Tracking Digital Censorship

In recent days we’ve seen reports of libraries from K-12 to college losing access to venerable and trusted databases such as Opposing Viewpoints as well as several Gale products, particularly those related to topics such as gender, sexuality, and environmental studies. While the pace may have quickened, the sudden disappearance of such databases is not new.

Earlier this year Library Futures released an in-depth study of digital content suppression. In our research, we uncovered six key findings:

1. Challenges against “porn” in library databases are not only unsubstantiated— they are sometimes purposeful acts of disinformation presented with false narratives about the source, context, or character of the information.
2. Despite the claims from censorship advocates that minors use library databases to access porn, there is no evidence to support this claim, as well as more than five years of evidence from Utah demonstrating that students use databases to conduct normal and assigned student research.
3. Increased content bans and the threat of worrisome legislation have a chilling effect on libraries, with librarians reporting “self-censorship” even when content hasn’t been challenged.
4. Database providers have implemented more local controls as a result of the EBSCO pornography accusations, resulting in an increased use of overly restrictive topwords and other filtering that limits minors’ access to critical information, particularly health and race information.
5. High-volume content challenges often originate from a single or small number of sources that wield disproportionate influence through use of social media or capturing the attention of an authority figure. These challengers often circumvent established policies and procedures to rapidly escalate their threats.
6. Claims of pornography in library materials are based on discriminatory ideologies that can negatively impact children’s learning, civil rights, and wellbeing. However, students recognize the real harm in censorship and are one of the most powerful change agents when advocating for or against legislation impacting library collections.

The report details the increased use of stop words, the effects of soft censorship on library collections, and the legislation around the country aimed at reducing student access to information in the name of protecting them from dangerous ideas.

Library Futures continues to track digital content suppression. If you have information to share, please get in touch. (And if you come across misinformation in the form of AI slop, we’ve got a place for you to report that, too.)