Intellectual Freedom represents the ideal that an individual could express himself
freely without fear, determine and possess his own ideas and opinions.
Repression of Intellectual freedom would limit a person’s knowledge of different
issues such as communism. For instance, if a book about communism were to be
prohibited from the libraries of high schools across America many students would not
know that advantages and disadvantages of communism which could lead to closedmindness about socioeconomic systems different from their own. By not knowing about
communisim or democratic socialism students would not gain an appreciation of the
differences among countries nor develop a worldview. This would limit their ability to
think objectively about the political and social dynamics in the world.
Intellectual freedom allows the intellect and culture of people to flourish. In other
words, censoring the works of visual artists is considered a crime as it prevents people
from not only from enjoying the artists’ works, but also being educated by them something that artists gain personal fulfillment from. To the extent, that these works of
art are enjoyed by most viewers they are placed in permanent collections of national
museums and exhibited internationally.
Restricting a person’s freedom to express their thoughts would reduce their
motivation to create, for human beings being able to be creative gives meaning to our
existence.
If a political scientist wanted to write a book about the federal government’s
handling of 9/11 victims or survivors, but he could not do so because President George
Bush would be offended then he would be constrained in his ability to write about
important issues. Thus, Intellectual freedom could be regarded as “essential to the
creation and development of a democratic society”. (Hamilton & Ole Pors, 411)
1
To discuss how the issue of Intellectual freedom emerged, censorship
must be described. It is considered to “be any deliberate impediment on the expression of
or access to any ideas or images” (Tony Doyle, p 45). An absolute form of censorship
includes the Nazi genocide of the Jews and Roma gypsies. George J. Andreopoulos
reveals that these “massive and systematic human rights abuses” perpetrated during
World War II lead to the creation of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) in 1948. (Encyclopedia Britannica 2006) Indeed, the ratificaction of ideal of
Intellectual Freedom in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
proves how important this concept is in preserving democracy. Therefore, promoting
intellectual freedom both internationally and locally ensures the respect for peoples
around the world.
Intellectual freedom was not always a principle of American Librarianship
according to Tony Doyle(2001). He noted in his article “ A Utilitarian Case for
Intellectual Freedom In Libraries” that up to the early twentieth century, censorship was
a vital duty of librarians. In fact, in 1908 the president of ALA Arthur Bostwick used the
theme “Librarian as Censor” for his presidential address.
The idea of Intellectual Freedom become a part of the American Library
Association (ALA) Code of Ethics in 1939. In the 1920s Intellectual freedom began to
root, according to Tony Doyle, “ ALA’s position on intellectual freedom was beginning
to warp into something like its familiar form” (Doyle, p 47). Since then Intellectual
freedom continued to gain ground among the Library profession and in 1939 it was
cemented in the ALA’s “Library Bill of Rights”.
2
A prominent proponent of Intellectual freedom in the 1950s Lester Asheim
further enshrined the idea in the field of Librarianship. (Doyle, 2001) He argued for an
“unbiased selection” in developing library collections focusing on patrons’ needs and
wants. (Doyle, 2001). Perhaps, his strong arguments against censorship lead to ALA’s
“Freedom to Read” statement adopted in 1953.
How is the LIS profession handling the issue of Intellectual Freedom?
The International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) statement on Intellectual
freedom guides the LIS professionals around the world. The following statement reflects
the IFLA commitment to this ideal:
Libraries contribute to the development and maintenance of intellectual freedom
and help safeguard basic democratic values and universal civil rights….
Libraries shall acquire, organize and disseminate freely and oppose any form of
censorship.
Their commitment to intellectual freedom is not just in words, but dedicated actions
to deal with intellectual freedom issues internationally.
Susanne Seidelin, Director of the IFLA/FAIFE Office discussed the work of IFLA
in a recent conference in Berlin in 2003. Seidelin lecture revealed that several countries
were making efforts to preserve intellectual freedom in their countries, but civil war,
censorship and poverty were curtailing their progress. For instance, in Africa censorship
is such a part of the culture that violations occur on daily basis. In Eastern Europe, LIS
professionals have opened access to collections of previously banned books. According
to Seidelin, the IFLA responds to violations of intellectual freedom by:
3

Addressing isolated incidents in different countries with letters to the
respective authorities

Response Statements in local and international print media or special
reports

Cooperating with NGOs, independent human rights groups and afflicated
IFLA organizations to gain more information on the case and ensure
accuracy of the report to complete investigations of reported cases.
This is just some of ways the IFLA works towards protecting intellectual freedom on a
international scale.
On a national level, the work of LIS profession takes the same approach to the issue.
Many academic librarians have embraced intellectual freedom so fully that they zealously
defend it. (Alex Byrne, 1999) In his article “See Librarian”, he asserts that “in university
libraries the defense of intellectual freedom is expressed through the unabashed provision
of all the resources needed to support study and scholarship to all clients” (Byrne, p113).
This demonstrates a bold approach to issue of Intellectual freedom by academic libraries.
In fact, approaching this issue in this manner benefits students, faculty and the public as
exchanges of ideas within the university as well as among universities maintains a vibrant
learning and research environment. Steven Herb highlights university libraries stance on
the issue of intellectual freedom in his article “Intellectual freedom and the academic
library: Entering the next century with strength”. He exerts that the adoption and
approval of the “Intellectual Freedom Principles for Academic Libraries” could not come
at a better time when threats to access to information abound for most academic libraries.
4
Not everyone in the LIS profession encourages Intellectual freedom. It seems that
many librarians and information professionals encounter difficulty in applying this
principle. Self-censorship says Valerie Thomson is “ one of the biggest influences”
impacting on the Children’s Rights on Intellectual freedom. Thomson’s article
“Children’s Rights in the Library” highlights how librarians could practice censorship
without realizing it. These rights of the Child (under Article 13 of the UN Convention on
the Rights of the Child) includes “the freedom to seek, receive and impart information
and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the
form of art, or through any media of the child’s choice.”
The removal or relocation of Gay/Lesbian display in Tampa Florida Public
Library System also conveys how some librarians relate to demands to remove
controversial materials. In the article, “Gay Display Controversy: A threat to Intellectual
freedom”, Linda Alexander describes the events following the mounting of a
Gay/Lesbian young adult book display in one of the Tampa Florida Public libraries. She
notes that a few patrons expressed their displeasure while one patron sought to make an
official complaint. Ironically, the chief librarian ordered the display to be moved,
underlining “the presence of children in the library” as the reason for its removal.(
Alexander 24) In addition, the chief librarian stated the material should be placed in adult
section where members could request the books. A backlash ensued including 700 protest
emails, and negative publicity from the local and national press. In the end, the District
government administrators who instituted a policy banning “Gay/Lesbian” pride events
and promotions in their community still have the policy in tact, despite protests from the
Florida Library Association, the ALA’s Intellectual Freedom Committee and other
5
organizations. This incident indicates intellectual freedom is not cherished by all library
administrators and the politics plays a major role in determining how well it is practiced.
After September 11, 2001 drastic changes in the U.S government information
policy took place that affected intellectual freedom in libraries. The U.S. Patriot Act
promulagated on October 26th, 2001 was the U.S. government’s reactionary measure to
those horrific events in September, 2001. This legislation which signaled America’s
“War on Terrorism” has placed librarians and libraries under a sweeping magnifying
glass in order to find terrorist activities and plots as investigative reports revealed the
terrorists used computers to launch their plot. As a result anyone suspected of terrorist
activity could questioned or even detained by the FBI. It also means must now librarians
provide information about users to the FBI, thereby violating patron’s right to privacy
and freedom of expression. Also under this legislation, access to government information
has been tightened. The IFLA responded to these events with its statement of “Terrorism,
the Internet and Free Access to Information on October 4th, 2001. The ALA also fought
back through new policies designed to counteract these restrictions by the government:
namely: the “Resolution Reaffirming the Principles of Intellectual Freedom in the
Aftermath of Terrorist Attacks”, “Privacy: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of
Rights” and “Resolution on the USA Patriot Act and Related Measures that Infringe on
the Rights of Library Users”(Rubin 135). Gloria Meraz’s comment underscores the LIS
profession’s view on this controversy, “ If we believed in the principles of open access to
information and Intellectual Freedom before September 11, how can we minimize them
6
now?”(129). Clearly, the LIS profession is continually alert to threats to intellectual
freedom by governments both here and abroad.
Another issue the LIS profession confronts in handling of intellectual freedom is
the internal conflict librarians feel between the professional values and their personal
values. Researchers studying the conflict between personal beliefs and professional code
of ethics affecting librarians of the Seattle Public Library, discovered that 71% of those
sampled experienced conflict. It was also reported that the librarians felt they needed
training to communicate and defend the library’s Internet use policy which supports
intellectual freedom. Indeed, the results of the survey support this claim, as 34% of the
interviewees perceived defending the policy to be difficult. However, 37% of them held
the opposite view. On the question of allowing pornography on the computer, 70% of
interviewees were in favour while 5% strongly opposed. It is interesting to note that
respondents while 70% of respondents were in favour of allowing pornography on the
internet 37% of them believed their personal values were contrary to ALA’s professional
values.
Economics indirectly affects intellectual freedom as the ability to read, write,
view information is tied to access of information. The financial resources of individuals
and countries greatly determine how much is available to them particularly in this
technologically-driven age. As such library and information professionals, especially
those in public libraries have been working assiduously to address the challenge. The
importance of public libraries and librarians in increasing access to information is
promoted in the article, “Freedom of access to information and freedom of expression:
7
the internet as a tool for global social inclusion” written by Stuart Hamilton and Niels
Ole Pors. The Internet is regarded as the mechanism to alleviate barriers to information
access and “libraries have contributed to this concept by making collections and
catalogues available online for those physically unable to access library resources”.
(Hamilton and Pors 410). Their paper also reported the results of the IFLA/FAIFE World
Report on Libraries and Intellectual Freedom. European countries lead the way in terms
of availability of Internet access with North America and Oceania trailing. In contrast,
the USSR, Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean were behind in their internet
access services. In light of this, the researchers seemed pleased that public libraries were
actively playing their part to achieve greater access to information for the benefit of their
respective countries.
In conclusion, this paper served to describe the idea of Intellectual freedom,
examine how it emerged and offer a view of the challenging issues the LIS profession
faces in handling Intellectual freedom.
8
References
Doyle, T. (2001). A Utilitarian Case for Intellectual Freedom in Libraries.[Electronic
Version]. Library Quarterly, 71, 44-71.
Harkovitch, M. (2003) Intellectual Freedom in Belief and in Practice.
Public Libraries. 42, 367-74. Retrieved November 23, 2006, from Wilson Web.
Byrne,A. (1999). See Librarian: University Libraries and Intellectual Freedom.
Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 30.2, 107-18. Retrieved November 23, 2006
from Wilson Web(Library Literature and Information Fulltext database)
Seidelin, S.(2002) Intellectual Freedom and Libraries: International Perspectives. IFLA
Journal, 28, 181-184. Retrieved November 22, 2006, from Wilson Web.
Herb, S.(1999) Intellectual freedom and the academic library: Entering the next century
with strength. College & Research Libraries News, 60, 841-843. Retrieved November
21, 2006 from Wilson Web.
Meraz, G. (2001) Libraries after 9/11. Texas Library Journal, 77 128-129. Retrieved
November 25, 2006 from Wilson Web.
Hamilton, S and Ole Pors, N. (2003) Freedom of access to information and freedom of
expression: the internet as a tool for global social inclusion. Library Management, 24,
407-416. Retrieved November 22, 2006 from LISA database.
Thomson, V. (2004) Children’s Rights in the Library. School Libraries in Canada.
Ontario. 24 38-43. Retrieved November 23, 2006 from ProQuest database.
Alexander, L. (2005) Gay Display Controversy: A Threat to Intellectual Freedom.
Florida Libraries, 48, 24-27. Retrieved November 21,2006 from EBSCO database.
Andreopoulos, G. J.(2006). United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Encyclopaedia
Britannica online. Academic Edition
9