Kimstu
March 8, 2023, 4:19pm
14
Kropotkin:
This post has been reported…to the American Library Association. I suspect not even SOAT can stand up to their power, especially as they are mobilizing in the face of new waves of book banning and other attempts at censorship. That is, they are spoiling for a fight.
Apologies for continuing the hijack, but this is very interesting news. Shortly after the PATRIOT Act was passed (so, more than 20 years ago already? oookay, universe) I somewhat accidentally attended a party at an ALA convention (long story), and…
Wait, I already told you guys this story (August 2002, geez):
Kimstu:
[…] at the very least, there are some things in the Act that the ALA views with definite concern. I first learned about this while hanging out with some attendees of a librarians’ conference that shared a building with a conference I was attending, a couple of weeks ago (those librarians are much wilder partiers than you might suspect! :)), but it is more, er, soberly confirmed by the ALA report “The PATRIOT Act in the Library”:
The Patriot Act amended over 15 federal statutes, including the laws governing criminal procedure, computer fraud and abuse, foreign intelligence, wiretapping, immigration, and the laws governing the privacy of student records. These amendments expanded the authority of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and law enforcement to gain access to business records, medical records, educational records and library records, including stored electronic data and communications. It also expanded the laws governing wiretaps and “trap and trace” phone devices to Internet and electronic communications. These enhanced surveillance procedures pose the greatest challenge to privacy and confidentiality in the library.
And it goes on to spell out exactly which amendments make which differences in constraints on library procedures. What I gather the librarians are most concerned about is that under the new law, certain search warrants are automatically accompanied by a “gag order”: they may not disclose that a warrant has been served or that records have been produced in response to it. Many federal document depository librarians are also apparently pretty pissed about the FBI confiscating thousands of documents, deemed potentially sensitive, that their readers need.
That ALA link is broken two decades later, but there are lots of resources on the site that discuss ALA resistance to censorship and invasion of privacy. When librarians are spoiling for a fight, watch out .
(Sorry, that really is a hijack of the intended purpose of the thread, ignore me! But I was interested…)