All libraries -- public, private and school -- contain curated collections. None can hold EVERYTHING; all must select how they allocate limited physical and financial resources. The goal is to serve the community without prejudice and collection development has to have a basis.
Today, too often, the basis for a place in the collection is it's immediate popularity (not quality) -- to serve the library's desire for circulation numbers which help directly and indirectly in obtaining funding.
When a child, I used the Carnegie Public Library in Pawnee City, Nebr. One person curated that library's large collection -- Miss French. The variety of material was broad but each passed her test of quality.
Illinois just passed a law REQUIRING inclusion of some material. This is censorship of a library's independence. How can you prohibit a negative? Failure to include a resource in the library is distinctly different from "banning" it. The vague law is government overreach and so vague as to be unenforceable -- except when selectively applied.
Illinois has become the first state to penalize public libraries for removing books under a new law signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker on June 12.
The law requires public libraries across Illinois to adhere to Chicago-based American Library Association’s (ALA) Bill of Rights in order to remain eligible for state funding.
While the ALA standards require libraries to provide materials presenting “all points of view on current and historical issues” and not to exclude books because of the author’s background or views, the Illinois law specifically focuses on just one tenet, which says that library books “should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.”
The stated goal of the law, which takes effect in January 2024, is to encourage libraries to either adopt the ALA standard or develop their own polices that “prohibit the practice of banning specific books or resources.”
