ALA and SAA elections, the 1950 census release, conspiracy thinking, the ALA's capitalist ploy, animation, and beyond!
This newsletter, again said to be "too long for email," covers the latest news on archives, libraries, genealogy, history, animation, LGBTQ topics, and more.
I have been busy since my last newsletter on March 27. For one, on March 29, I published a re-examination of the wrestler-librarian/buff librarian in Totally Spies!, which was positively received on Twitter and on my blog. Some said they loved that I broke down the stereotype that librarians are more than we have been “taught to believe,” laughed about being mentioned, fascinated at being included, thanked me for sharing it, and mentioned it to other people. Otherwise, I published a recently added listing of librarians and libraries in pop culture in March and re-published my post about Kaisa in Hilda, and a post on Barebones, a librarian in the webcomic Brownie and Barebones. With that, let me move onto the rest of my newsletter.
The biggest news is the results of SAA's 2021 election, in which more than 20% of the members participated. Sadly, Ricardo Punzalan, who I voted for, was not elected as Vice-President / President-Elect, resulting in Helen Wong Smith being elected. Otherwise, Krystal Appiah, Joyce Gabiola, and Lydia Tang were elected to the SAA Council for three-year terms beginning this August (2022–2025), while the 2023 Nominating Committee will consist of Louis Jones (Wayne State University), Jessica C. Neal (Center for Research Libraries), and Brittany Newberry (Georgia State University). Otherwise, there was the introduction of the DocNow App and SAA President Courtney Chartier writing, in part, that “the work of loving and protecting records is not neutral, nor is the work of loving and protecting people.” In addition, there were posts about addressing missing name information for women in Yale Special Collections, Flickr’s problematic deletion (then un-deletion) of 5 million archival images, the massive headache of preserving the past digital age, and the release of the 1950 U.S. Federal Census by NARA, sure to be a boon for genealogists.
Apart from the publication of the March/April 2022 edition of Archival Outlook, people tweeted about slowing down archival processing of a series/folder, the White House switchboard prefix number not listed in the official call log of the former president, that digitizing everything is not physically impossible, the best format for finding aids, stress and overworked archives employees, and misconceptions about archives employees. There were additional articles on reparative description, use of digital archives during COVID-19 pandemic, diverse and inclusive archives at Temple University, how Arizona archivists document state government, and archives and special collections as sites of contestation.
There were additional articles on topics such as encouraging institutions to project films in “an effort to preserve and perpetuate knowledge about the history of film technology,” Arkansas during World War II, archivist Tamar Chute of Ohio State University, disrupting White man’s joy that shaped archival collections in the past, space in the national registry of historic places, evaluating strategies for the preservation of console video games, post-custodial archiving for the collective good, learning about census records on NARA’s History Hub, digital preservation at the Houses of Parliament, 2010–2020, and the digitized archival document trustworthiness scale. Last but not least is the Diversity Residency Toolkit, which establishes standards and best practices for diversity residencies.
That brings me to the controversial article in the publication, In the Library with the Lead Pipe, entitled “Conspiratorial Thinking in Academic Libraries: Implications for Change Management and Leadership.” Comments in response criticized the article for not explaining why library workers would be paranoid or conspiratorial, said the authors had little or no experience on the library front lines, argued that the article analysis is lacking, and had trouble with the data presented. More than that, Meredith Farkas called for the article to be retracted. Librarian Nicole Pagowsky criticized the article for a weak premise, shoddy methodology, and being harmful to library workers, in the case, joined by those who called it “truly bad scholarship,” said the article says more about authors’ positions than anything else, noted that peer review is “inherently not neutral and will never be perfect,” and had issues with the tone of the article. Some called the article anti-worker and managerial-speak, noted that library leaders who “cause low morale and low productivity” are expensive, noted the faulty choices in the poll used for the article, made additional criticisms of the article itself, and noted other issues with the article.
Others criticized the publication itself for not handling responses to the article well, and the non-response to criticism, and wondered whether they should respect the publication at all in the future. There were those who said that the publication would share what they would do differently in the future, wondered how the article got through the editorial and peer-review process, why an article about this was published when there are so many other things that could be published instead, said it makes gaslighting look scientific, and argued it makes them think less of the journal. Additional comments called the article “managerial horseshit,” said they are removing them as a resource in their bibliography, wondered who the article is for, said the journal published “toxic library leadership apologists,” Sofia Leung defended the journal in that she said that while this article was problematic, as was their response, this doesn’t mean that previous or future work in the journal “should be dismissed/diminished.” That wasn’t the worst library-related thing that happened this week, however. That’s coming up next!
Recently, the ALA’s previous president, Loida Garcia Febo, visited the NASDAQ site in Times Square along with other librarians, purportedly to “promote library use and support” and honor National Library Week, April 3-9. Those present includes Jillian Rudes (a NYC School Librarian, president of NYCSLA, member of the ALA Conference Committee and GNCRT Committee), Tara Cooper Weiss (New Jersey Association of School Librarians Intellectual Freedom Chairperson, wearing a New Jersey Library Association shirt), Ewa Dziedzic-Elliott (New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) President-Elect), and Prof at Queens College CUNY in Library Joe Sanchez. Possibly, the advocacy chair for Advocacy Chair for NJASL, Holly Hocks, was there, as was Shannon Keller of NYPL, but I don’t think any of the ALA officers and other ALA leaders were there. Those present at the ringing of the closing bell were from the New York City school library system, the NYPL, Queens Library system, Hoboken Library, the New York Library Association, and more. This is according to the ALA itself, NJ Library Cooperative, Rudes, Melissa Jacobs, and elsewhere. The ALA clearly sanctioned the event, even though the current leadership were not there. Raymond Garcia, the Special Assistant to the Executive Director of the ALA, and formerly manager of the Public Library Association’s Public Libraries Online and an intern at Preferred Hotels & Resorts who worked on social media and public relations, happily promoted the event (and again here, calling it “very cool”), as did the ALA on various occasions (see here and here).
This event was roundly criticized as a celebration of late-stage capitalism, raging capitalism, the “death knell” of the organization, argued that it shows that the ALA was “on-brand,” shows that the ALA believes that capitalism will “solve all out library problems,” represents capitalism, corporate America, and Wall Street, puts previous comments by the ALA about libraries building small business into a different perspective, called it hilarious and eye-rolling, pointed out that is not “consistent with library values,” used the news as a call for people to unionize, and described it as nonsense and made them uncomfortable.
Others were disappointed, joked about it (also see here), inappropriate, said it didn’t make sense, said it would be great if the librarian profession had “an advocacy organization supporting it,” argued that they were not regretting leaving the ALA (also see here), noted that those who attended were surrounding themselves with those who would close public libraries to “lower taxes” and force people to “buy books from Amazon,” said it made clear that the ALA didn’t care about workers during the pandemic and continues to not care about them, argued it shows that the ALA is “out of touch,” asked to list the ways that what the ALA did “helps” or “honors” libraries in 2022, stated that what the ALA did “alienates library workers…to court those who couldn't care less about the public good,” wondered who at the ALA would have thought this is a good idea, noted that they fail to see how this helps libraries get recognition, called it a “nice little wake-up call that we've all been following a retail model for nearly 20 years and framing operations as a business,” and made a variety of other comments (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here).
Some gave the ALA the benefit of the doubt, stating that what ALA did is a “sellout move” but was peanuts compared to library contracts with Elsevier. Others wondered why ALA candidates hadn’t commented on this (Emily Drabinski did later) or even asked followers of ALA librarians should have accepted the invitation at all. Threads off this conversation said that libraries don’t properly train managers, that libraries have been “running like corporations”, called the “businessification of library spaces” as something that is “so depressing,” said there is a reason that board members of their library system are “business people, not public servants,” argued that “public goods are not businesses, and libraries do not have customers,” and asserted they would never call patrons customers, ever.
Unfortunately, there were a rash of people who were drawn in by the corporate jubilee, like librarian Jackie Nark who called it “cool”, self-proclaimed library lobbyist, who declared that this is “exciting” and shows that libraries “build business,” while Melissa Jacobs, the NYC Public Schools Director of Library Services, signal boosted the ALA’s despicable action, library director Russell Michalak called it “awesome,” Maggie Farrell who declared it showed “appreciation for library workers.” Also signal boosting the event was Valerie Hawkins, a former library reference specialist at the ALA Library, Hoboken Councilmember Phil Cohen (which some people made fun of him for here, here, and here), Councilmember Tiffanie Fisher, library executive Nicholas A. Brown, librarian Beth Thomas (also see here), Louisiana librarian LaTrisha, Councilmember James Solomon, and education director Monica D.T. Rysavy. Additionally, the Friends of the Bridgeville Public Library and Burke Library Hamilton College boosted the event. There were also positive messages from school librarian Esther Keller, teacher-librarian Amanda Jones, librarian Dustin Hensley, school librarian Kim “Lovie” Howell, and author Dr. Donna Clovis, school librarian Jill Mills, school librarian Mary Moyer, Lisabarian, Balbina Rojas, Nelly B. Manzetti, librarian K.C. Boyd, and others (also see here and here). Those who supported this event should be publicly criticized for their support. Furthermore, their opinions on library matters should not be trusted now or in the future.
Honestly, what the ALA did is no surprise. For one, the ALA’s new Executive Director, Tracie D. Hall, formerly directed the “culture portfolio at the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation,” which included developing grant programs for “arts venues, cultural programming and creative entrepreneurship.” Secondly, the ALA’s new president, Patricia "Patty" M. Wong, talked about the need to “develop diversified business models that are revenue positive and sustainable and attract and maintain the interest of new and existing members.” Both are joined, in the executive office by those who studied information management (Sheryl Reyes, Director of the Office of ALA Governance), long-time ALA members (Marsha P. Burgess as Council Secretariat, and Cheryl Malden as Program Officer), and others like Holly Robison as Governance Associate, and Garcia who I mentioned earlier. There are the fellow executive officers. They include library managers (Lessa Kanani'opua Pelayo-Lozada as ALA President-Elect and Julius C. Jefferson, Jr. as Immediate Past President) and an OCLC board member (Maggie Farrell as Treasurer). Additional executive board members, either current or in future years, include a former library manager (Eboni M. Henry), student deans (Karen G. Schneider, Libre (Latrice) Booker), library managers (Alexandra Rivera, Ana Elisa de Campos Salles), a library director (Larry Neal), a library coordinator (Sam Helmick), and OCLC Senior Program Minister (Christina Rodriques).
At the same time, “corporate members” are a category of those who can be members of the ALA. The ALA’s division, the Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC), also declared that it “greatly values financial support from reputable corporations to further ALSC’s mission to create a better future for children through libraries.” The ALSC’s key stakeholders includes local business people, library support groups, funders, and philanthropists. The American Association of School Librarians (AASL), a ALA division, focuses on PR messages and a “planned and sustained process to assess the customer's needs.” CORE, a ALA division, focuses on librarians and information providers in “central roles of leadership and management, metadata and collections, and technology” (i.e. managers and supervisors). The Public Libraries Association, a ALA division, says that “librarians, library workers, library trustees, libraries, library vendors, anyone who supports libraries may join PLA.” United for Libraries, a ALA division, declared it advocates and promotes libraries, develops library foundations, and engages “corporate supporters to unite and strengthen voices in support of libraries.” Additionally, the Association of College & Research Libraries has committed itself to “acknowledge and address historical racial inequities; challenge oppressive systems within academic libraries” the Reference and User Services Association, has various statements on racism, cultural norms, access, and pricing of Harvard Business Review, and the Young Adult Library Services Association, all three ALA divisions, talks about fostering safe spaces and the important role of “libraries and librarians play in preparing teens to become engaged, productive citizens.” All of these fit with the ALA overall, with their goal, in the recent pivot strategy to “increase revenue by 10% over expenses” and “increase membership by 5%” by 2025 and investing “in a robust database platform to manage member, donor, and customer relationships through systematic and ongoing internal research.” Some have also said that ALA has a net worth of over $22 billion. And this isn’t even getting to the library roundtables which are part of the ALA.
It is absurd to say what the ALA did is “librarians advocating for libraries” as Loida Garcia Febo claimed on Twitter. It was a celebration alright, a celebration of global capitalism, not supporting the idea that “letting the entire world know once again how libraries are helping communities + that we need their continued support.” What a bunch of poppycock. This action connects with what I have said earlier about the ALA, criticizing them for not talking about library unionization, their dismissal of internet activism, and reported on criticism of ALA policy as caring more about intellectual freedom than human freedom or human aspirations coming from Violet Fox. Furthermore, April Hathcock, who I have often mentioned in this newsletter, argued on June 29, 2021 that the ALA has “always been and will always be centered on promoting the ‘neutrality’ of white supremacy and capitalism,” whose post I quoted in my July 4, 2021 newsletter.
Surprisingly, Emily Drabinski won as head of the ALA, a person who calls herself a “Marxist lesbian.” More critical of this is people such as Alex Brown, who wrote on Twitter that the ALA is not a friend of library workers, operating for itself, meaning it doesn’t matter who is in charge, but that as long as the “self-serving, upholding supremacy structure remains, it will never improve.” This is evidenced also in the fact that the ALA said nothing about the discussion around Hoopla. Brown previously criticized the ALA for praising “libraries that remained open during COVID” and ignoring Twitter advocacy as I noted in my May 16, 2021 newsletter. Although I said I would rejoin the ALA if she won, and I have praised her candidacy as having a “very progressive platform” in the past, I will rejoin only if she is able to make substantial changes and lower prices of membership. If that can’t be done, I will not rejoin the ALA. The ALA is an organization for library managers, not for library workers. Anyone with sense has come to that realization. Clearly what Pelayo-Lozada argued for as president-elect of ALA is a lie, that the “ALA belongs to all of us, regardless of our library worker status or type or where we reside.” I also doubt what Derek Murphy said about Drabinski is true: “Drabinski's election as president will hopefully foretell a shift for the better [in the ALA].” It is a possibility that nothing will change, and it will continue to be on the side of library managers. However, those on the abolitionist-library-association mailing list, for the organization of the same name, called it “amazing,” “wonderful” and argued that the ALA is moving in a “direction that centers library workers and organized labor.” Whether that happens remains to be seen, as she said she has the “deepest respect and gratitude for Kelvin and his commitment to libraries,” a person who is executive director of the Las Vegas-Clark County Library District and her opponent in the race. If Drabinski can make sure that the ALA serves library workers rather than managers, that would be a victory.
There are various other library-related stories. Allison Jai O’Dell explained why she left academic libraries with salaries ranging from “$32,000 annually to $45 hourly,” but was never able to “accumulate wealth” but did develop a “wide range of skills and perspectives on data management.” She explained that she left because her “reasons for abandoning an entire career in libraries…[are] the toxic and competitive culture in the academy left me emotionally and physically exhausted…[and] easy doubled [her]… salary for half the work.” Jennifer Snoek-Brown shared recently added reel librarian titles and had a reader poll for what she should watch next. So far, it looks like The Time Machine is winning out, compared to Breakfast for Tiffany’s, An Extremely Goofy Movie, The Park Bench, and Wonder Man. There were additional articles about the intricacies of a paper-based library system, a reading list on critical pedagogy, educators resisting right-wing book banning efforts, a video on a supposed “tech-positive future for libraries,” and a decline in the number of school librarians. Other tweets asked when libraries and library workers “get to start doing less with more” and noted the problem with the term “People with social disabilities.”
There were many articles and news about history which I’ve read recently. From the Smithsonian this includes a formal apology from Scotland to the thousands who were accused of witchcraft, the ins and outs of hyperinflation, a Japanese-American concentration camp in Colorado receiving federal protection, archaeologists finding a 1,500 year old Visigoth coffin, and stained glass at Canterbury Cathedral. Other Smithsonian articles were on the mansion of Thomas Cromwell, chief adviser to Henry VIII, a sponge fossil which may be the earliest record of animal life, and perspective resources for educators on the storming of the Capitol. Additional history articles included a dispatch from the Tattooed Historian about how Instagram has become one of the “biggest platforms” for historians and how it can be used by historians, doing storytelling through podcasts, blogging as public engagement, and why the storming of the Capitol was not like a banana republic.
These articles about history lead right into genealogy. As I noted earlier in this newsletter, NARA released the 1950 U.S. Federal Census. Other versions of it are already available on Ancestry and FamilySearch. I’ve tweeted about this again and again this past week, noting I found records of my grandparents (Ray and Lena, Robert and F.L.), great-grandparents (Louis and Jennie, Robert and Miriam), and a bunch of Efthims. I recently found a record of my great-grandparents Michael and Marie who were living in Arizona at the time! It really is a great time for genealogists. Even the Midwest Genealogy Center staff offered patrons root beer and played period music, while helping people with their census searches. Interestingly, the images shown on NARA website are “microfilms taken by the bureau in 1952 that had to be carefully scanned by archive staff” but the “original paper documents were destroyed in the 1960s” for some reason. It was also the “first to use computers,” specifically into a UNIVAC I computer which weighed 16,000 pounds and had 5,000 vacuum tubes, then these “census forms were photographed and transferred to nearly 6,400 microfilm rolls” but sadly “only the fronts of the census forms were copied, so the answers to the questions were lost.” It is one treasure trove for sure, for which you can even find details of organized crime families, and paint a picture of ordinary life.
There are further genealogy news, whether on a California panel limiting reparations to those who can trace their lineage to “free and enslaved Black people living in the U.S. during the 19th century” which limits those who will receive reparations to direct descendants, 500k Irish names recorded in New York almshouse ledgers dating back to 1700s, explaining Irish parishes, mixed Indigenous Māori and Pākehā genealogy and heritage in Aotearoa/New Zealand, and understanding genealogical bewilderment in the context of racialised intercountry adoptees.
That brings me to a completely different topic: stories and articles about LGBTQ people. This includes articles on defining pansexuality, anti-LGBTQ laws, asexual icons in movies, and a glossary of polyamorous language. CBS 17 reported that a California law mandating corporate boards have ethnic or LGBT members is ruled unconstitutional. Anime News Network reviewed the manga, Whole of Humanity Has Gone Yuri Except for Me. It also reported the licensing of the yuri Futari Escape manga series and the ending of Uso to Kiss wa Hōkago ni, a yuri manga. Cosmopolitan described the difference between polygamy and polyamory.
This interlinks to the backlash Disney faced for their stance on the Don’t Say Gay Bill, especially after a tone-deaf letter by CEO Bob Chapek. Cissy Jones argued that it is “disheartening, maddening, saddening, and so awful” to see where Disney’s money is going (to the Florida GOP) and added “Will Disney change? I hope so. But again, animation is not the corporate suit. Not in the slightest.” Abigail Disney criticized the law as well, Equality Florida and Family Equality challenging the law on legal grounds. On the other side, conservative figures are declaring that Disney should be boycotted after Disney later changed their position following some executives wanting more LGBTQ characters (some of who joked about promoting “gay agenda”) and pressure from employees and outside groups. It’s hard to know if Disney can repair some of the damage they have done over the years. This is further thrown into question when well-loved shows like The Owl House and Amphibia are ending, with no current shows filling that void, not even The Ghost and Molly McGee.
That brings me to articles on animation. Some focused on Hazbin Hotel while others talked about Mira, Royal Detective, and the best queer animated kids shows. The latter included Sailor Moon, Adventure Time, The Legend of Korra, Steven Universe, OK K.O.!: Let’s Be Heroes, The Loud House, Danger & Eggs, She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, Craig of the Creek, Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts, and The Owl House. In terms of She-Ra, the show’s creators criticized Netflix for exploiting animation industry contracts. Meghan Winch, on the other hand, recommended streaming kids shows, but the only ones of the seven they recommended which I’d say are somewhat decent are We Bare Bears and Mira, Royal Detective, more the former than the latter. Otherwise, there were articles on the second season of The Owl House, how She-Ra is not an average kids show, claims that The Owl House is “the future” of intersectional representation, the best cartoon musical performances (in Hilda, Steven Universe, RWBY, Amphibia, The Simpsons, Star vs. Forces of Evil, Adventure Time, and Helluva Boss), an interview with Sarah Nicole Robles who voices Luz Noceda, and everything we know so far about Dead End: Paranormal Park.
That brings me to anime. There has been a rash of wonderful anime which recently premiered like Love After World Domination, Aharen-San, Spy x Family, In the Heart of Kunoichi Tsubaki, and Shikimori’s Not Just a Cutie. And soon the second season of Komi Can’t Communicate will be airing. There’s also shows like Cue!, the second season of Love Live! Nijigasaki High School Idol Club, the second season of The Demon Girl Next Door, the third season of Ascendance of a Bookworm. All these shows are good, and they should be watched! There were other articles on body swapping anime like Kokoro Connect, whether there is too much fan service in My Dress-Up Darling (there is a lot), the best things about sports anime, how to get started with Adachi and Shimamura, why anime is very popular after being ignored, and the release date of the new anime, The Executioner and Her Way of Life, which premiered on March 31 and is on HIDIVE, of all places. I’m also watching a rash of other anime which I may write reviews of for The Geekiary or somewhere else.
On a totally different topic are Smithsonian articles like DNA filtered air, pioneering sci-fi writer, how West African drums “talk,” the love letters of Sylvia Plath and other items sold at auction, seagrass harmed by noise pollution, how bad science is appealing, the first insect to be wiped out by humans, microbes thriving under a pulverized rock, many plants older than dinosaur facing extinction, and greenhouse gas emissions peaking within three years to stay below. Others talked about the history of philosophy, the Internet Archive joined opposition to Smart Copyright Act, and how biogas could do more harm than good for the hog industry. Others wrote on deepfake issues, a loophole for judicial elections in Florida, amputations in a Black community, and a New Orleans school board reversing little known ban on jazz.
That brings me to The Nib. There were illustrations on aging poorly, the terrible NFTs, unmasking, the struggle to reclaim Indigenous territory, Facebook influencing what our society deems “decent,” attention fatigue, history of April Fools, classic scams, the so-called “marketplace of ideas,” and declining populations of butterflies. Otherwise, illustrations were about the anti-homeless policies of Eric Adams, asking whether America can fix its housing crisis, creepily realistic technology, the terrifying possibilities for streaming shows.
That’s all for this newsletter. As you may notice, I am not publishing these newsletters bi-weekly or weekly anymore. That is to relieve the stress on me so I’m not locked into scrambling to get it done every week. I can loosely say I will send a newsletter every two weeks, but I only work on this newsletter when I have time. Hence, there is no uniformity at when or what day it will be published. Until the next time!
- Burkely