In the news today I saw an article about something The Krafty Librarian talked about a few weeks ago that I neglected to mention here. The article, Convicted U.S. Felon's 'Cures' Tops Book Charts, discusses the popularity (and controversy) of Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About. I had thought about posting about this when I first ready Krafty's blog, but then decided against it as I wasn't sure how I felt about it. I still don't know how I feel, but since the story has come across my radar a second time I feel it warrants a post.

When Krafty mentioned this on her blog we got into a discussion about the placement of this book in a library's collection. After initially reading her post I immediately went to my library's catalog to see if we own (I always do this whenever I read something about a book - good or bad). I wasn't surprised to see that my library did in fact own it (as did the majority of libraries in my system). When I mentioned this to Krafty she immediately responded with a "You're going to pull it from your shelves, right?" It was with a bit of discomfort that I had to tell her no, I didn't have any plans on pulling it. I'm sure Krafty was appalled and outraged that it would be sticking around, but she is far too nice to yell at me.

Does it feel dirty to leave a book in my library's collection knowing that it pretty much nothing but misinformation? A bit. Do I feel like a bad librarian because I am deliberately leaving a book on the shelf that for all intents and purposes could be viewed as dangerous to the health and well being of my patrons? Yes. So why am I leaving it there?

As a librarian, I don't have a choice. Although I might view the contents of the book to be complete garbage (not to mention dangerous), I have a long line of patrons who want to read it. Don't believe me? Since the beginning of this year our copy of the book has been checked out 16 times, and currently has 54 holds on it system wide. And while I might choose to not purchase or remove a certain book from my personal collection, that does not give me the right to remove it from the public's collection (i.e. my library's collection). I would never censor the fiction my patrons elect to read, so why would I ever presume to censor their non-fiction reading? I wouldn't.

But Kelly, some of you who have had me in class might be saying, what about a librarian's responsibility in providing accurate information (particularly when it relates to medical information) to their patrons? See, that's the tricky part of this issue which currently has me in a quandary. As a librarian I know the rules about collection development, when to weed and update certain items. As such I would never purchase a material that provides outdated/incorrect information. So where does that leave me when faced with purchasing a book like Natural Cures? Screwed. One part of my brain argues that the information contained in the book is misinformation that is potentially dangerous and thus goes against the collection development policy of my library, while the other part of my brain argues that our patrons want the book and its my job to get it for them.

And yes, I realize I just talked myself into a circle there. I guess what it all boils down to for me in the end is that my patrons are grownups, and at some point they have to assume some responsibility for the information they consume and use. I can do my best to steer them to authoritative sources, but in the end they are the ones with the sole power to decide what piece of information to use or discard. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm nothing but a misinformation enabler by having a book like Natural Cures on my library's shelves. What do you think?

--------------------------------------------------------------------