-wives, or soon to be ex-wives obsess with at my work and openly discuss in public. This book is no better than going to any web site and hooking up the old web cam. The library has no obligation to fulfill by putting this on their shelves. If you want to read a trashy porno book, buy it yourselves. and Proud to be Liberal, shouldn’t you want more government interference? That’s how you liberals roll… Socialized health care, social security, free this, free that.
does not matter: No it is you people who want less government interference. Therefore, citizens should be able to read any book they want and the government (in this case the library) should not gainsay me. BTW, the library is free; do you want a subscription library? That’s how you conservatives roll, privatize this, privatize that and make rich people richer with your dime.