On "Embarrassment Wednesdays," I will post something for which I truly feel embarrassment. Today it's my library school at FSU.
In a ceremony attended by the avatars of six students, the first virtual graduation of The Florida State University took place online on Saturday, May 1, in Second Life.
"'It really brought forth the reality of graduation for me since I was not able to attend in person,' Linda Vosburgh said."
You mean "the virtual reality of graduation," don't you [pig snort laughter]. Because real reality is, aw, crap, I don't even know anymore.
But here, for your (and my) Wednesday Embarrassment, is the video:
check out these time markers,
mark 0:20: is this Hogwarts? Up, broom. UP BROOM! Harry looks like he's hopping instead of flying.
mark 0:27: is that Patrick Henry or some other historic American sporting that tricorne hat?
mark 6:21: "Will the candidates ... please put your pants on. Just because your avatar is clothed, that doesn't mean you can sit there at home jiggling your mouse, au naturel."
mark 6:47: wtf? was that Superman?
mark 8:30: surface to air missiles? you can't hurt Superman with those. (except for those green kryptonite ones.)
Okay. I'm kidding about the embarrassment. Congratulations, MLIS graduates. You can file a claim for unemployment benefits at, https://www2.myflorida.com/fluid/. Hurry up, I just put some political science graduates on the computers ahead of you.
Showing posts with label library school. Show all posts
Showing posts with label library school. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Sunday, May 30, 2010
It says "Library" in the name.
I was just reading an article that asks the question, How can you spot a diploma mill?
And the title of this post is the punchline. No, not funny? Are you sure about that?
The article mentions ways to identify real, accredited institutions by checking the U. S. Department of Education database and by spotting the fake ones by their celebrity endorsements. Or by how much credit the school gives for "life experience."
I was once graded on my presentation of Marcia Brown's Once a Mouse, does that count as real library work?
But maybe there are no current library school diploma mills. Maybe library life experience is not considered valuable enough to be exploited by scam artists.
Maybe, until now.
The.effing.librarian is proud to announce the opening of The Effing University of Library and Social Media & Life Experience College distance learning library school.
Wow. You know this has to be a good school if both the words University and College are in the name.
Check out this promotional material:
And that's it. Send these answers along with your check for $12,000 to me and I'll get that diploma right out. But if you can't wait, print up this one, ...but I'll be needing that check...
And the title of this post is the punchline. No, not funny? Are you sure about that?
The article mentions ways to identify real, accredited institutions by checking the U. S. Department of Education database and by spotting the fake ones by their celebrity endorsements. Or by how much credit the school gives for "life experience."
I was once graded on my presentation of Marcia Brown's Once a Mouse, does that count as real library work?
But maybe there are no current library school diploma mills. Maybe library life experience is not considered valuable enough to be exploited by scam artists.
Maybe, until now.
The.effing.librarian is proud to announce the opening of The Effing University of Library and Social Media & Life Experience College distance learning library school.
Wow. You know this has to be a good school if both the words University and College are in the name.
Check out this promotional material:
Have you ever wondered if you could qualify to be a librarian? Did you ever want to enter the exciting world of book buying, book processing, book lending and book drop snake wrangling? Well, now you can.
In addition to your life experience, which is the experience you get from life, especially experience from life you get in a library, The Effing University of Library and Social Media & Life Experience College provides quality experience, content and understanding, all in a state-of-the-art educational setting.(The "state-of-the-art educational setting" is dependent on your home setting as The Effing University of Library and Social Media & Life Experience College is a distance-learning only college-university. So if your home computer is old and your learning area is the kitchen table, then this guarantee of "state-of-the-art" is not guaranteed. Also, quality is not guaranteed.)
If you ever wanted to be part of this exciting environment, answer the simple questions on the back of this bag of cat litter.
A professional library scholar will judge your answers and send your letter of acceptance containing your diploma in two to three weeks, just in time for your check to clear.
Answer these simple questions to the best of your ability:
How many copies of And Tango Makes Three should you buy for a school library in Alaska or Florida?
Zero.
None.
How quickly does the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue get stolen in any library?
(Answer should be in "minutes.")
Which department handles each of these clean-up situations? Assign each department once to a single event, Reference, Circulation, Childrens:
- Vomit in the bathroom:
- Blood on the keyboard:
- Poo on the carpet:
Essay: What do you do with your Dragon Balls?
And that's it. Send these answers along with your check for $12,000 to me and I'll get that diploma right out. But if you can't wait, print up this one, ...but I'll be needing that check...
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
I am an FSU graduate. Dammit.
So my girlfriend gets the CCI Connection newsletter from the Florida State University College of Communication & Information. This is what used to be called library school. I hear they may change the name again to the College of Twitter and Facebook Social Networking Interconnectivity. Yes, to be fair, there is still a School of Library & Information Studies at FSU. Jeez, can't a guy make a joke?
I tell her that they never send me their newsletter even though I've told them who I am and gave them my blog address.
"You mean, other than the letter they sent asking you to NOT tell anyone that you are an FSU graduate?" she asks.
"It wasn't a letter, it was a court order," I remind her. "And, yes, other than that, nothing. Ever."
So I am currently looking at the library school website. And they have an option for alumni to "keep in touch" by offering to mentor a current library school student. I would love to mentor a student, I say when I saw that. And I meant it. I wasn't lying or exaggerating even though I'm currently legally drunk in all states except Alaska.
But yes, FSU, well pretty much any, library school students, the.effing.librarian could be your mentor! But what could I do for you? What are my qualifications?
These are true facts:
I tell her that they never send me their newsletter even though I've told them who I am and gave them my blog address.
"You mean, other than the letter they sent asking you to NOT tell anyone that you are an FSU graduate?" she asks.
"It wasn't a letter, it was a court order," I remind her. "And, yes, other than that, nothing. Ever."
So I am currently looking at the library school website. And they have an option for alumni to "keep in touch" by offering to mentor a current library school student. I would love to mentor a student, I say when I saw that. And I meant it. I wasn't lying or exaggerating even though I'm currently legally drunk in all states except Alaska.
But yes, FSU, well pretty much any, library school students, the.effing.librarian could be your mentor! But what could I do for you? What are my qualifications?
These are true facts:
- I've been doing library stuff for over ten years and am currently employed as a librarian.
- I've worked at several public service library positions of increasing responsibility, mostly in computer instruction and reference.
- I have hired and supervised other library staff.
- I've served on committees, presented at workshops and/or discussions at state and regional conferences, won prestigious, major awards and have never been fired.
- I have no record as a felon in North America.
What kinds of things can I do for you? I don't know. I haven't given it much thought. I guess you ask me stuff and I answer. But with awesome mentoring powers.
Imagine the report you would turn in to your professor:
- Who is your mentor? The.effing.librarian.
- What does the effing librarian mean? I don't know. I found him online. He claims to be a semi-famous blogger... in Japan.
- At which library does he work? I don't know.
- How does your mentor communicate with you? Email only. And through anonymous classified ads in The Hartford Courant.
- Has your mentor ever borrowed money? Yes. But it was for a life-saving operation. Or a sex change, it wasn't really clear. But there was lots of crying.
Did you know the emoticon for tears looks like this :'-( ?
And the emoticon for killing three guys in prison looks like this >:'''-[
My mentor taught me that.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
What was your Library Dream Job?
What was your ideal library job when you first imagined that you would be a librarian? Not the crap job you settled for, but your dream. Astronaut Librarian? In space, no one hears you go, Shhh.
What about just before you graduated from library school?
When I first had the the idea to become a librarian, I thought it would be great to work for the federal government. I actually researched pay grades for librarians in the military. But as I was already 30, I thought I was too old (something I read about military jobs listed a cutoff at 28), so I never went past just basic research.
When I was in my early twenties, I wanted to be a firefighter. I took the written tests and scored pretty high and passed the physical endurance test. I don't know if you know what you need to do for a firefighter physical, but you need to run a lot, lift and carry heavy shit, find your way out of a smoke-filled room, and hold your breath under water for a pretty long time. But for reasons I don't want to discuss, I never made the cut.
When I got to library school some years later, I was out of shape and ready for a life of sitting on my ass in a public library. Before that, I thought I could be a media specialist in a public school, but I'd learned that school principals are assholes and I didn't want take any job that I knew in advance would suck.
But after six weeks of library school, I'd lost twenty pounds. Partly from stress, but mostly from riding my bike everywhere and going to the gym every day. I had five classes my first semester. I'm looking at a copy of my transcript now: I took 16 credits my first semester, 9 credits over the summer, and then 14 more in the fall. Is library school still 39 credit hours for the degree?
And I graduated with a... I don't want to say until I know what the average is, otherwise revealing my pathetic GPA will just make the MLS look bad. Yes, it was above a 3.0, but not nearly as close to a 4.0 as one would expect from the genius you consistently enjoy on this here bloggy thing.
So I would go to class in the morning then go to the gym. Then go back for more classes and do homework in the library or in the computer lab. Most days, between classes, I slept on the furniture in the library building. I think my first class was at 6:30 a.m. and my last class ended around 8:00 p.m.
I got into library school totally by luck (a story which I've told too many times online to repeat here without it outing real me). And I got my first library job totally by luck; if you call accepting a job 200 miles from home "luck."
By graduation, I don't think I saw more than six jobs that I thought I wanted. And none were dreamy.
I just took out my graduation ceremony thingy and started looking for other graduates. One guy was an LJ Mover and Shaker, teaches at a library school and seems to have won lots of awards. I wonder if he remembers me.
So far, some of the other grads have blogs that aren't kept up. Oh, great, this woman is in Africa. Oh, hey, I have a cool blog. What? You help to educate children in Africa? Shit. Library 2.0 only matters to people who have unlimited bandwidth.
Great. Here is another woman doing better than me. University of Georgia. Feh. I have my own mini-fridge in my cubicle.
Too bad I really don't remember many people from library school. I really was busy when I was in library school. And as much as some people say the MLS is a joke degree, I worked my ass off to get it.
I don't know what my dream library job would be. It's not something I really think about. I would have wanted to be at a college, but too many of you bitch so much about the bullshit you deal with that I don't know if I could handle it without punching some prof square in the face.
I've guess I've just been busy with other stuff. Trying to keep a few people happy. So I guess I don't have any library dreams. But library fantasies, well, pull up a chair...
What about just before you graduated from library school?
When I first had the the idea to become a librarian, I thought it would be great to work for the federal government. I actually researched pay grades for librarians in the military. But as I was already 30, I thought I was too old (something I read about military jobs listed a cutoff at 28), so I never went past just basic research.
When I was in my early twenties, I wanted to be a firefighter. I took the written tests and scored pretty high and passed the physical endurance test. I don't know if you know what you need to do for a firefighter physical, but you need to run a lot, lift and carry heavy shit, find your way out of a smoke-filled room, and hold your breath under water for a pretty long time. But for reasons I don't want to discuss, I never made the cut.
When I got to library school some years later, I was out of shape and ready for a life of sitting on my ass in a public library. Before that, I thought I could be a media specialist in a public school, but I'd learned that school principals are assholes and I didn't want take any job that I knew in advance would suck.
But after six weeks of library school, I'd lost twenty pounds. Partly from stress, but mostly from riding my bike everywhere and going to the gym every day. I had five classes my first semester. I'm looking at a copy of my transcript now: I took 16 credits my first semester, 9 credits over the summer, and then 14 more in the fall. Is library school still 39 credit hours for the degree?
And I graduated with a... I don't want to say until I know what the average is, otherwise revealing my pathetic GPA will just make the MLS look bad. Yes, it was above a 3.0, but not nearly as close to a 4.0 as one would expect from the genius you consistently enjoy on this here bloggy thing.
So I would go to class in the morning then go to the gym. Then go back for more classes and do homework in the library or in the computer lab. Most days, between classes, I slept on the furniture in the library building. I think my first class was at 6:30 a.m. and my last class ended around 8:00 p.m.
I got into library school totally by luck (a story which I've told too many times online to repeat here without it outing real me). And I got my first library job totally by luck; if you call accepting a job 200 miles from home "luck."
By graduation, I don't think I saw more than six jobs that I thought I wanted. And none were dreamy.
I just took out my graduation ceremony thingy and started looking for other graduates. One guy was an LJ Mover and Shaker, teaches at a library school and seems to have won lots of awards. I wonder if he remembers me.
So far, some of the other grads have blogs that aren't kept up. Oh, great, this woman is in Africa. Oh, hey, I have a cool blog. What? You help to educate children in Africa? Shit. Library 2.0 only matters to people who have unlimited bandwidth.
Great. Here is another woman doing better than me. University of Georgia. Feh. I have my own mini-fridge in my cubicle.
Too bad I really don't remember many people from library school. I really was busy when I was in library school. And as much as some people say the MLS is a joke degree, I worked my ass off to get it.
I don't know what my dream library job would be. It's not something I really think about. I would have wanted to be at a college, but too many of you bitch so much about the bullshit you deal with that I don't know if I could handle it without punching some prof square in the face.
I've guess I've just been busy with other stuff. Trying to keep a few people happy. So I guess I don't have any library dreams. But library fantasies, well, pull up a chair...
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
A Library school by any other name would smell.
The Annoyed Librarian has a column on how some library schools are dropping the word Library from their names and adding words like "communications" or "information" or "wizardry."
And I wonder why this is happening because so many libraries become what they need to be. The NYT has a story that shows how librarians become teachers (when the teachers don't seem to be teaching the right stuff) and they become tech gurus if that's what people want us want to know.
Libraries continue to reinvent themselves, but not in the scary may that Madonna still tries by adopting British accents or making out with Britney; they adapt to the needs of their customers. FYI, we tried the British accent at our library and it was a big hit. But it was a little difficult to remember to add -shropshire or -ingham to every place name when speaking, and Lord or Lady to every author name.
So when Libraries are doing so much to remain technological relevant, why do Library Schools feel that the name "library" is outdated? The library is what it needs to be; librarians are what our customers need for us to be. Did somebody miss that fucking lesson in school?
Librarians keep showing the public that libraries are evolving while Library Schools, say No, you're not. Library means books. Stop trying to change.
So, is this evidence that these library schools are not up with what libraries are doing now? If libraries are providing broadband Internet and connecting users' USB devices and uploading and download and editing files in a variety of formats, then what the fuck are these library schools doing that they don't notice?
As AL points out, it's just New Jersey who wants to change the name now. What the fuck, New Jersey? You fuckin' retahded? If you don't keep an eye on your library business, somebody is gonna come along and take it. You'll wake up with an unabridged dictionary in your bed with the section for L torn out. Fuhgeddaboudit.
Librarians continue to change the face of librarianship. If Library Schools can't see that, then what the hell are they doing?
I think library school boards, directors, whoever, think that they are like pharmaceutical companies advertising some new drug: Try Librexica™. Ask you doctor if Librexica™ is for you. Librexica™ may not be for you if you experience enthusiasm lasting more than twelve hours or if you are awesome or ever plan to become awesome, or if you suffer a sudden drop of hipness pressure from not purchasing the latest crap Steve Jobs wants to sell you.
The farther the library school gets away from the concept of an actual library, the cooler those directors must feel. So they call the college the "School of Bondage and Discipline," or the "School of Hard Knocks," or "Starbucks." Or even "???????."
Dude, look at the name of this college; it's just a bunch of question marks. Maybe part of the degree program is figuring out what the program is... maybe I get to make up whatever I want. That's awesome. Because I'm majoring in weed: I'm going to publish books on weed paper that you smoke after you read.. or before you read... DUUUDE! ReadWeed is our company name!
I don't really give a crap what a library school calls itself, as long as my degree is still useful and keeps me from getting thrown out on my ass and replaced by a recently laid-off barista.
And I wonder why this is happening because so many libraries become what they need to be. The NYT has a story that shows how librarians become teachers (when the teachers don't seem to be teaching the right stuff) and they become tech gurus if that's what people want us want to know.
Libraries continue to reinvent themselves, but not in the scary may that Madonna still tries by adopting British accents or making out with Britney; they adapt to the needs of their customers. FYI, we tried the British accent at our library and it was a big hit. But it was a little difficult to remember to add -shropshire or -ingham to every place name when speaking, and Lord or Lady to every author name.
So when Libraries are doing so much to remain technological relevant, why do Library Schools feel that the name "library" is outdated? The library is what it needs to be; librarians are what our customers need for us to be. Did somebody miss that fucking lesson in school?
Librarians keep showing the public that libraries are evolving while Library Schools, say No, you're not. Library means books. Stop trying to change.
So, is this evidence that these library schools are not up with what libraries are doing now? If libraries are providing broadband Internet and connecting users' USB devices and uploading and download and editing files in a variety of formats, then what the fuck are these library schools doing that they don't notice?
As AL points out, it's just New Jersey who wants to change the name now. What the fuck, New Jersey? You fuckin' retahded? If you don't keep an eye on your library business, somebody is gonna come along and take it. You'll wake up with an unabridged dictionary in your bed with the section for L torn out. Fuhgeddaboudit.
Librarians continue to change the face of librarianship. If Library Schools can't see that, then what the hell are they doing?
I think library school boards, directors, whoever, think that they are like pharmaceutical companies advertising some new drug: Try Librexica™. Ask you doctor if Librexica™ is for you. Librexica™ may not be for you if you experience enthusiasm lasting more than twelve hours or if you are awesome or ever plan to become awesome, or if you suffer a sudden drop of hipness pressure from not purchasing the latest crap Steve Jobs wants to sell you.
The farther the library school gets away from the concept of an actual library, the cooler those directors must feel. So they call the college the "School of Bondage and Discipline," or the "School of Hard Knocks," or "Starbucks." Or even "???????."
Dude, look at the name of this college; it's just a bunch of question marks. Maybe part of the degree program is figuring out what the program is... maybe I get to make up whatever I want. That's awesome. Because I'm majoring in weed: I'm going to publish books on weed paper that you smoke after you read.. or before you read... DUUUDE! ReadWeed is our company name!
I don't really give a crap what a library school calls itself, as long as my degree is still useful and keeps me from getting thrown out on my ass and replaced by a recently laid-off barista.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
The best job. Ever.
THIS IS NOT A LIE: I'm a professionally trained brassiere fitter. I went to a class and everything, and I know sixty-one different ways to say boobies. Look, my certification is right here on my driver's license, right next to my "Awesomeness Donor" sticker. If I die, I have enough awesome to help ten regular people.
Just imagine the.effing.librarian, telling women he can help them find their correct bra size. And then having security eject him from Disneyland. Because you can't fondle women just because they sit in front of you on Space Mountain.
But there's a story at U.S.News & World Report about the best careers and librarian made the list. And there's some discussion about this on the various blogs.
Some have argued that library school is a huge waste of time and money for all sorts of reasons: we don't learn any useful, real world stuff; there are no jobs; and if we get one, we make very little money; and there are things done by people in the library bathrooms that would make even Will Rogers hate them.
But I'm glad I went to library school and have a library job. I have my job because I went (and graduated, as this "real" diploma proves). It's those first four years of college that didn't help.
If you tell anyone what you did in college for your four-year degree, they will nod and agree that it was a waste. I have a degree in literature and I sold bras for a living. My friend has degree in political science and he sells food products. My other friend has criminal something degree and he has a badge and carries a gun to work: well, two out of three.
So I appreciate that I was able to get that library degree. And that I have this job, even if it isn't perfect. But is it one of the best careers? Is it better than being a bra salesman? Not sure. I mean both jobs are quite a handful. (Rimshot! Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. I'm here all week.)
Just imagine the.effing.librarian, telling women he can help them find their correct bra size. And then having security eject him from Disneyland. Because you can't fondle women just because they sit in front of you on Space Mountain.
But there's a story at U.S.News & World Report about the best careers and librarian made the list. And there's some discussion about this on the various blogs.
Some have argued that library school is a huge waste of time and money for all sorts of reasons: we don't learn any useful, real world stuff; there are no jobs; and if we get one, we make very little money; and there are things done by people in the library bathrooms that would make even Will Rogers hate them.
But I'm glad I went to library school and have a library job. I have my job because I went (and graduated, as this "real" diploma proves). It's those first four years of college that didn't help.
If you tell anyone what you did in college for your four-year degree, they will nod and agree that it was a waste. I have a degree in literature and I sold bras for a living. My friend has degree in political science and he sells food products. My other friend has criminal something degree and he has a badge and carries a gun to work: well, two out of three.
So I appreciate that I was able to get that library degree. And that I have this job, even if it isn't perfect. But is it one of the best careers? Is it better than being a bra salesman? Not sure. I mean both jobs are quite a handful. (Rimshot! Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. I'm here all week.)
Monday, November 24, 2008
the.effing.librarian's guide to making friends and influencing people.
I don't try to make new friends. Or if I do, I usually go about it the wrong way. I can't tell you how many times I met someone new by asking, "If I untie you, will you promise not to scream?"
But I have this blog so I can make friends with the world. And I have another blog on LISNews.
I don't know why more librarians don't take advantage of Blake's generosity by creating blogs at LISNews. I met Blake last week and he told me that he's asked librarians repeatedly to create and post to a blog there, but they decline. I don't know why.
I've gotten a lot of exposure from what I post on LISNews. Lots of other indexing sites pick up my post and repost it or index it do something with it that increases my visibility on the Internet.
If you want people to see what you blog, then consider adding a blog at LISNews. If you read my posts, I mostly cross-post the same stories from my Blogger site. If I think a story is extra-funny or interesting I add it to my blog at LISNews. So you don't have to create new content. And more people will get to know who you are and then visit your other blog.
When I went to FSU, I didn't know anyone there. I started in January and anyone who wanted a friend already got one at the beginning of the semester. So my first day in the dorm I got a pizza and shared it with the people watching TV. Sure, they ate all the pizza then beat me up and took my wallet because I was in library school, but I never gave up. The next pizza I brought them was covered with poisonous mushrooms, and that night I had the TV all to myself.
But I have this blog so I can make friends with the world. And I have another blog on LISNews.
I don't know why more librarians don't take advantage of Blake's generosity by creating blogs at LISNews. I met Blake last week and he told me that he's asked librarians repeatedly to create and post to a blog there, but they decline. I don't know why.
I've gotten a lot of exposure from what I post on LISNews. Lots of other indexing sites pick up my post and repost it or index it do something with it that increases my visibility on the Internet.
If you want people to see what you blog, then consider adding a blog at LISNews. If you read my posts, I mostly cross-post the same stories from my Blogger site. If I think a story is extra-funny or interesting I add it to my blog at LISNews. So you don't have to create new content. And more people will get to know who you are and then visit your other blog.
When I went to FSU, I didn't know anyone there. I started in January and anyone who wanted a friend already got one at the beginning of the semester. So my first day in the dorm I got a pizza and shared it with the people watching TV. Sure, they ate all the pizza then beat me up and took my wallet because I was in library school, but I never gave up. The next pizza I brought them was covered with poisonous mushrooms, and that night I had the TV all to myself.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Another reason to love me.
I am at least six days ahead of everyone. When people look back at this blog, they will say, "effing was six days ahead of everyone." Some of you only read this blog once a week, so you don't notice it, but if you visited every day, you'd agree.
So. What caused the self-congratulatory outburst? I just saw that U C Berkeley just today had a student presentation on "tangible user interfaces."
I don't know if you were here the other day when I returned from the future with the news, but tangible user interfaces are gonna be the next big thing in libraries.
Berkeley says this about it: "A considerable amount of research has been done in the domain of Tangible User Interfaces, a new approach to HCI which focuses on the physical interaction with computational media."
From the Flickr pix, I can't tell if anyone is actually using my idea for a thermal-regulated rectal interface, but who knows what happened after class in the parking lot. Those crazy Berkeley kids might just stumble on my probe design accidentally (on purpose).
Just remember if you steal my idea, you might as well steal the marketing slogan, too:
The Gerbil: because your ass knows what you want.
So. What caused the self-congratulatory outburst? I just saw that U C Berkeley just today had a student presentation on "tangible user interfaces."
I don't know if you were here the other day when I returned from the future with the news, but tangible user interfaces are gonna be the next big thing in libraries.
Berkeley says this about it: "A considerable amount of research has been done in the domain of Tangible User Interfaces, a new approach to HCI which focuses on the physical interaction with computational media."
From the Flickr pix, I can't tell if anyone is actually using my idea for a thermal-regulated rectal interface, but who knows what happened after class in the parking lot. Those crazy Berkeley kids might just stumble on my probe design accidentally (on purpose).
Just remember if you steal my idea, you might as well steal the marketing slogan, too:
The Gerbil: because your ass knows what you want.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Another Library School Thing
I'm not planning to post every paper I wrote in school, but Woeful had a comment on the Liberry page about a New Jersey patron, and coincidentally, I wrote a paper on that case (co-wrote with The Magster, another library student, who wrote the introduction since I would never use the word plethora,... twice).
So here goes. I don't remember what grade I got, so plagiarize at your own risk (if you think rewriting a 1992 paper will help your grade).
And fyi, I remember that a few days before the paper was due, the court rendered the decision and we had to get permission to go to the law library and log on to lexis/nexis and get a copy of it. Remember when database searching was, like, six dollars a minute?
And this goes without say, but IANAL, so any opinions expressed in this paper that piss you off are for entertainment purposes only.
Introduction.
The case which was investigated and scrutinized was one which will certainly have a distinct effect on libraries and library policies for a long time to come. It arises from a plethora of opposing sides, opinions of how the library should be used, and what rules will be utilized in keeping its innate "library functions" and how these all weave into the First Amendment's right to freedom of speech which in turn "encompasses a right to receive ideas" [PA, 3].
The difficulty of this case arises from the enormous responsibility of the library which is really quite mind-boggling. There will be long term repercussions which will result from the importance of the library's fulfilling an almost impossible goal. First of all, "[t]he library does have a unique role as the storehouse of the First Amendment. The world of books is the most remarkable creation of man. Nothing else that he builds ever lasts. Monuments fall; nations perish; civilizations grow old and die out; and after an ere of darkness, new races build others. But in the world of books are volumes that have seen this happen again and again, and yet live on, still young, still fresh as the day they were written, still telling men's hearts of the hearts of men centuries dead" [NJLA, 20].
Considering this, the importance of the case of Kreimer v. Morristown takes on and especially poignant quality, and the difficulty of solving it stems from opposing, but thoroughly legitimate points of view.
At the time of the specific controversy, Richard Kreimer was a 41-year old homeless man who used the Joint Free Public Library of Morristown, New Jersey on a regular basis. There came a point, however, when he wasn't just using the library perhaps for reading books or magazines, but was engaged in certain activities which could be considered a nuisance. Although he was also reported to have harassed certain women and children as well as being belligerent to a librarian, the main point that seems to have arisen was that he exuded a particularly foul odor and caused it to be impossible for other people to exercise their own rights in the usage of the Library.
In response to this problem, the Library drew up specific rules for the purpose of dealing with the men and subsequently had him evicted on the premises of the new rules.
He retaliated by bringing the case to court with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union, and under the decision of Judge H. Lee Sarokin, it was found that his rights as pertained to the First and Fourteenth Amendments had been violated and he was awarded over $250,000 in various forms of compensation. Of course, this wasn't the end. And it won't be the end as a very real Pandora's Box has been opened, exuding a plethora of ambiguities pertaining to the rights of people in relation to that all-encompassing vat of knowledge, the library, and the library's own rights to protect itself in the face of certain advantages being taken of it.
Part 1: Summary of Judge Sarokin's Opinion.
United States District Judge H. Lee Sarokin gave his opinion on the case of Richard R. Kreimer v. Bureau of Police for the Town of Morristown, et al. on May 22, 1991. Kreimer requested a judgement essentially declaring the library's "Patron Policy" invalid in that it denied him access to information guaranteed in the First Amendment. On May 16, 1989, in response to numerous complaints by patrons of inappropriate behavior by other users of the library, the Joint Free Public Library of Morristown, New Jersey adopted a list of rules to allow for the removal of persons who persisted in the disruption of the natural library functions. These rules were amended after criticism by the local ACLU to include the following entries:
Still, Sarokin's judgement was based primarily on the First Amendment to the United States Constitution regarding "freedom of speech." He also acknowledged that the New Jersey Legislature empowers the public library Board of Trustees with creating and enforcing rules and regulations regarding proper use of the library. So his opinion on the case was guided by the Morristown public library "policy" and its relationship to the freedoms expressed or implied by the U.S. Constitution. What is agreed is that reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions may be placed on a location, but that they must be narrow in breadth. It is also agreed that the library is a public place, but Sarokin contends that it is also a "'quintessential' public forum" [13]. Sarokin believes that designated public forums are treated the same as traditional public forums. While most can agree that the public library may be a designated or limited public forum, as in a meeting place for the expression of ideas, it may not be so easy to agree on calling it a "quintessential" public forum where speeches may be made.
Sarokin makes a point of squashing the notion that "annoyances" and "nuisances" as listed in the "policy" are different from "disturbances" which can and have been legitimately regulated against. Presumably, because the homeless can often be nuisances or annoyances, he feels that this language is overbroad. He also feels that to expel a homeless or poor person from a public library is an even greater crime because that person may not have the money to "purchase even a single newspaper" [18]. And his opinion of punishment "without any requirement of evidence or suggestion that the excluded patron will be disruptive on a later occasion" [18] is so liberal as to suggest that he believes that no one should be excluded from library privileges (or punished? or jailed?) ever. How can one prove that someone will be disruptive at a later date? Kreimer was documented as an annoyance/nuisance/disturbance at least four times in his pursuit of ideas prior to the library's drafting and implementation of the "policy." Sarokin offers no assistance in the dilemma.
Sarokin cites Brown v. Louisiana (1966) in his defense of Kreimer's right to occupy space in the library without actually using library materials. In Brown, five black men were arrested for occupying space in a library while conducting a silent protest without making use of library materials. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Brown on the grounds that the five men were not interfering with the library's function or annoying anyone. Sarokin feels that just as a patron can avert his eyes from an unwelcome or uncomfortable visual intrusion (such as persons assembled in silent protest) other patrons who consider intense bodily aroma to be a nuisance can simply move their seats [30]. Apparently, being forced to relocate one's materials and property to distant locations away from the offensive smell is not considered a disruption in Sarokin's view. He is simply concerned that these guidelines for library behavior may be abused by overzealous, librarians with overly sensitive olfactory organs. Sarokin believes that conditioning library usage on how a person smells forces an unfair and "unreasonable wealth classification" on the homeless and those who do not have access to soap and water (and those who urinate on themselves).
Regarding paragraph 1 of the "policy," Sarokin points out "that a patron may use the library as a quiet place...to balance a checkbook" (according to defendants' counsel). This supports Kreimer's claim that the rules are overbroad and unenforceable in that selective non-library related are allowed and others are not. Again, although Kreimer's activities were seen as "disruptive," the issue at hand was not Kreimer's actions but the wording of the "policy." Sarokin rules paragraph 1 (and, in fact, much of the "policy") as "hopelessly vague" and unconstitutional [28].
Sarokin only sees the library "policy" as harmful, forcing class distinctions, and limiting access to homeless individuals. He refuses to note that non-use of library materials in not the sole reason for denying an individual access. Paragraph 1 of the policy contain wording which appears broad, but "library activities" are often varied. Libraries often stock income tax forms which are not necessarily library materials, but are allowed to be filled out in the library. "Studying" can apply many things. Sarokin refuses to believe that librarians would not be competent enough to distinguish studying from staring vacantly into space. In Paragraph 5, Sarokin ignores the actions of "staring" and "following" to focus on the meanings of "harass" and "annoy." He fails to recognize that each broad term is contingent on the specific actions which accompanying it (actions which were directly attributed to the plaintiff). For reasons such as this, and others, the library chose to appeal.
In Response...
In response to Judge Sarokin's opinion there rose many different dissenting voices, giving the issue such a multi-faceted appearance as to make it as controversial as something as muddy and difficult to figure out as abortion. On the one hand, to begin with, the very nature of libraries being seen as highly elevated sanctums of learning which possess the power and responsibility of being there when a person has the volition to be intellectually illuminated, puts the library on a high ethical level because learning is perhaps one of the most ineffable erasers of class or status.
"The Public Library is one of the great symbols of democracy" [NJLA, 22] and the American Library Association has always been at the forefront of supporting equal access to information for all people, including the homeless and low income peersons. This is further iterated in the fact that libraries retain the responsibility for urging the poor to take advantage of this democratic society through use of the library. Thus the library tends to err on the side of the underdog. However, there still remains the fact that the library must retain its essential purpose, and rules must be made and followed in order to realize this end. "The exchange of ideas is an essential part of the educational process, but the need for discipline and order is great....." [NJLA, 15]. This quote appeared in a discussion contained in the "Brief on Behalf of Amicus Curiae, New Jersey Library Association," speaking about the fact that while the library is a public forum, it is differentiated from streets and parks in that, like a fairground which happened to be the subject of another case Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., its parameters set a delimiting factor which makes it altogether necessary to set certain guidelines as to its usage and functions. In the Heffron case, "Justice White authored the United States Supreme Court's holding which upheld regulations that restricted First Amendment expression in a limited public forum" [NJLA, 12]. It goes on to cite another case in which protesters were barred from putting up tents in Lafayette Park, Washington, DC, "to draw attention to the plight of the homeless" [15]. This case, Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, met its end when it was decided that a particular regulation was for
The NJLA is dismayed at the chilling effect the opinion exerts on library boards of trustees attempting to adopt rules and regulations to ensure that all persons have the right to use the facility for library related activities" [NJLA, 23].
The matter is ambiguous, because in protecting the rights of everyone, there are inevitably going to be inequities of rights protected, and whose rights take precedence when this occurs? "While the library as a forum may be imbued with First Amendment protection, each occupant of the library is not automatically enshrouded with a First Amendment cloak." [NJLA, 23].
For instance, in the case that was addressed, that being simply the fact of his bodily hygiene, there were also occurrences of behavior that were not brought out, one being the harassment of children. The issue here is whose rights are to be deemed more "important", Mr. Kreimer's or the child who is also in the library designated for serving his purposes as well as Mr. Kreimer's.
While the fact exists that through the resolve of the American Library Association, that "libraries serve the function of making ideas and information available to all members of society, without discrimination...including the indigent or the economically disadvantaged...The right of free access to information for all individuals is basic to all aspects of library service" [Appeal, 6], public libraries must be able "to ensure that all patrons may exercise their First Amendment right to use the facilities unhampered by the conduct of other patrons" [Appeal, 21].
In other words, while Judge Sarokin admitted on the one hand that he agreed that libraries should not be utilized as soup kitchens or shelters for the needy, he contradicts himself by using the other hand to still all efforts at protecting the libraries' role in the promulgating of the First Amendment:
All in all, Judge Sarokin succeeds very well in repeatedly contradicting himself. At one point he upholds the rule designating the necessity of shoes and shirts for health reasons, which is not a disruptive issue, but then further along the line, he limits other equally important areas saying that they do not fit in with the disruptive standard.
Furthermore, at the same time, as saying that the existing roles of the Morristown Public Library were too vague, he trimmed them down to the disruptive rule, and they are, though more proscribed, equally vague in their adumbrated state. The result of this reality is that "the Sarokin decision will have a chilling effect on libraries because many will not promulgate needed regulations" [NJLA, 28].
Another point to be considered is the fact that this case could be taken out of the context of the library and stated in general terms of conduct which would apply anywhere. This is briefly summarized in the amicus of the Freedom To Read Foundation: "If, in a particular case, a public library could demonstrate that other substantial interests--including public safety, compliance with state or local laws of general application, etc.---support a particular regulation, that regulation could be upheld if the library could also demonstrate that the library's interest is unrelated to the suppression of freedom of expression and that the regulation's 'incidental effect on access to the information is no greater than is necessary to further that other interest'" [24].
In defending Richard Kreimer, a variety of "nit-picking" elements were put forth attacking the "vagueness" and "subjectiveness" of the library patron policy. One point that was brought up dealt with the policy that the library must be used for library related purposes- in retaliation to this it was opined that when an individual stopped reading and began contemplating, that was the point at which he must leave.
It seems that in the revered sanctum of law terms that there could be room for a little common "horse-sense," without the danger of litigation. There is a veritable chasm which exists between the example of a patron engaged in contemplating with his eyes closed what he has just read and the point to which the plight of the Las Vegas- Clark County Public Library has reached: a lawsuit was filed on behalf of homeless patrons, alleging that "the library used the odor policy and restrictions on baggage and periodicals used to deny service to the library...anywhere from 25 to 250 homeless individuals use the facility as a shelter daily, but when a homeless rights action is being staged, they fill up all 125 available seats...[which] makes it impossible for us to function as a library'" [AL, 127].
In light of this glaring disparity, it is indeed evident that what is needed is "that a statutory or regulatory prohibition be set out in terms that the 'ordinary person exercising ordinary common sense' can sufficiently understand and comply with" [JFPB, 39]. And, "according to the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, a 'library' is 'a place set apart to contain books and other material for reading, study or reference...' The Patron Policy enumerates library related activities as 'reading', 'studying', and' using library materials'. How the district court could conclude that the general public would not understand that a library is a place to go to read, study and use library materials is unfathomable" [JFPB, 40]. But lacking sufficient common sense, the American Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee has drafted a list a guidelines which should ease concern over the problem. With their assistance and support, situations such as the Kreimer case should be avoided in the future.
Appeal.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Sarokin's decision in the Kreimer v. Morristown case. The court rejected Sarokin's "Opinion" on several grounds. In response to Sarokin's claims that a library is a "quintessential public forum," the court concluded that a library is not like a public park or sidewalk: "a library patron cannot be permitted to engage in most traditional First Amendment activities in the library, such as giving speeches or engaging in any other conduct that would disrupt the quiet and peaceful library environment" [the Appeal document contains no page numbers and is printed unevenly, so the specific locations of these, and the following quotes, is unavailable]. The court then concluded that a library is only a limited public forum, designated for a specific purpose. The use of the library as a meeting place is not in dispute. But Sarokin "relied heavily, and in [their] view, improperly, on the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Louisiana...the [Supreme] Court was quick to point out that 'the circumstances here were such that no claim can be made that use of the library by others was disturbed by the demonstration.'" Sarokin envisions a library where freedoms are absolute and not reliant on the effects which certain activities may have on others. There is a definite and essential difference between quiet protest and Kreimer's physical and odoriferous intrusions: "rule 9 does prohibit behavior that is actually disruptive, for the offensive nature of the patron's bodily hygiene must rise to the level of a nuisance before the patron may be expelled from the Library."
Sarokin's "Opinion" is also challenged in its use of the homeless as a "suspect class." The "policy" rules make no mention of a homeless class; it is only the sensational nature surrounding the events of Kreimer's situation and the current problems involving the homeless and where they spend their time which influenced Sarokin's attitudes toward the "policy." "To provide a fair method to expel any disruptive patron...the rules [of the policy] need only survive the lowest standard of review for equal protection purposes" according to the court.
The court found that "on their face" the rules contained within the library "policy" were "not invalid." Although there are several broad terms in the "policy," the court ruled that this "is not synonymous with vagueness" as charged by Kreimer and decided by Sarokin. Therefore, the decision was overturned.
Conclusion.
It is initially very easy to form a pre-mature opinion on either side of this case, but on delving further into the intricacies involved the issue quickly becomes less easy to assimilate.
There are valid points to both sides of the issue, and the factor which must ultimately tip the scales stems from several different considerations; these being what the purpose of the library come down to, and how many people are being benefitted as opposed to the rights of an individual being allegedly violated. "An individual's presence in a church does not transform him into an apostle...It appears from the record that the plaintiff's activities in the library are unrelated to his use of the library for library related activities" [NJLA, 25].
It appears that simply through his being able to sue using legal technicalities, Kreimer was able to assert his own rights at the expense of rights of many individuals who come to the library for intellectual enlightenment. This is obviously, using common sense, not just. the issue is not that he was being discriminated against, but that he was imposing himself in such a way as to curtail the rights of many other individuals.
The fact is that no matter what he might wish to do in the public library, taking advantage of his rights to the First Amendment, that certain guidelines must be followed in using the public library, or it will fail to serve its purpose.
"Public libraries should be and, under our constitution, must be accessible to rich and poor alike, but should not be equated to or mistaken for public parks, either by our courts or our citizenry. Libraries are a place for quiet, orderly pursuit of knowledge, not a public hangout, and the Constitution does not prohibit the promulgation of regulations designed to enforce that distinction" [AG, 2].
It seems that in the final analysis, the most important quality to be exercised is common sense.
Works Cited
Appeal, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 91-5501, March 23, 1992.
Attorney General of New Jersey, Amicus, 91-5501, November 4, 1991.
Freedom to Read Foundation, Amicus, 91-5501, September 11, 1991.
Joint Free Public Library of Morristown, Amicus, 91-5501, August 9, 1991.
New Jersey Library Association, Amicus, 91-5501, September 21, 1991.
"News Front," American Libraries, February, 1992, p. 127.
Public Advocate of New Jersey, Amicus, 91-5501, November 26, 1991.
Sarokin, H. Lee, U.S. District Court Judge, Kreimer v. Morristown, 90-554, May 22, 1991
So here goes. I don't remember what grade I got, so plagiarize at your own risk (if you think rewriting a 1992 paper will help your grade).
And fyi, I remember that a few days before the paper was due, the court rendered the decision and we had to get permission to go to the law library and log on to lexis/nexis and get a copy of it. Remember when database searching was, like, six dollars a minute?
And this goes without say, but IANAL, so any opinions expressed in this paper that piss you off are for entertainment purposes only.
Introduction.
The case which was investigated and scrutinized was one which will certainly have a distinct effect on libraries and library policies for a long time to come. It arises from a plethora of opposing sides, opinions of how the library should be used, and what rules will be utilized in keeping its innate "library functions" and how these all weave into the First Amendment's right to freedom of speech which in turn "encompasses a right to receive ideas" [PA, 3].
The difficulty of this case arises from the enormous responsibility of the library which is really quite mind-boggling. There will be long term repercussions which will result from the importance of the library's fulfilling an almost impossible goal. First of all, "[t]he library does have a unique role as the storehouse of the First Amendment. The world of books is the most remarkable creation of man. Nothing else that he builds ever lasts. Monuments fall; nations perish; civilizations grow old and die out; and after an ere of darkness, new races build others. But in the world of books are volumes that have seen this happen again and again, and yet live on, still young, still fresh as the day they were written, still telling men's hearts of the hearts of men centuries dead" [NJLA, 20].
Considering this, the importance of the case of Kreimer v. Morristown takes on and especially poignant quality, and the difficulty of solving it stems from opposing, but thoroughly legitimate points of view.
At the time of the specific controversy, Richard Kreimer was a 41-year old homeless man who used the Joint Free Public Library of Morristown, New Jersey on a regular basis. There came a point, however, when he wasn't just using the library perhaps for reading books or magazines, but was engaged in certain activities which could be considered a nuisance. Although he was also reported to have harassed certain women and children as well as being belligerent to a librarian, the main point that seems to have arisen was that he exuded a particularly foul odor and caused it to be impossible for other people to exercise their own rights in the usage of the Library.
In response to this problem, the Library drew up specific rules for the purpose of dealing with the men and subsequently had him evicted on the premises of the new rules.
He retaliated by bringing the case to court with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union, and under the decision of Judge H. Lee Sarokin, it was found that his rights as pertained to the First and Fourteenth Amendments had been violated and he was awarded over $250,000 in various forms of compensation. Of course, this wasn't the end. And it won't be the end as a very real Pandora's Box has been opened, exuding a plethora of ambiguities pertaining to the rights of people in relation to that all-encompassing vat of knowledge, the library, and the library's own rights to protect itself in the face of certain advantages being taken of it.
Part 1: Summary of Judge Sarokin's Opinion.
United States District Judge H. Lee Sarokin gave his opinion on the case of Richard R. Kreimer v. Bureau of Police for the Town of Morristown, et al. on May 22, 1991. Kreimer requested a judgement essentially declaring the library's "Patron Policy" invalid in that it denied him access to information guaranteed in the First Amendment. On May 16, 1989, in response to numerous complaints by patrons of inappropriate behavior by other users of the library, the Joint Free Public Library of Morristown, New Jersey adopted a list of rules to allow for the removal of persons who persisted in the disruption of the natural library functions. These rules were amended after criticism by the local ACLU to include the following entries:
1. Patrons shall be engaged in normal activities associated with the use ofIn his opinion in favor of the plaintiff, Sarokin noted several cases and reasons to support his decision. He lauded the public library as "one of our great symbols of democracy" [1], and he admitted that libraries "should not be transformed into hotels...for the needy" [2]. But yet, he suggested that although the "public has a right designate which of its institutions shall be utilized for particular purposes," [2] he elevates the status of Kreimer above that of the library, the "great symbol of democracy" by classifying Kreimer as a "homeless" as if the condition of homelessness is a bargaining chip used to up the ante in Kreimer's favor. If fact, Kreimer is excluded from the decision altogether, as if his activities don't matter at all, only his position as a homeless, as Sarokin explains that "this motion...does not...pertain to [the] plaintiff's conduct in any way" [3]. Sarokin also notes the opinion of amicus the American Civil Liberties Union on their concern that the "Patron Policy" of the Joint Free Library of Morristown might deny one class of persons the use of library facilities while allowing another free use. Sarokin and the ACLU have designated this class; the library policy has made no such distinction between others and the homeless, only between those who annoy by noise-making or "bodily hygiene [which] is so offensive as to constitute a nuisance to other persons" and others who do not.
a public library while in the building. Patrons not engaged in reading, studying, or using library materials shall be asked to leave the building.
5. Patrons shall respect the rights of other patrons and shall not harass or annoy others through noisy or boisterous activities, by staring at another with the intent to annoy that person, by following another person about the building with the intent to
annoy that person, by playing walkmans or other audio equipment so that others can hear it, by singing or talking to oneself or any other behavior which may reasonably
result in the disturbance of other persons.
9. Patrons shall not be permitted to enter the building without a shirt or other covering of their upper bodies or without shoes or other footwear.
Patrons whose bodily hygiene is so offensive as to constitute a nuisance to other persons shall be required to leave the building.
Still, Sarokin's judgement was based primarily on the First Amendment to the United States Constitution regarding "freedom of speech." He also acknowledged that the New Jersey Legislature empowers the public library Board of Trustees with creating and enforcing rules and regulations regarding proper use of the library. So his opinion on the case was guided by the Morristown public library "policy" and its relationship to the freedoms expressed or implied by the U.S. Constitution. What is agreed is that reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions may be placed on a location, but that they must be narrow in breadth. It is also agreed that the library is a public place, but Sarokin contends that it is also a "'quintessential' public forum" [13]. Sarokin believes that designated public forums are treated the same as traditional public forums. While most can agree that the public library may be a designated or limited public forum, as in a meeting place for the expression of ideas, it may not be so easy to agree on calling it a "quintessential" public forum where speeches may be made.
Sarokin makes a point of squashing the notion that "annoyances" and "nuisances" as listed in the "policy" are different from "disturbances" which can and have been legitimately regulated against. Presumably, because the homeless can often be nuisances or annoyances, he feels that this language is overbroad. He also feels that to expel a homeless or poor person from a public library is an even greater crime because that person may not have the money to "purchase even a single newspaper" [18]. And his opinion of punishment "without any requirement of evidence or suggestion that the excluded patron will be disruptive on a later occasion" [18] is so liberal as to suggest that he believes that no one should be excluded from library privileges (or punished? or jailed?) ever. How can one prove that someone will be disruptive at a later date? Kreimer was documented as an annoyance/nuisance/disturbance at least four times in his pursuit of ideas prior to the library's drafting and implementation of the "policy." Sarokin offers no assistance in the dilemma.
Sarokin cites Brown v. Louisiana (1966) in his defense of Kreimer's right to occupy space in the library without actually using library materials. In Brown, five black men were arrested for occupying space in a library while conducting a silent protest without making use of library materials. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Brown on the grounds that the five men were not interfering with the library's function or annoying anyone. Sarokin feels that just as a patron can avert his eyes from an unwelcome or uncomfortable visual intrusion (such as persons assembled in silent protest) other patrons who consider intense bodily aroma to be a nuisance can simply move their seats [30]. Apparently, being forced to relocate one's materials and property to distant locations away from the offensive smell is not considered a disruption in Sarokin's view. He is simply concerned that these guidelines for library behavior may be abused by overzealous, librarians with overly sensitive olfactory organs. Sarokin believes that conditioning library usage on how a person smells forces an unfair and "unreasonable wealth classification" on the homeless and those who do not have access to soap and water (and those who urinate on themselves).
Regarding paragraph 1 of the "policy," Sarokin points out "that a patron may use the library as a quiet place...to balance a checkbook" (according to defendants' counsel). This supports Kreimer's claim that the rules are overbroad and unenforceable in that selective non-library related are allowed and others are not. Again, although Kreimer's activities were seen as "disruptive," the issue at hand was not Kreimer's actions but the wording of the "policy." Sarokin rules paragraph 1 (and, in fact, much of the "policy") as "hopelessly vague" and unconstitutional [28].
Sarokin only sees the library "policy" as harmful, forcing class distinctions, and limiting access to homeless individuals. He refuses to note that non-use of library materials in not the sole reason for denying an individual access. Paragraph 1 of the policy contain wording which appears broad, but "library activities" are often varied. Libraries often stock income tax forms which are not necessarily library materials, but are allowed to be filled out in the library. "Studying" can apply many things. Sarokin refuses to believe that librarians would not be competent enough to distinguish studying from staring vacantly into space. In Paragraph 5, Sarokin ignores the actions of "staring" and "following" to focus on the meanings of "harass" and "annoy." He fails to recognize that each broad term is contingent on the specific actions which accompanying it (actions which were directly attributed to the plaintiff). For reasons such as this, and others, the library chose to appeal.
In Response...
In response to Judge Sarokin's opinion there rose many different dissenting voices, giving the issue such a multi-faceted appearance as to make it as controversial as something as muddy and difficult to figure out as abortion. On the one hand, to begin with, the very nature of libraries being seen as highly elevated sanctums of learning which possess the power and responsibility of being there when a person has the volition to be intellectually illuminated, puts the library on a high ethical level because learning is perhaps one of the most ineffable erasers of class or status.
"The Public Library is one of the great symbols of democracy" [NJLA, 22] and the American Library Association has always been at the forefront of supporting equal access to information for all people, including the homeless and low income peersons. This is further iterated in the fact that libraries retain the responsibility for urging the poor to take advantage of this democratic society through use of the library. Thus the library tends to err on the side of the underdog. However, there still remains the fact that the library must retain its essential purpose, and rules must be made and followed in order to realize this end. "The exchange of ideas is an essential part of the educational process, but the need for discipline and order is great....." [NJLA, 15]. This quote appeared in a discussion contained in the "Brief on Behalf of Amicus Curiae, New Jersey Library Association," speaking about the fact that while the library is a public forum, it is differentiated from streets and parks in that, like a fairground which happened to be the subject of another case Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., its parameters set a delimiting factor which makes it altogether necessary to set certain guidelines as to its usage and functions. In the Heffron case, "Justice White authored the United States Supreme Court's holding which upheld regulations that restricted First Amendment expression in a limited public forum" [NJLA, 12]. It goes on to cite another case in which protesters were barred from putting up tents in Lafayette Park, Washington, DC, "to draw attention to the plight of the homeless" [15]. This case, Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, met its end when it was decided that a particular regulation was for
maintain[ing] the parks in the heart of our Capital in an attractive and intact condition, readily available to the millions of people who wish to see and enjoy them by their presence. To permit camping--using these areas as living accommodations would be totally inimical to these purposes, as would be readily apparent by those who have frequented the National Parks across the country and observed the unfortunate consequences of the activity of those who refuse to confine their camping to designated areas [16].In this view, the opinion of Judge Sarokin that libraries should only be able to make rules involving loud or boisterous activity, or extremely ostensible botherance erects a limiting device to the need of the library for regulating non-library related activities.
The NJLA is dismayed at the chilling effect the opinion exerts on library boards of trustees attempting to adopt rules and regulations to ensure that all persons have the right to use the facility for library related activities" [NJLA, 23].
The matter is ambiguous, because in protecting the rights of everyone, there are inevitably going to be inequities of rights protected, and whose rights take precedence when this occurs? "While the library as a forum may be imbued with First Amendment protection, each occupant of the library is not automatically enshrouded with a First Amendment cloak." [NJLA, 23].
For instance, in the case that was addressed, that being simply the fact of his bodily hygiene, there were also occurrences of behavior that were not brought out, one being the harassment of children. The issue here is whose rights are to be deemed more "important", Mr. Kreimer's or the child who is also in the library designated for serving his purposes as well as Mr. Kreimer's.
While the fact exists that through the resolve of the American Library Association, that "libraries serve the function of making ideas and information available to all members of society, without discrimination...including the indigent or the economically disadvantaged...The right of free access to information for all individuals is basic to all aspects of library service" [Appeal, 6], public libraries must be able "to ensure that all patrons may exercise their First Amendment right to use the facilities unhampered by the conduct of other patrons" [Appeal, 21].
In other words, while Judge Sarokin admitted on the one hand that he agreed that libraries should not be utilized as soup kitchens or shelters for the needy, he contradicts himself by using the other hand to still all efforts at protecting the libraries' role in the promulgating of the First Amendment:
By developing regulations which clarify the limited public forum of theThis amicus curiae goes on to a second point in which it puts forth a rebuttal to Judge Sarokin's ruling that the only restrictions that may be made regarding proscription of activities in the libraries are those relating to disruptive behavior. The negative aspect of this is simply that in trying to prohibit ambiguity, the judge succeeded in limiting the issue to the point of denuding it of salient points. In Point II of the NJLA amicus, the point is brought up that "under the trial court's rationale, plaintiff could exercise, sleep, operate a business, knit, and engage in innumerable other activities that are incompatible with the use of the library. Not only is the use unintended, but more importantly, it precludes patrons who seek to use the library from utilizing the library's resources and services" [26].
library, its board of trustees are protecting and strengthening the role
of the forum for all...for example, certain libraries have adopted
guidelines that require small children to be accompanied by an adult.
The avowed purpose of the guideline is the safety of the child, as well as to
ensure that the child is not disruptive [NJLA, 22].
All in all, Judge Sarokin succeeds very well in repeatedly contradicting himself. At one point he upholds the rule designating the necessity of shoes and shirts for health reasons, which is not a disruptive issue, but then further along the line, he limits other equally important areas saying that they do not fit in with the disruptive standard.
Furthermore, at the same time, as saying that the existing roles of the Morristown Public Library were too vague, he trimmed them down to the disruptive rule, and they are, though more proscribed, equally vague in their adumbrated state. The result of this reality is that "the Sarokin decision will have a chilling effect on libraries because many will not promulgate needed regulations" [NJLA, 28].
Another point to be considered is the fact that this case could be taken out of the context of the library and stated in general terms of conduct which would apply anywhere. This is briefly summarized in the amicus of the Freedom To Read Foundation: "If, in a particular case, a public library could demonstrate that other substantial interests--including public safety, compliance with state or local laws of general application, etc.---support a particular regulation, that regulation could be upheld if the library could also demonstrate that the library's interest is unrelated to the suppression of freedom of expression and that the regulation's 'incidental effect on access to the information is no greater than is necessary to further that other interest'" [24].
In defending Richard Kreimer, a variety of "nit-picking" elements were put forth attacking the "vagueness" and "subjectiveness" of the library patron policy. One point that was brought up dealt with the policy that the library must be used for library related purposes- in retaliation to this it was opined that when an individual stopped reading and began contemplating, that was the point at which he must leave.
It seems that in the revered sanctum of law terms that there could be room for a little common "horse-sense," without the danger of litigation. There is a veritable chasm which exists between the example of a patron engaged in contemplating with his eyes closed what he has just read and the point to which the plight of the Las Vegas- Clark County Public Library has reached: a lawsuit was filed on behalf of homeless patrons, alleging that "the library used the odor policy and restrictions on baggage and periodicals used to deny service to the library...anywhere from 25 to 250 homeless individuals use the facility as a shelter daily, but when a homeless rights action is being staged, they fill up all 125 available seats...[which] makes it impossible for us to function as a library'" [AL, 127].
In light of this glaring disparity, it is indeed evident that what is needed is "that a statutory or regulatory prohibition be set out in terms that the 'ordinary person exercising ordinary common sense' can sufficiently understand and comply with" [JFPB, 39]. And, "according to the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, a 'library' is 'a place set apart to contain books and other material for reading, study or reference...' The Patron Policy enumerates library related activities as 'reading', 'studying', and' using library materials'. How the district court could conclude that the general public would not understand that a library is a place to go to read, study and use library materials is unfathomable" [JFPB, 40]. But lacking sufficient common sense, the American Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee has drafted a list a guidelines which should ease concern over the problem. With their assistance and support, situations such as the Kreimer case should be avoided in the future.
Appeal.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Sarokin's decision in the Kreimer v. Morristown case. The court rejected Sarokin's "Opinion" on several grounds. In response to Sarokin's claims that a library is a "quintessential public forum," the court concluded that a library is not like a public park or sidewalk: "a library patron cannot be permitted to engage in most traditional First Amendment activities in the library, such as giving speeches or engaging in any other conduct that would disrupt the quiet and peaceful library environment" [the Appeal document contains no page numbers and is printed unevenly, so the specific locations of these, and the following quotes, is unavailable]. The court then concluded that a library is only a limited public forum, designated for a specific purpose. The use of the library as a meeting place is not in dispute. But Sarokin "relied heavily, and in [their] view, improperly, on the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Louisiana...the [Supreme] Court was quick to point out that 'the circumstances here were such that no claim can be made that use of the library by others was disturbed by the demonstration.'" Sarokin envisions a library where freedoms are absolute and not reliant on the effects which certain activities may have on others. There is a definite and essential difference between quiet protest and Kreimer's physical and odoriferous intrusions: "rule 9 does prohibit behavior that is actually disruptive, for the offensive nature of the patron's bodily hygiene must rise to the level of a nuisance before the patron may be expelled from the Library."
Sarokin's "Opinion" is also challenged in its use of the homeless as a "suspect class." The "policy" rules make no mention of a homeless class; it is only the sensational nature surrounding the events of Kreimer's situation and the current problems involving the homeless and where they spend their time which influenced Sarokin's attitudes toward the "policy." "To provide a fair method to expel any disruptive patron...the rules [of the policy] need only survive the lowest standard of review for equal protection purposes" according to the court.
The court found that "on their face" the rules contained within the library "policy" were "not invalid." Although there are several broad terms in the "policy," the court ruled that this "is not synonymous with vagueness" as charged by Kreimer and decided by Sarokin. Therefore, the decision was overturned.
Conclusion.
It is initially very easy to form a pre-mature opinion on either side of this case, but on delving further into the intricacies involved the issue quickly becomes less easy to assimilate.
There are valid points to both sides of the issue, and the factor which must ultimately tip the scales stems from several different considerations; these being what the purpose of the library come down to, and how many people are being benefitted as opposed to the rights of an individual being allegedly violated. "An individual's presence in a church does not transform him into an apostle...It appears from the record that the plaintiff's activities in the library are unrelated to his use of the library for library related activities" [NJLA, 25].
It appears that simply through his being able to sue using legal technicalities, Kreimer was able to assert his own rights at the expense of rights of many individuals who come to the library for intellectual enlightenment. This is obviously, using common sense, not just. the issue is not that he was being discriminated against, but that he was imposing himself in such a way as to curtail the rights of many other individuals.
The fact is that no matter what he might wish to do in the public library, taking advantage of his rights to the First Amendment, that certain guidelines must be followed in using the public library, or it will fail to serve its purpose.
"Public libraries should be and, under our constitution, must be accessible to rich and poor alike, but should not be equated to or mistaken for public parks, either by our courts or our citizenry. Libraries are a place for quiet, orderly pursuit of knowledge, not a public hangout, and the Constitution does not prohibit the promulgation of regulations designed to enforce that distinction" [AG, 2].
It seems that in the final analysis, the most important quality to be exercised is common sense.
There are limitations in the English language with respect to being both
specific and manageable brief, and it seems to us that although the prohibitions
may not satisfy those intent on finding fault at any cost, they are set out
in terms that the ordinary person exercising ordinary common sense can
sufficiently understand and comply with, without sacrifice to the public
interest [JFPB, 41].
Works Cited
Appeal, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 91-5501, March 23, 1992.
Attorney General of New Jersey, Amicus, 91-5501, November 4, 1991.
Freedom to Read Foundation, Amicus, 91-5501, September 11, 1991.
Joint Free Public Library of Morristown, Amicus, 91-5501, August 9, 1991.
New Jersey Library Association, Amicus, 91-5501, September 21, 1991.
"News Front," American Libraries, February, 1992, p. 127.
Public Advocate of New Jersey, Amicus, 91-5501, November 26, 1991.
Sarokin, H. Lee, U.S. District Court Judge, Kreimer v. Morristown, 90-554, May 22, 1991
Monday, September 24, 2007
Ye Olde Skoole Dayze.
It took a few hours, but I was finally able to put together an old Win98 machine with a five-and-a-quarter floppy to get to my files from my library school days. And since these assignments were written in early 1992, you may need to check an old pre-millenium dictionary for proper spelling and use; I tried to clean up some smeared ink from my quill pen.
(Remember, this is from April 1992, so forgive me for not mentioning Google. I think their ship hadn't arrived on our planet yet.)
(Remember, this is from April 1992, so forgive me for not mentioning Google. I think their ship hadn't arrived on our planet yet.)
"Probably, if not certainly, the most consistently recurring issue in the information field is fear. Fear of new technology threatens progress. Although most now agree that the overall threat from computers is minimal, the fear associated with the instantaneous transfer of data and the voluminous quantities of material which can be stored electronically (and hardly anyone understands how that works) and invisibly is common and understandable. Does anyone really know what happens to data once it is stored? How reliable is the system--does it store exactly what I tell it to, or does it become altered in some way? How do I protect my information from being stolen or intercepted when it's transferred over the phone lines? These are all fears which have to be overcome by information professionals daily.
The fear can be compounded by another issue currently on the frontal lobes of information professionals: the global community. The expanding information needs of developed and developing countries is and will be a major information science issue for the coming decades. Information technologies such as integrated services digital networks (ISDN) are being used to link multiples of users together at work stations via international telephone lines. This allows for persons with related interests from any area with good telephone connections to "meet" and participate in real "same-time" dialogue with the assistance of computers, video monitors, and satellite links. The need to travel hundreds or even thousands of miles for conferences or seminars can be eliminated.
Global universities are also possibilities as technologies advance. Students may find that they can take courses in other countries with native students without leaving their local college.
Although the main obstacle blocking these world-wide advancements is not fear of technology, but fear of American influence, and fear of the loss of nationalism, and of culture. Unlike Americans and most Europeans, many of the societies in the rest of the world base their loyalties and beliefs in the larger group mentality and not in individuality. Access to information upsets those systems.
Thus, the expanding "global village" and the fear of technology will continue to be related concerns for members of the information village. It is extremely important for us to allay those fears by establishing some ethical guidelines.
So, given the emotional importance of ethics in the world of information technology, it is vital that some ethical issues be considered. Since information science is such a new area and since there is little state or federal legislation to regulate it, the need for professional ethics is essential. The right to privacy has always been recognized as fundamental, but in the newest technology, how can it be guaranteed? Therefore, privacy becomes paramount in any respectable information scientists' code of ethics. Legal and product liability are also major concerns as databases are being constructed and sold as products. Who becomes liable in the event that information in a database proves to be wrong, or harmful, or causes injury or death? Should the original author be held responsible or should it be the database organizer? These questions have yet to be tried or resolved. Solid ethical guidelines should minimize the odds that resolution will be necessary. The idea of intellectual property ownership requires ethical principles to keep the waters calm. Who owns the database when it consists of other copyrighted works and only the collective work is owned by the database builder? How can data be protected during electronic transfer? Can it be intercepted prior to the author establishing proper copyright protection criteria? Again, strong ethics can minimize these events.
Since much of the future of information science will continue to rely on telecommunications technology for information access and retrieval, the most important recent legislative event was the granting of, and the revocation of special services privileges to the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOC). If allowed, it could allow for telephone companies to out price their competition for information services because they own the technology which carries it. It could create huge telephone/information monopolies which could regulate the value of information and charge whatever they wished. If allowed, it could kill the individual information broker or send him scurrying to the nearest academic library to use its system."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)