The Shadow of Censorship: Bill 28’s Burdensome Restrictions on Libraries

Alberta’s public libraries are facing an impending deadline to comply with new restrictions imposed by Bill 28. While the government claims that these regulations aim to protect children from accessing explicit materials, librarians are grappling with the complexities of implementing them.

At stake is not just the fate of specific books or collections but also the fundamental principles of librarianship and public institutions’ role in promoting intellectual freedom. The restrictions imposed by Bill 28 represent a shift towards censorship that threatens to undermine library services.

Librarians will need to meticulously sift through graphic novels, searching for potentially offending illustrations. This process is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and inherently subjective, leaving room for interpretive variations that could lead inconsistent application of the regulations.

The human cost of compliance is evident in estimates like Olds Municipal Library’s 600 hours of staff time and $15,000 in labor costs to review their graphic novel collection. Smaller libraries may struggle with this burden, potentially forcing them to close temporarily.

The lack of clear guidelines from the provincial government on implementing Bill 28 effectively compounds librarians’ anxieties. Parkland Regional Library System’s director, Ron Sheppard, voices concerns about the subjective nature of the regulations and their potential impact on educational materials and historical texts featuring explicit imagery.

The restrictions extend beyond physical collections to include e-books and audiobooks borrowed through third-party vendors, raising questions about access control and censorship in the digital age. Librarians must navigate between objective standards and subjective interpretations when dealing with ratings systems for films and video games.

Medicine Hat Public Library’s chief librarian, Ken Feser, observes that new restrictions will essentially “bury” certain materials from public view, making them less accessible to readers. This concern is underscored by his fear that some libraries may refuse to carry books leading to too many complaints or attach a stigma to borrowing restricted materials.

The abrupt change in policy treats libraries as adversaries rather than partners in promoting intellectual freedom and educational resources. The decision follows a similar order for school libraries, sparking debate about the role of public institutions in safeguarding children’s innocence versus ensuring access to information.

Action4Canada founder Tanya Gaw champions Bill 28’s restrictions, arguing that they are necessary to protect children from explicit materials within schools, school libraries, and publicly-funded libraries. However, this stance raises questions about the broader implications of censorship in public institutions and the potential for overreach in limiting access to information.

The deadline for compliance with Bill 28 is just a month away, but the challenges facing librarians are far more profound. The real question is not merely how to implement these restrictions but whether they represent a step towards a more restrictive environment where intellectual freedom is compromised for the sake of protecting children from what some deem inappropriate.