Laserfiche WebLink
• There is no place in our society for efforts to coerce the taste of others, to confine adults to the reading matter <br />deemed suitable for adolescents, or to inhibit the efforts of writers to achieve artistic expression. <br />• To some, much of modern expression is shocking. But is not much of life itself shocking? We cut off literature at <br />the source if we prevent writers from dealing with the stuff of life. Parents and teachers have a responsibility to <br />prepare the young to meet the diversity of experiences in life to which they will be exposed, as they have a <br />responsibility to help them learn to think critically for themselves. These are affirmative responsibilities, not to <br />be discharged simply by preventing them from reading works for which they are not yet prepared. In these <br />matters values differ, and values cannot be legislated; nor can machinery be devised that will suit the demands <br />of one group without limiting the freedom of others. <br />• It is not in the public interest to force a reader to accept the prejudgment of a label characterizing any <br />expression or its author as subversive or dangerous. <br />• The ideal of labeling presupposes the existence of individuals or groups with wisdom to determine by authority <br />what is good or bad for others. It presupposes that individuals must be directed in making up their minds about <br />the ideas they examine. But Americans do not need others to do their thinking for them. <br />• It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians, as guardians of the people's freedom to read, to contest <br />encroachments upon that freedom by individuals or groups seeking to impose their own standards or tastes <br />upon the community at large; and by the government whenever it seeks to reduce or deny public access to <br />public information. <br />• It is inevitable in the give and take of the democratic process that the political, the moral, or the aesthetic <br />concepts of an individual or group will occasionally collide with those of another individual or group. In a free <br />society individuals are free to determine for themselves what they wish to read, and each group is free to <br />determine what it will recommend to its freely associated members. But no group has the right to take the law <br />into its own hands, and to impose its own concept of politics or morality upon other members of a democratic <br />society. Freedom is no freedom if it is accorded only to the accepted and the inoffensive. Further, democratic <br />societies are more safe, free, and creative when the free flow of public information is not restricted by <br />governmental prerogative or self -censorship. <br />• It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians to give full meaning to the freedom to read by providing books <br />that enrich the quality and diversity of thought and expression. By the exercise of this affirmative responsibility, <br />they can demonstrate that the answer to a "bad" book is a good one, the answer to a "bad" idea is a good one. <br />• The freedom to read is of little consequence when the reader cannot obtain matter fit for that reader's purpose. <br />What is needed is not only the absence of restraint, but the positive provision of opportunity for the people to <br />read the best that has been thought and said. Books are the major channel by which the intellectual inheritance <br />is handed down, and the principal means of its testing and growth. The defense of the freedom to read requires <br />of all publishers and librarians the utmost of their faculties, and deserves of all Americans the fullest of their <br />support. <br />• We state these propositions neither lightly nor as easy generalizations. We here stake out a lofty claim for the <br />value of the written word. We do so because we believe that it is possessed of enormous variety and usefulness, <br />worthy of cherishing and keeping free. We realize that the application of these propositions may mean the <br />dissemination of ideas and manners of expression that are repugnant to many persons. We do not state these <br />propositions in the comfortable belief that what people read is unimportant. We believe rather that what <br />people read is deeply important; that ideas can be dangerous; but that the suppression of ideas is fatal to a <br />democratic society. Freedom itself is a dangerous way of life, but it is ours. <br />This statement was originally issued in May of 1953 by the Westchester Conference of the American Library Association <br />and the American Book Publishers Council, which in 1970 consolidated with the American Educational Publishers <br />Institute to become the Association of American Publishers. <br />Adopted June 25, 1953, by the ALA Council and the AAP Freedom to Read Committee; amended January 28, 1972; <br />January 16, 1991; July 12, 2000; June 30, 2004. <br />