By Andy Brack , updated 10/1/23 | Librarians are learning the S.C. State Library in August quietly notified the national trade association for libraries that the state was not renewing its membership because it felt the group was “tone deaf” on local book bans and other issues.
In an Aug. 21 letter not widely known in public until recent days, agency director Leesa M. Aiken wrote the American Library Association (ALA) that the state library was leaving, in part, because of the group’s “hyper-focus on groups of people at the exclusion of others [that] has been problematic for libraries and has hindered their ability to engage with all members of the communities and government representatives.”
One librarian, who asked not to be named for fear of retribution, was shocked by Aiken’s letter: “The South Carolina State Library director’s action is a slap in the face to librarians and library patrons in South Carolina. Is the State Library operating with professional library standards in mind or are they caving to the whims of South Carolina’s elected officials?”
Late Friday, an ALA spokesman said the group met with Aiken on Sept. 28 for a “brief but fruitful discussion.”
“It is unfortunate that the State Library of South Carolina has decided not to renew its ALA membership,” a statement said. “Despite that decision, ALA remains committed to providing essential support, resources, and opportunities for every library and library worker in every state and territory across the nation to help them better serve their communities.”
Red state exodus?
To some, the State Library’s letter appears to be part of a concerted conservative effort to counteract what libraries do. Four days after Aiken’s letter went to the ALA, freshman state Superintendent of Education Ellen Weaver disassociated the agency from a 50-year affiliation with the S.C. Association of School Librarians. Among the concerns: how the group spoke out against censorship in libraries.
According to a Sept. 13 story, libraries in red states are pulling out of the ALA because of its defense of challenged books.
Aiken’s letter included a focus on book bans, which are sweeping the nation as it has become more politically polarized: “Guidance which has been provided by ALA concerning book bans, and handling difficult situations locally have quite frankly been tone-deaf and show a lack of understanding of what is happening in the field. … ALA’s action [sic] appear to be activism for certain groups of people and not advocacy for libraries and all of the people they serve.”
In its Sept. 29 statement, the ALA noted that it was a member-driven organization with almost 50,000 members who adopted a “Library Bill of Rights” in 1939 partially out of a concern of suppression of information observed by governments in the 1930s. “Among those principles is, ‘A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background or views.”
Aiken’s criticism of the ALA extended to what she wrote were “inaccurate and slanted” depictions of South Carolina’s library funding: “For the last four years when I have presented my state budget, I have spent at least half of my time answering questions about the actions of ALA and have been unable to focus on my actual budget requests.”
Aiken did not respond to an inquiry on Sept. 29 for more information.
But the ALA said it was successful in working with members to boost state aid to libraries from 2019 to 2023 by $380,757 to a total of $3.02 million.
The S.C. State Library administers federal and state support for libraries in the Palmetto State, including “public library development, library service for state institutions, service for the blind and physically handicapped, and library service to state government agencies,” according to its website.
- Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com.
We Can Do Better, South Carolina!
Embarrassed and appalled that politics appears to dictate this course of action, contrary to constitutional guarantees.