Censorship in the public libraries of New Zealand : a survey

Abstract

Censorship in libraries, and in public libraries in particular, is officially considered by the library profession as being undesirable. The 1980 Censorship In Libraries statement of the New Zealand Library Association (NZLA, now the New Zealand Library and Information Association, NZLIA) maintains: No library materials should be excluded from libraries because of the race, nationality, or political, social, moral, or religious views of their authors (NZLA 1980, Article 3). Further: No library materials should be censored, restricted or removed from libraries because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval or pressure (NZLA 1980, Article 4). That the above should be made effective is seen as the direct responsibility of librarians themselves: 1 Librarians have a responsibility to ensure that the selection and availability of library materials is governed solely by professional considerations. In so doing, they should neither promote nor suppress opinions and beliefs expressed in the materials with which they deal (NZLA 1980, Article 2). Most explicitly of all, the NZLA statement avers: Librarians should resist all attempts at outside censorship which runs counter to their professional responsibility (NZLA 1980, Article 5). Given that many New Zealand librarians are indeed members of the NZLIA, they may be assumed to endorse the NZLA/NZLIA's stance. To date, however, no formal or systematic research into public library censorship has been conducted in New Zealand. The extent of attempts to censor public library collections in New Zealand is unknown. Indeed, it is not known whether censorship occurs at all. (Occasional instances are reported in the press, but given that press coverage is highly unlikely to cover all occurrences, a survey of newspaper cuttings could hardly constitute valid research.) Similarly, it is not known how librarians field such censorship attempts as do occur. It is not known what the policies of libraries are in this respect. Neither is it known who is attempting censorship, nor what their motives might be, nor what sort of material is objected to. It is not known what problems are being raised by the increasing provision of public Internet access in libraries, with all its assumed attendant hazards. Plainly, there exists a "knowledge void" in this area. Exactly what is the incidence (if any) of attempts to censor materials in the public libraries of New Zealand? A censorship attempt is not necessarily an arm-flailing row at the reference desk. Conceivably, the attempt could just as easily arrive in the form of a letter from a political, religious, or other pressure group. It may come as a memorandum froma member of the local council, or from a member of the library committee. It may even come from a librarian her/himself who decides not to catalogue or circulate some item, just in case it causes controversy. It may even occur at the selection stage, when a librarian censors by omission - that is, by deciding not to acquire certain materials. Whatever the true state of affairs, the absence of hard information is potentially dangerous. It is possible that access to library materials is being denied, restricted or otherwise prejudiced, and that no-one is able to do anything about it for the simple reason that no-one knows what is going on. This present study was conceived as an attempt to discover what the true state of affairs is in New Zealand, as reported by the Librarians in Charge (or their delegates) of public libraries. For those library and information professionals in New Zealand who do value freedom of access to information, hard data on the denial or attempted denial of such freedom should prove a useful tool in their hands.