Human Rights are not political views.

Since the results of the American election, many of us at FLIF have debated how to handle this and what our actions should be in the coming months.

Quite simply: FLIF stands by its mandate to defend intellectual freedom and stand up for social justice. We believe, as Desmond Tutu said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

Hate speech is generally categorized as speech, gesture, conduct, writing or display which may incite violent or prejudicial action by disparaging or intimidating an individual or group. When a person is acting in an inflammatory manner by categorizing minority groups with negative attributes and perpetrating views that are deliberately harmful to said groups, the result is that the use of these words, expressions, gestures or displays cause and reinforce the subordination of these groups.

A presidential nominee calling for a registry of Muslims or a vice presidential nominee creating a law to jail same-sex couples applying for marriage licenses clearly meet these guidelines. Their words, especially when spoken from a position of power, are detrimental to civil liberties and used to justify violence towards minority groups. Citizens of a country should not be involuntarily placed on a registry based on the colour of their skin or their religion. Press outlets should not be denied access or threatened with lawsuits by government officials.  

Freedom of speech is a person’s protected right to criticize its government, not a government official’s right to disparage a populace. Human rights are not political issues, nor are they privileges to be doled out by a governmental official. They are to be protected against suppression and incendiary behaviours by all responsible citizens.

The actions of America's incoming government will not make people safer. In the short time since the election, hate speech and crimes have risen in America. We must stand together to defend human rights and freedoms against a government that is poised to discriminate against already marginalized groups.

Banned Books Week

It is now Banned Books Week, and hopefully you've seen some of the resources and articles raising awareness and celebrating intellectual freedom.

The CLA put out a press release on last year's survey of challenged resources and policies, as well as a report written by Alvin Schrader and Donna Bowman.

The ALA always has their webpage.

And there's an organization sponsored by publishers.

There are tons of ways to get involved this week. Raise awareness in your community (not everyone is as aware of banning/challenging books as you are). Loudly proclaim your commitment to and love for intellectual freedom over the internet or in person (Loudly: all in caps, at the top of your lungs). Take a commonly challenged book out of the library (return it on time and in good condition, please), or use your dollar vote to show support to publishers and authors of controversial works. Hug an intellectual freedom fighter (aka: librarian).

Here are some fun things that I found today:

A comic:

And a quiz.

Please let us know what you've found, what inspires you, or just whatever your brain wants to drop out in the comments.

Oh, and remember: banning and challenging works is real, and very serious. Don't celebrate Banned Books Week; celebrate our freedom to choose what we consume, and the people that fight for this freedom.

--Ken

Silencing Dissent

Stephen Harper's government continues to come under fire for its measures that have silenced scientists on a number of important issues, not least of all the environmental impacts of projects such as the Alberta oil sands. A recent editorial in The New York Times is very critical of the restrictions on academic freedom in Canada, pointing out that:

Science is the gathering of hypotheses and the endless testing of them. It involves checking and double-checking, self-criticism and a willingness to overturn even fundamental assumptions if they prove to be wrong. But none of this can happen without open communication among scientists. This is more than an attack on academic freedom. It is an attempt to guarantee public ignorance.

As the article notes, scientists across Canada have organized public protests against the actions of the Harper government, but this is an issue that has implications for everyone whose work may conflict with government policy, and as such, it is an issue that is too important to ignore.

Sometimes You Have to Hold Your Nose

Recent controversy over the parodying of the "Don't Be That Guy" posters against sexual assault have found their way into the Edmonton Public Library. The group claiming responsibility for the "Don't Be That Girl" posters, Men's Rights Edmonton (MR-E) has been called into question for the campaign in recent days. It recently caught the attention of some Edmontonians using Twitter that MR-E plans on hosting a lecture on boys in education at the Stanley Milner branch of the library.

In response to concerns expressed on Twitter, EPL cited the Canadian Library Association (CLA)'s Position Statement on Intellectual Freedom:

. @KateBoorman @brittanyinyeg Like most Cdn public libraries we support the CLA's Statement on Intellectual Freedom: http://t.co/CbqW8Pzlm5
— Edm Public Library (@EPLdotCA) July 11, 2013

The ensuing conversation debated whether or not MR-E can be defined as a hate group, which would make it exempt from coverage by the CLA's statement. Certainly, this is debatable; however, at present, MR-E has not been designated as such in Canadian law. Thus, the group is still afforded protection under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and by extension by the CLA.

Whether you agree with the group's message or not, regardless of how offensive you may find it, part of the library's mandate is to provide a space where there is freedom to speak -- and the room for debate.

Free Speech Debate

An interesting website, Free Speech Debate has proposed ten draft principles:

1. We - all human beings - must be free and able to express ourselves, and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers.

2. We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachment of public and private powers.

3. We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well informed decisions and participate fully in political life.

4. We seek openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.

5. We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge.

6. We neither make threats of violence nor accept violent intimidation.

7. We respect the believer but not necessarily the content of the belief.

8. We are all entitled to a private life but should accept such scrutiny as in the public interest.

9. We should be able to counter slurs on our reputations without stifling legitimate debate.

10. We must be free to challenge all limits of freedom of expression and information justified on such grounds as national security, public order, morality, and the protection of intellectual property.

11. What is missing? What would you propose? Join the global conversation...

Two Canadian cases were considered for the debate:
Cyber bullying that led to suicide and The importance of Braille literacy.

Sadly, the cyber bullying that led to Amanda Todd's suicide is not an isolated event. The recent suicide of Rehtaeh Parsons has reignited concerns of social media use and cyber bullying. Similar cases in the United States have also emerged, bringing a critical need to address such forms of bullying hidden within freedom of speech.   

The case study of Braille literacy poses an interesting question, "If depriving the visually-impaired of access to Braille makes them less literate – and thus, conceivably, less expressive – can this dispute over library funding be cast as a free speech issue?"

International cases of free speech are also examined in this debate, illustrating a global concern for issues in intellectual freedom. 

Petition: Don't Muzzle Librarians and Archivists, Part II

Thanks again for signing our Change.org petition, Don't Muzzle Librarians and Archivists! Please continue to promote, support, and share this petition, we are almost half way there!


Courageous members at Library and Information Studies Students Association (LISSA) have signed a letter to Dr. Caron, cc Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Minister Moore.  It is important to speak up about Library and Archives Canada's new Code of Conduct, as this impacts our future: 

As students, we suffer a deep loss when librarians and archivists at LAC cannot speak publicly in any conferences, institutions, and teaching engagements. There are no risks when LAC librarians and archivists share their knowledge and experience with a new generation. There are great benefits to bridging the gap from rhetoric to practice for students. Such knowledge should be transferred with scholarly activities to maintain, sustain, and preserve our national heritage and collective memory for future use.

Are librarians the new threat?

Last week, Munro's article exposed a chilling new Code of Conduct for Library and Archives Canada (LAC) employees. LAC identified librarians and archivists as "dedicated professionals, ...seeking and sharing knowledge" in their statement of principles. However, the treatment of such committed staff is not aligned with these principles. LAC employees are restricted from teaching and presenting at conferences as these are considered "high risks" activities.

Are librarians and archivists the new threat and in need of muzzling? Will demanding a "duty of loyalty" mitigate this perceived threat? Interesting concerns raised in this video:

Andrew Cash, Member of Parliament for Davenport and NDP Deputy Heritage Critic, asks Heritage Minister James Moore about the muzzling of civil servants at Library and Archives Canada during Question Period on March 18, 2013

Listen to Myron's critique on As It Happens on the chilling effects or follow his blog, Bibliocracy for further insights to LAC Code of Conduct.

More information:

British Columbia Library Association's Press Release - March 20, 2013.

Canadian Library Association's statement urges revisiting LAC Code of Conduct.

Wojtek Gwiazda of Radio Canada International interviews James Turk, executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers (14 minutes and 11 seconds). James Turk discusses the problematic sections of "duty to loyalty" and "high risks"in the code.

Remembering Aaron Swartz

Aaron Swartz was found dead at his Brooklyn apartment yesterday in an apparent suicide. At only 26, Swartz has a long list of achievements. A Wired article outlines his chief accomplishments:

When he was 14 years old, Aaron helped develop the RSS standard; he went on to found Infogami, which became part of Reddit. But more than anything Aaron was a coder with a conscience: a tireless and talented hacker who poured his energy into issues like network neutrality, copyright reform and information freedom.  Among countless causes, he worked with Larry Lessig at the launch of the Creative Commons, architected the Internet Archive’s free public catalog of books, OpenLibrary.org, and in 2010 founded Demand Progress, a non-profit group that helped drive successful grassroots opposition to SOPA last year.

A section of the Official Statement from his partner and family reminds us of his profound impact on promoting social justice and intellectual freedom:

Aaron’s commitment to social justice was profound, and defined his life. He was instrumental to the defeat of an Internet censorship bill; he fought for a more democratic, open, and accountable political system; and he helped to create, build, and preserve a dizzying range of scholarly projects that extended the scope and accessibility of human knowledge. He used his prodigious skills as a programmer and technologist not to enrich himself but to make the Internet and the world a fairer, better place. His deeply humane writing touched minds and hearts across generations and continents. He earned the friendship of thousands and the respect and support of millions more.

Swartz was facing a federal jury trial to begin on April 1, 2013 for 13 felony charges. The charges stemmed from his alleged actions related to downloading four million JSTOR articles from MIT. The prosecutors called these actions stealing and believe that he intended to share the articles on file-sharing sites and peer-to-peer networks. If convicted of the charges, Swartz could have been fined up to $1 million and faced up to 35 years in prison.

To learn more about Aaron Swartz, see the recent CBC News and New York Times articles. Information about the Internet activism he was involved in can be found at the Demand Progress website.

Fall IFRT Report Released

The Fall issue of the ALA’s Intellectual Freedom Round Table Report has been released. This report contains a number of stories and opinions on the topic of censorship in libraries, as well as a summary of current court cases on the freedom of expression. It also has a listing of the ALA committees and associations which address intellectual freedom and outlines how to get involved in these divisions.

See the ALA website for a listing of previous IFRT reports.

Plan for Internet Filter in Australia is Dropped

The Australian government has dropped plans to implement a nation-wide Internet filter according to the Sydney Morning Herald. A recent article outlines the history of the controversial plan and the action that will be taken in its place. The Internet filter began as an election promise and, according to the article, would have required Australian Internet service providers to block content on “child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and material that advocated terrorist activity” had it passed into law. The Australian government has instead opted to have the Internet service providers block individual websites related to child abuse.

Read the Sydney Morning Herald article or watch a related video for further information on the scrapped Internet filter plan.

Intellectual Freedom Beyond Banned Books

At our last FLIF meeting, we talked about how intellectual freedom is about more than just the freedom to read and banned books. Intellectual freedom issues can affect us as students as well as the broader academic community. One such issue has been raised in a PhD comics video entitled Open Access Explained!. As the video explains, open access has come about as a result of digitization and journal price increases. With open access, the public is free to read and free to re-use scholarly research.

The video was made in partnership with the Right to Research Coalition (R2RC). The R2RC has a number of helpful ideas in how we can promote the use of open access as individuals, as student organizations, and as librarians. The section on Why Open Access? explains how traditional publishing practices and open access impact students, researchers, individuals in developing countries, and many other groups in addition the general public. Open access in academia is just one example of how issues of intellectual freedom can extend beyond the traditional notions of censorship and banned books.

FTRW: Free discussion with Paula Simons & Greg Hollingshead

The Canadian Literature Centre and the Writers Guild of Alberta are hosting a free discussion with renowned author Greg Hollingshead and his former writing student and Edmonton Journal columnist Paula Simons in celebration of Freedom to Read Week. This talk will focus on Simons' experiences as a local journalist who has received both acclaim and criticism for her journalistic writing. These two literary personalities will also discuss how Freedom to Read Week is connected with freedom of expression and challenges that both novelists and journalists face once their work is published.

Please join us in this discussion Thursday March 1, 2012 at 7pm in the U of A Law Centre 231/237. The event is free and open to the public, please RSVP via Eventbrite here:  
Celebrate Freedom to Read Week with the Can Lit Centre and the WGA

____________________________________________________________________

Greg Hollingshead has published three novels and three story collections. In 1995 his third story collection, The Roaring Girl, won the Governor General's Award for Fiction. In 1998 his novel The Healer won the Rogers Writers' Trust Fiction Prize and was shortlisted for the Giller Prize. His latest novel, Bedlam (2004), was longlisted for the IMPAC Dublin Literary Award and was a Globe and Mail 100 Best Books of the Year and a New York Times Book Review Editor's Choice for 2006. Greg's work has been published in the U.S., U.K., Germany, and China. He is a professor emeritus at the University of Alberta and director of the Writing Studio program at The Banff Centre. In 2007 he received the Lieutenant Governor of Alberta Gold Medal for Excellence in the Arts. He is currently at work on his seventh book, a novel. He lives with his wife Rosa Spricer in Edmonton. For 2011-12 he is serving as Chair of the Writers' Union of Canada.

Paula Simons is the Edmonton Journal's award-winning City columnist. A born-and- bred Edmontonian, Simons is a graduate of the University of Alberta (BA Hon.) and Stanford University (MA), as well as a former fellow at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies. Over her years with the Journal, she has served as provincial affairs columnist, culture columnist and as a member of paper's editorial board. Simons has earned five prestigious National Newspaper Award citations of merit for her editorials, columns and investigative political reporting.