What Goes Into Tracking Censorship, With an Update From the New York Public Library Comms Team
What goes into creating a Literary Activism story? A lot of time, energy, and effort. Not every story about book censorship or library challenges makes the weekly link roundup cut, as each story is vetted for as much context and insight as possible. For news stories that are reported, time and energy goes into doing significant research, which can include interviews on or off the record, interviews and research done on background that may never make the story itself, and, where possible, utilizing public records information acquired through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
There have been many times when that research leads to a story worth writing and publishing. There are other times when that research ends up leading to dead ends or ends up changing the story altogether. For example, last year, I had been directed to a story of a library worker being fired for having “too much” in the children’s area for Pride celebrations; upon digging into the story further–including a call with the community’s lawyer–this was not a story about censorship but rather, a human resources issue that had no reason to be pursued and published here.
Last week, in the Literary Activism weekly news roundup, I included a link and context to that link. You can see the unedited screenshot here.
There’s an error in the text, which is why it has been edited from the original piece. New York Public Library (NYPL) has collaborated with Brooklyn’s Books Unbanned program. It was my fault for not being clear in that final line. The NYPL is not part of the Books Unbanned digital card program; that is, they don’t provide digital access to their collections to young people nationwide. NYPL has worked with Books Unbanned, including the National Day of Action and Freedom to Read Rally in fall 2024. You can read the updated version here.
Literary Activism
News you can use plus tips and tools for the fight against censorship and other bookish activism!
What hasn’t been edited or modified, though, is anything else.
I began to hear stories of censorship at NYPL at the American Library Association conference last month from numerous sources. I did exactly as I do with any story I hear that would be worth sharing: I developed a list of key words that came up in those conversations, and I began to dig. I scoured the library’s website for information about how to submit a FOIA–called Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) in New York State. As a publicly funded institution, it seemed like the most direct path to finding information if that information were written down or recorded in any way. Public records are a tool that anyone can ask for from publicly-funded institutions. The laws vary state-by-state and some records requests may cost the requestee a little money depending on the size and deliverability of the request, but most of the time, anyone from anywhere can request records from any public institution to do with what they wish.
In trying to find how to FOIL the NYPL, I discovered that you could not do that. Despite being publicly funded, the NYPL is actually registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. The library gets funding both from taxpayers and from private entities, and the library acts in partnership with the city, not as a governmental division of the city.
Per a legal memo from 2003, because of how the library itself is enlisted and enrolled not as a governmental division but as a non-governmental nonprofit, it is not subject to FOIL laws.
I’m not the first, nor will I be the last, to discover that the largest municipal public library in the United States is not subject to public records laws.
This took me to a dead end in verifying the stories I’d been hearing at the conference. It was not, however, the end of looking for any insight or context to what I’d been hearing. Had anyone published anything about this? We know it takes tremendous bravery for anyone to share stories of censorship, and that goes doubly so for any library worker who is fearful their whistleblowing may lead to them facing retaliation or job loss for speaking up and out.
So when this carousel posted by the Prison Library Support Network was sent to me several times–with folks asking if I could verify with FOIL records–I had to do two things. The first was to inform them that the library is not subject to FOIL laws and thus, no, I could not investigate the public record. The second was to decide whether or not to include the link in the weekly roundup in Literary Activism.
Given how much in that carousel aligned with some of what I’d heard, given that it came to me through several reliable sources, and given that it was an action-oriented carousel, asking folks who care about the library, its work, and its employees to speak up and out about the issues within it, I decided to include it. It’s the same process I use to include any link in the roundup, and it’s the same process I use when I write a story that cites library workers without naming them or outing their location. That the carousel was a call to action, it aligned with the goals and purpose of the column.
The weekly link roundups in Literary Activism began in 2021. There have been times that I’ve been sent a link to share in response or I’ve found a response to a story in later weeks and included it as a followup.
Within hours of last week’s Literary Activism link roundup post going live, a spokesperson from the NYPL’s communications department sent an email (to my personal email–something really unusual) expressing frustration that they were not asked for a comment and with “an urgent” request for a phone call.
Public records are powerful because they don’t put any particular spin or narrative on documents or discussions happening in public institutions. Public relations are there to show off the great things that an organization is doing and serve as a contact point for questions about those things or the institution itself. Public records are for the public to assess. Public relations are for the public to consume. That’s why I hadn’t reached out to the NYPL communications team. This was about being unable to request public records.
I extended the offer to share what NYPL may wish to say in response to the carousel link. The spokesperson then responded with requests to take down the link, once again asking me for my phone number. I did not remove the link, though I did again offer to link to any public response they might give.
To be clear, we do not pull or censor our link roundups to allow individuals or entities to respond to information linked in these sources. Responses have been included in succeeding Literary Activism link roundups where appropriate.
On Saturday afternoon, the NYPL spokesperson emailed an unlinkable statement, denying the claims made in the carousel shared by the Prison Library Support Network. The NYPL communications spokesperson did not link to a statement posted on their press information page; it was sent as text only to my personal email.
The NYPL not being subject to FOIL means that you can’t ask to see the email discussions nor the documents used to make decisions related to book lists; it means you can’t see where and how leadership has directed frontline staff to act, speak, or behave when representing the library.
Instead, you have to reach out to the press office, which has no obligation to present any of the records you may wish to see. The press office doesn’t need to show these emails because they’re not obligated to do so.
It is not the policy of Book Riot, nor most any media outlet, to reach out to the press office nor public relations team of an institution in the absence of FOIL. Those are not the same thing. They serve distinctly different purposes, and in situations where there is talk of potential censorship, the press office is working on behalf of the institution’s best interests, not on behalf of the people the institution serves.
To demand censorship of an outlet in response to a link about potential censorship within an institution is certainly a choice. Were I to ask them about this, the response would be from the public relations standpoint, not the public records standpoint.
While we’re still waiting for a public statement from NYPL to share as a follow-up link, I did make one correction: as noted above, the NYPL has worked with Brooklyn’s Books Unbanned program and specifically, participated in the National Day of Action and Freedom to Read Rally in fall 2024.
What I didn’t get wrong is this: there’s no ability to FOIL the NYPL, and thus, there’s no way to substantiate what appeared in the carousel, nor is there a way to refute them, either.
