I don't think your understanding is accurate. Their positions are overwhelmingly in support of freedom of information, freedom of speech, privacy, and the public domain. They're opposed to anything that locks down and restricts information, generally oppose unnecessary copyright extension and overbearing copyright laws and rules (including the DMCA and DRM). They have a wide array of positions that are both frequently aligned with and opposed by both major American political parties.
People distort the ALA's position as pushing LGBTQ books on children, but that's just the most in the limelight right now because those are the books that are being challenged the most, and the ALA is generally against book banning.
The ALA is aligned largely with classical liberalism, not modern progressivism, and most American conservatives I knew before 2016 would have agreed with their positions on freedom of information and personal privacy.
> This is a perversion of the phrase "book banning". Choosing not to have certain books in libraries, or in the kids section of libraries, is not "book banning".
Yes it is. It is by the dictionary definition of the two words 'banning' and 'book' to be banning books, from a library. You are wrong.
Yes. But the majority of the community seems to be explicitly against the removal of these text from the library. It is an extremely small and loud group of traditional Catholics whose stance on this is unpopular even among other catholics in the community.
The ALA is a ideological organization that advocates for open access to information and resources. Those damn communist, they always want well informed citizens!!
While we're at it someone should really buy out and shut down wikipedia! Have you seen their article on Hitler? They make him sound like a criminal!!
This sounds like a response from someone who is not especially informed about the ALA. I work in a related field and am aware of the policy positions they have taken on lightning rod cultural issues. Perhaps you could look into this before claiming that they just want "open access to information and resources".
If that's the case, then please feel free to inform me of what policy positions they take on lightning rod issues that isn't related to their stated goal of providing open access to the public?
I don't think your understanding is accurate. Their positions are overwhelmingly in support of freedom of information, freedom of speech, privacy, and the public domain. They're opposed to anything that locks down and restricts information, generally oppose unnecessary copyright extension and overbearing copyright laws and rules (including the DMCA and DRM). They have a wide array of positions that are both frequently aligned with and opposed by both major American political parties.
People distort the ALA's position as pushing LGBTQ books on children, but that's just the most in the limelight right now because those are the books that are being challenged the most, and the ALA is generally against book banning.
The ALA is aligned largely with classical liberalism, not modern progressivism, and most American conservatives I knew before 2016 would have agreed with their positions on freedom of information and personal privacy.
This is a much better response than the one I gave. Thank you for having the patience that I did not <3
[flagged]
> This is a perversion of the phrase "book banning". Choosing not to have certain books in libraries, or in the kids section of libraries, is not "book banning".
Yes it is. It is by the dictionary definition of the two words 'banning' and 'book' to be banning books, from a library. You are wrong.
Yes. But the majority of the community seems to be explicitly against the removal of these text from the library. It is an extremely small and loud group of traditional Catholics whose stance on this is unpopular even among other catholics in the community.
3 replies →
The ALA is a ideological organization that advocates for open access to information and resources. Those damn communist, they always want well informed citizens!!
While we're at it someone should really buy out and shut down wikipedia! Have you seen their article on Hitler? They make him sound like a criminal!!
This sounds like a response from someone who is not especially informed about the ALA. I work in a related field and am aware of the policy positions they have taken on lightning rod cultural issues. Perhaps you could look into this before claiming that they just want "open access to information and resources".
If that's the case, then please feel free to inform me of what policy positions they take on lightning rod issues that isn't related to their stated goal of providing open access to the public?
4 replies →