Editing American Library Association (section)

==Political positions==
{{see also|American librarianship and human rights}}
The ALA [[Public Library Advocacy|advocates]] positions on [[United States]] political issues that it believes are related to libraries and librarianship. For court cases that touch on issues about which the organization holds positions, the ALA often files [[amicus curiae|amici curiae]] briefs, voluntarily offering information on some aspect of the case to assist the court in deciding a matter before it. The ALA has a Public Policy and Advocacy office in [[Washington, D.C.]], that [[Lobbying|lobbies]] [[United States Congress|Congress]] on issues relating to libraries, information and communication. It also provides materials to libraries that may include information on how to apply for grants, how to comply with the law, and how to oppose a law.<ref>American Library Association. [https://www.ala.org/aboutala/offices/ppa Public Policy and Advocacy Office].</ref>

===Intellectual freedom===
{{See also|Book censorship in the United States}}
The primary documented expressions of the ALA's intellectual freedom principles are the Freedom to Read Statement<ref>{{cite web| url= http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/freedomreadstatement| title= Freedom to Read Statement| publisher= ALA| access-date= 2018-04-25| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100826004143/http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/ftrstatement/freedomreadstatement.cfm| archive-date= 2010-08-26| url-status= live| date= July 26, 2006}}</ref> and the [[Library Bill of Rights]]; the Library Bill of Rights urges libraries to "challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment."<ref>{{cite web | url =http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill | title =Library Bill of Rights | publisher =ALA | access-date =2010-09-01| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100920062636/http://ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/index.cfm| archive-date= 20 September 2010 | url-status= live| date =June 30, 2006 }}</ref> The [[ALA Code of Ethics]] also calls on librarians to "uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources."<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics | title=Article II, ALA Code of Professional Ethics | publisher=ALA | access-date =2010-09-01| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100920133140/http://ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm| archive-date= 20 September 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref>

The ALA maintains an [[Office for Intellectual Freedom]] (OIF), which is charged with "implementing ALA policies concerning the concept of [[intellectual freedom]],"<ref name="Office for Intellectual Freedom">{{cite web | url =http://www.ala.org/offices/oif | title =Office for Intellectual Freedom | publisher =ALA | access-date =2010-09-02| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100920055430/http://ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/index.cfm| archive-date= 20 September 2010 | url-status= live| date =June 9, 2008 }}</ref> defined as "the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. It provides for free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause or movement may be explored."<ref>{{cite web | url =http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/basics/ifcensorshipqanda | title =Intellectual Freedom and Censorship Q & A | publisher =ALA | access-date =2010-09-01 | url-status =dead | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20130402032951/http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/basics/ifcensorshipqanda | archive-date =2013-04-02 }}</ref> Its goal is "to educate librarians and the general public about the nature and importance of intellectual freedom in libraries."<ref name="Office for Intellectual Freedom"/> The OIF compiles lists of challenged books as reported in the media and submitted to them by librarians across the country.<ref>{{ cite web|url=http://www.ala.org/advocacy/banned/frequentlychallenged |title=Frequently Challenged Books |publisher=ALA |access-date=2010-09-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100920063914/http://ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/frequentlychallenged/index.cfm |archive-date=20 September 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

The first director, [[Judith Krug]], headed the office for four decades, until her death in April 2009.<ref>{{cite web | date = 2009-12-02 | url = http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6709656.html | title = Barbara Jones, Ex-Director at Wesleyan, Named Head of ALA OIF and FTRF | work = Library Journal | publisher = MediaSource, Inc. | access-date = 2010-09-01 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120614061145/http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6709656.html | archive-date = 2012-06-14 }}</ref>

In 1950, the Intellectual Freedom Committee, the forerunner of the OIF, investigated the termination of [[Ruth W. Brown]] as librarian of the [[Bartlesville]] Public Library, a position she held in the [[Oklahoma]] town for 30 years.  Brown's termination was based on the false allegation that she was a communist and that she had as part of the library's serials collection two left wing publications, ''[[The New Republic]]'' and ''[[The Nation]]''.  The ALA support for her and the subsequent legal case was the first such investigation undertaken by the ALA or one of its state chapters.<ref>Robbins, L.S. (2000). The dismissal of Miss Ruth Brown. Norman, The University of Oklahoma Press.</ref>

In 1999, radio personality [[Laura Schlessinger]] campaigned publicly against the ALA's intellectual freedom policy, specifically in regard to the ALA's refusal to remove a link on its web site to a specific sex-education site for teens.<ref>{{cite web | date =1999-05-10 | url =http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA158676.html | title ="Dr. Laura" Continues Criticism of ALA | work =Library Journal | publisher =MediaSource, Inc. | access-date =2006-11-14 | url-status =dead | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20070930204559/http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA158676.html | archive-date =2007-09-30 }}</ref> Sharon Priestly said, however, that Schlessinger "distorted and misrepresented the ALA stand to make it sound like the ALA was saying porno for 'children' is O.K."<ref>{{cite journal | last =Priestly | first =Sharon |date=Winter 2001 |  title =Don't Listen to Dr. Laura | journal =Free Inquiry | volume = 41 | issue = 1}}</ref>

In 2002, the ALA filed suit with library users and the ACLU against the United States [[Children's Internet Protection Act]] (CIPA), which required libraries receiving federal E-rate discounts for Internet access to install a "technology protection measure" to prevent children from accessing "visual depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors."<ref>{{cite web | url =http://www.ifea.net/cipa.pdf | title =Text of the Children's Internet Protection Act}}</ref> At trial, the federal district court struck down the law as unconstitutional.<ref>''United States v. Am. Lib. Asso.'', 201 F.Supp.2d 401, 490 (2002)</ref> The government appealed this decision, and on June 23, 2003, the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] upheld the law as constitutional as a condition imposed on institutions in exchange for government funding. In upholding the law, the Supreme Court, adopting the interpretation urged by the U.S. Solicitor General at oral argument, made it clear that the constitutionality of CIPA would be upheld only "if, as the Government represents, a librarian will unblock filtered material or disable the Internet software filter without significant delay on an adult user's request."<ref>{{cite web | url =http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=539&invol=194 | title =''US v ALA'' 539 U.S. 194, 2003 | work =FindLaw | access-date =2007-03-21| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20070219172248/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=539&invol=194| archive-date= 19 February 2007 | url-status= live}}</ref>

In 2021, the ALA released a statement signed by its executive board and Boards of Directors of its eight divisions in response to "a dramatic uptick in book challenges and outright [[Book banning in the United States (2021–present)|removal of books]] from libraries".<ref name="American Library Association-2021">{{Cite web|last=|date=2021-11-29|title=The American Library Association opposes widespread efforts to censor books in U.S. schools and libraries|url=https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2021/11/american-library-association-opposes-widespread-efforts-censor-books-us|access-date=2022-02-13|website=[[American Library Association]]|language=en|archive-date=2022-02-13|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220213043656/https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2021/11/american-library-association-opposes-widespread-efforts-censor-books-us|url-status=live}}</ref> The message condemned "a few organizations [which] have advanced the proposition that the voices of the marginalized have no place on library shelves{{nbsp}}... falsely claiming that these works are subversive, immoral, or worse [and inducing] officials to abandon constitutional principles, ignore the rule of law, and disregard individual rights to promote government censorship of library collections".<ref name="Alfonseca-2021">{{Cite web|last=Alfonseca|first=Kiara|date=December 3, 2021|title=Authors of color speak out against efforts to ban books on race|url=https://abcnews.go.com/US/authors-color-speak-efforts-ban-books-race/story?id=81491208|access-date=2022-02-13|website=[[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]]|language=en|archive-date=2022-02-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220214004449/https://abcnews.go.com/US/authors-color-speak-efforts-ban-books-race/story?id=81491208|url-status=live}}</ref> A spokesperson told [[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]] that in her time working with reports of book challenges, she had "never seen such a widespread effort to remove books on racial and gender diversity".<ref name="Alfonseca-2021" />

===Privacy===

==== 1970s ====
The [[Federal Bureau of Investigation]] (FBI) attempted to use librarians as possible informants in the conspiracy case of the [[Harrisburg Seven]] in 1971. The Harrisburg Seven, a group of religious anti-war activists, were primarily accused of conspiring to kidnap National Security Advisor [[Henry Kissinger]]. The supposed leader of the group, [[Philip Berrigan]], was serving time at the Lewisburg penitentiary. The FBI sought "to use library surveillance and librarian informants" at [[Bucknell University]] as evidence of the Harrisburg Seven's "characters and intentions."<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Lamdan|first=Sarah Shik|year=2013|title=Why library cards offer more privacy rights than proof of citizenship: Librarian ethics and Freedom of Information Act requestor policies|journal=Government Information Quarterly|volume=30|issue=2|pages=133|doi=10.1016/j.giq.2012.12.005|url=https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=cl_pubs|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Boyd Douglas became one such informant for the FBI: he was a prisoner at the same penitentiary with a work-release position at the library. Boyd presented himself as an anti-war activist and offered to smuggle letters he collected while at work to Philip Berrigan at the prison.

The FBI also attempted to use [[Zoia Horn]], a librarian at the Bucknell library, and interviewed other library workers. The FBI met with Horn in her home to debrief her, but Horn refused to answer their questions. She refused to testify, even after she was given immunity from self-incrimination.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Sparanese|first=Ann|year=2003|title=Activist Librarianship: Heritage or Heresy?|journal=Progressive Librarian|volume=22|pages=45|via=Biography Reference Bank}}</ref> Horn stated, "To me it stands on: Freedom of thought" and for the government to practice "spying in homes, in libraries and universities inhibits and destroys this freedom."<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IalBZuoiOf4C&q=The%20CIA%20on%20Campus:%20Essays%20on%20Academic%20Freedom%20and%20the%20National%20Security%20State&pg=PP1|title=The CIA on Campus: Essays on Academic Freedom and the National Security State|last=Zwerling|first=Philip|publisher=McFarland & Company|year=2011|isbn=9780786488896|pages=105|via=Google Books}}</ref> Zoia Horn was charged with contempt of the court and served 20 days in jail. She was "the first librarian who spent time in jail for a value of our profession" according to [[Judith Krug]] of the American Library Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Zoia-Horn-1st-U-S-librarian-jailed-over-alleged-5624023.php|title=Zoia Horn, librarian jailed for not testifying against protesters|last=Egelko|first=Bob|date=2014-07-15|website=San Francisco Chronicle|access-date=2016-11-28}}</ref> Horn continued to fight for intellectual freedom in libraries and beyond. The Intellectual Freedom Committee of the California Library Association now awards the Zoia Horn Intellectual Freedom Award in honor of those who make contributions to intellectual freedom.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.cla-net.org/?118|title=Zoia Horn Intellectual Freedom Award|website=California Library Association}}</ref>

In the 1970s, [[United States Department of the Treasury]] agents also pressured public libraries across the country to "release circulation records recording the names and identifying information of people who checked out books on bomb making."<ref name=":0"/> The ALA believed this to be an "unconscionable and unconstitutional invasion of library patrons' privacy."<ref name=":0" />

As a result of these two situations and many others, the ALA affirmed the confidential status of all records which held patron names in a ''Policy on the Confidentiality of Library Records''. The ALA also released the ALA Statement on Professional Ethics in 1975 which advocated for the protection of the "confidential relationship" between a library user and a library.<ref name=":0"/>

==== 1980s ====
The FBI tried to use surveillance in library settings as part of its [[Library Awareness Program]] of the 1980s; it aimed to use librarians "as partners in surveillance." The program was known to the FBI as "The Development of Counterintelligence Among Librarians," indicating that the FBI believed that librarians might be supportive in its counterintelligence investigations. The FBI attempted to profile "Russian or Slavic-sounding last names" of library patrons to look for possible "national security threats." The FBI wanted libraries to help it trace "the reading habits of patrons with those names."<ref name=":0" />

The ALA responded by writing to the FBI director. The Intellectual Freedom Committee also created "an advisory statement to warn libraries" of the Library Awareness Program, including ways to help librarians "avoid breaking their ethical obligations if faced with FBI surveillance."<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lamdan|first=Sarah Shik|year=2013|title=Why library cards offer more privacy rights than proof of citizenship: Librarian ethics and Freedom of Information Act requestor policies|url=https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=cl_pubs|journal=Government Information Quarterly|volume=30|issue=2|pages=134|via=Science Direct|doi=10.1016/j.giq.2012.12.005|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

==== USA PATRIOT Act ====
In 2003, the ALA passed a resolution opposing the [[USA PATRIOT Act]], which called sections of the law "a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users."<ref>{{cite web | date =2003-01-29 | url =http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/statementspols/ifresolutions/resolutionusa | title =Resolution on the USA PATRIOT Act and Related Measures that Infringe on the Rights of Library Users | publisher =ALA | access-date =2010-09-01 | url-status =dead | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20120203034603/http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/statementspols/ifresolutions/resolutionusa | archive-date =2012-02-03 }}</ref> Since then, the ALA and its members have sought to change the law by working with members of Congress and educating their communities and the press about the law's potential to violate the privacy rights of library users. ALA has also participated as an ''[[amicus curiae]]'' in lawsuits filed by individuals challenging the constitutionality of the USA PATRIOT Act, including a lawsuit filed by four Connecticut librarians after the library consortium they managed was served with a [[national security letter]] seeking information about library users.<ref>{{cite news | last = Cowan | first = Alison Leigh | date = 2006-05-31 | url =https://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/31/nyregion/31library.html | title = Four Librarians Finally Break Silence in Records Case | work = The New York Times | access-date =2007-02-07}}</ref> After several months of litigation, the lawsuit was dismissed when the FBI decided to withdraw the National Security Letter.<ref>{{cite web |date=2006-06-26 |url=http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/FBI_drops_demand_for_information_from_0626.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120317065442/http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/FBI_drops_demand_for_information_from_0626.html |archive-date=2012-03-17 |url-status=live |title=FBI drops demand for information from Connecticut library group |work=Raw Story |access-date=2007-02-07 }}</ref> In 2007, the "Connecticut Four" were honored by the ALA with the Paul Howard Award for Courage for their challenge to the National Security Letter and gag order provision of the USA PATRIOT Act.<ref>McCook, Kathleen de la Peña (2011), ''Introduction to Public Librarianship, '' pp. 63–64. 2nd ed. New York, Neal-Schuman.</ref>

In 2006, the ALA sold humorous "radical militant librarian" buttons for librarians to wear in support of the ALA's stances on intellectual freedom, privacy, and civil liberties.<ref>{{cite web | url =http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/archive/radicalbutton | title ="Radical, Militant Librarian" Button | publisher =ALA | access-date =2010-09-01 | url-status =dead | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20121024044804/http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/archive/radicalbutton | archive-date =2012-10-24 }}</ref> Inspiration for the button's design came from documents obtained from the FBI by the [[Electronic Privacy Information Center]] (EPIC) through a [[Freedom of Information Act (United States)|Freedom of Information Act]] (FOIA) request. The request revealed a series of e-mails in which FBI agents complained about the "radical, militant librarians" while criticizing the reluctance of FBI management to use the secret warrants authorized under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act.<ref>{{cite press release|date=2006-01-17 |url=http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=pressreleases&template=/contentmanagement/contentdisplay.cfm&ContentID=113573 |title=ALA introduces "Radical, Militant Librarian" button |publisher=ALA |access-date=2007-03-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070404072818/http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=pressreleases&template=%2Fcontentmanagement%2Fcontentdisplay.cfm&ContentID=113573 |archive-date=4 April 2007 |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Renaming of Laura Ingalls Wilder Medal===
In 2018, the organization changed the name of the Laura Ingalls Wilder Medal to the [[Children's Literature Legacy Award]]. According to ''[[The New York Times]]'', the name change was made "in order to distance the honor" from what the ALA described as "culturally insensitive portrayals" in Wilder's books.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Chokshi |first1=Niraj |title=Prestigious Laura Ingalls Wilder Award Renamed Over Racial Insensitivity |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/books/laura-ingalls-wilder-book-award.html |access-date=19 September 2018 |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=June 26, 2018}}</ref>
<!-- This should be somewhere else.  Award section probably? -->

===Copyright===
The ALA "supports efforts to amend the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]] (DMCA) and urges the courts to restore the balance in copyright law, ensure fair use and protect and extend the public domain."<ref>{{cite web |last=Nisbet |first=Miriam |date=October 2006 |url=http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/copyagenda.pdf |title=2006 Copyright Agenda |publisher=ALA |access-date=February 26, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150403122831/http://www.ala.org/advocacy/sites/ala.org.advocacy/files/content/copyright/copyagenda.pdf |archive-date=April 3, 2015}}</ref> It supports changing [[copyright]] law to eliminate damages when using [[orphan works]] without permission;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/comments/OW0658-LCA.pdf |title=Re: Orphan Works Notice of Inquiry |publisher=Library Copyright Alliance / U.S. Copyright Office |access-date=2009-07-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090627032833/http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/comments/OW0658-LCA.pdf|archive-date=27 June 2009 |url-status=live}}</ref> is wary of [[digital rights management]]; and, in ''[[ALA v. FCC]],<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.eff.org/cases/ala-v-fcc|title=American Library Association v. Federal Communications Commission |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation|date=July 2011 }}</ref>'' successfully sued the [[Federal Communications Commission]] to prevent regulation that would enforce next-generation digital televisions to contain rights-management hardware. It has joined the Information Access Alliance to promote open access to research.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ala.org/advocacy/copyright/openaccesstoresearch/accessresearch|title=Open Access|publisher=ALA|access-date=2015-03-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100920154048/http://ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/openaccesstoresearch/index.cfm|archive-date=2010-09-20|url-status=dead}}</ref> The Copyright Advisory Network of the association's Office for Information Technology Policy provides copyright resources to libraries and the communities they serve. The ALA is a member of the Library Copyright Alliance,<ref>[http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/ Library Copyright Alliance]</ref> along with the Association of Research Libraries and the Association of College and Research Libraries, which provides a unified voice for over 300,000 information professionals in the United States.<ref>{{cite web|title=Background|url=http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/about/index.shtml|publisher=Library Copyright Alliance|access-date=March 31, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140414064449/http://www.librarycopyrightalliance.org/about/index.shtml|archive-date=April 14, 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref>
Currently, the ALA supports bill H.R. 905, also known as the You Own Devices Act, stating "to foster the social and commercial evolution of the "Internet of Things" by codifying the right of the owner of a device containing 'essential software' intrinsic to its function to transfer [e.g. sell or lease] both the device and the software."<ref>{{cite web|title= Copyright|url=http://www.ala.org/advocacy/copyright |publisher=American Library Association|date=March 10, 2019 }}</ref>