You all continue to ruminate about censorship, filtering the internet, and the meaning of information. Some of you actually come to a decision about how you feel about balanced collections, filtering the web, and limiting access.
I think by now you've realized that I believe in balanced collections, access to collections and materials, and few limitations to access. There are always reasons to limit access. Since I do a lot of my work in preservation and think lots about special collections, we often limit access to the physical object, because it's in poor or fragile shape, and give the user a facsimile or today point them toward digital facsimiles. Of course, researchers and patrons can always ask for the original, if the copy still exists in the system.
Some of you asked about balanced collections, or collection development. I am assuming that you learn more about that in acquisitions and also in access?? There are books in the profession that provide lists of books for various subject areas, by Dewey or LC number. The books usually include Reference Tools, Basic or Care titles, and then Subject specific titles. Books for collection development help us create broad and deep collections, and make certain we aren't missing an important title. There are also collection development books for fiction and for various reading levels (Children's, YA, Hi/Low). ALA and the other library science publishers publish these types of books.
Filtering is just too contentious to talk about here. I've made comments in your reflective journals. Suffice it to say, some filtering is tied to funding, others to CIPA and COPA laws. I'm not for it. I'm for using your own judgment and being respectful of other people. Enough said.
And Information, well, most of you tackled Debons and Buckland and have a better idea of how the theory works.
Next week we'll tackle users. That's Monday for all of you reading this post tonight (Friday night). I'm working on the video podcasts and my blog so they are ready for you on Sunday night.