Hoopla's Fascist Turn

so much hoopla over Hoopla...

You may have heard over the past week that some librarians from the Library Freedom Project are pissed off about some of the shit offered on Hoopla.

And no, they’re not pissed off about what they should be. They’re not pissed off that Hoopla is clogged with junk and nonsense, like Kidz Bop 2022. 

Photo by Felix Koutchinski on Unsplash

Seriously, Kidz Bop, does the song “Un Dia (One Day)” really require translation in parenthesis? Meanwhile, “Die Guten Zeiten” is just left hanging? I mean, I know it because I took German in school because I’m a racist. 

No, wait, it was because I really liked the German teacher. The Spanish teacher not so much. She turned out to be having an affair with a student. They even had a baby. True story!

ANYWAY, the librarians in question, from the Library Freedom Project, were pretty pissed off when they found some stuff on Hoopla they weren’t happy about:

For instance, when you search for ebooks about “homosexuality” and “abortion,” instead of factual informational content, the search results are largely self-published religious texts designed to misinform and scare library readers about sexual and reproductive topics. There is also an enormous amount of misinformation about vaccines, and even books peddling long-debunked links between vaccines and autism. (screenshots below).

Oo, scary!

Let’s take a closer look, though.

God and COVID

I started by looking into one of the screenshotted titles that provides “COVID misinformation,” GOD Is Bigger Than COVID.

I picked this one because it’s 28 pages long, and…honestly I thought it’d be hilarious. Also, because you all used the image twice, so maybe it’s extra bad?

I read all of it, and it’s not hilarious. But the part that’s LEAST hilarious is that after reading it: I’m pretty sure nobody who cited it as a problematic book has read it. Or even skimmed it.

The book is a personal account of a very religious woman who got COVID in 2020. She had a tough time with it, and she felt very isolated (as we all did), even saying that neighbors who would wave as they went by no longer would do so once she told everyone she got COVID. Her faith helped her through a difficult time. 

And…that’s about it.

She doesn’t claim that God will protect you against COVID. She’s VERY pro-mask, going so far as to “stalk” her church and fellow worshippers on Facebook to make sure they were all wearing masks. 

Here’s the book’s ending: “In my close of this book, I just want to say, ‘Social distance your self, wear your mask and wash your hands.’”

The author got COVID before vaccines were available, and I was like, “Okay, maybe she’s an anti-vaccine weirdo who doesn’t express this in her book, but has since become something of a figure in the anti-vax circle.”

NOPE!

She’s posted multiple, multiple times about how she’s vaccinated.

What’s weird to me about coming after this particular title is that the author approaches life in a faith-based way, believing that her faith and God’s will helped her survive COVID. BUT, she doesn’t say anything anti-science, and nothing anti-vaccine, and everything she says is 100% harmless. Remove her faith, and her advice is still sound.

And, in fact, scientific and medical studies are kind of on the author’s side. 

From a Mayo Clinic analysis:

A majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.

So, librarians, what the fuck?

This lady is expressing a point of view, is saying nothing anti-science, in her book or in her life, and legit research DOES back her claim that spirituality can be a helpful factor for ailing people. 

And she does it all in a book that can be checked out voluntarily on Hoopla.

Practice and Preach

Librarians, fuck: When you come for a book in order to ban it, you should probably read it. Especially if it’s 28 pages and maybe 10 minutes of reading time, total. This is REALLY embarrassing. 

Why It’s A Problem To Be Wrong

Using GOD Is Bigger Than COVID as your prime example, citing it TWICE in your letter makes me question…What about some of the other titles you had removed?

Have you read them? Do you know what they’re actually about?

How sure are you?

The Case for Bad Books

You’re unhappy about anti-abortion titles, and I get that, BUT there’s currently a legal battle over Roe v. Wade that’s more serious than several previous iterations, and this point of view, though one I do not care for, is one that is present in our world. People have the right to read what this point of view is, even if it’s wrong.

A New Nobility of Blood and Soil is a horrid book, however it was highly influential in WWII Germany and on Hitler.

I think it has a place somewhere in the library collection as it provides historic context. It’s BAD information, it has BAD ideas, but, like other historic documents that share those shitty qualities, it provides context.

I’m of the opinion that when we talk about WWII, it’s confusing for modern folks, and it does help to show them some of how this came about. Because Germans were not totally different people, a completely alien species. This isn’t a Star War where they did bad things because…they’re the bad guys.

I don’t even know the basic arguments about Holocaust denial. If I were to speak to someone about it, they’d probably bamboozle me because I wouldn’t have the slightest clue about where they’re coming from or why. It’s important to have access to the basic arguments and ideas because otherwise they become difficult to refute. They become more persuasive when it appears, to an outside observer, that the denier makes relevant points that can’t be taken down by evidence in the moment.

I get where you’re coming from, librarians, and I’m certain that many of this book’s readers will read it and take away fascist ideas and see them as positives. Because, realistically, people who are normal won’t give it the time of day. Who’s going to waste their time on this nonsense if they disagree with it?

BUT, all that said, we can’t control the takeaways people get from their reading, nor should we be trying to.

The Digital Library and Bad Books

A digital repository is a great solution when it comes to bad books.

It means people are far less likely to stumble upon them. People don’t have to walk past them in a physical space. There’s less likelihood people will be made to feel uncomfortable because, if they come across these materials, it will be in the comfort and safety of their own digital environment as opposed to being in the library. Rowdy patrons won’t put them on displays as a joke. The catalog information is right there with the book instead of being somewhere else.

Let Me Flip It

Let’s take a progressive idea that’s closer to the fringes. Let’s say…the idea that it’s okay to commit acts of violence to catalyze climate change action. 

I don’t necessarily agree with this idea, but I appreciate the opportunity to read about it and understand where the person is coming from. I think it helps me talk about these topics in an informed, productive way. It helps me understand a person who’s not like me, even if they’re not like me in a pretty serious, pretty meaningful way.

If all I have is the newsfeed version of this belief system, I will never understand it, and I will never be able to effectively communicate with or about a person who believes this way.

It is my hope that someone would read a book of this type and not buy in completely and start blowing up cars. However, someone more moderate may get a new perspective on the seriousness of the climate issue, and perhaps choose to be more active in their role.

Hoopla’s System

This is information that is a couple years old, it was the best I could find, but I have every reason to believe it’s still accurate:

Libraries have a Hoopla budget, and they pay depending on the patron use. Each checkout of a book works kind of like a purchase, and authors do receive a royalty for Hoopla checkouts.

Which means your library didn’t necessarily BUY these bad books, your patrons just have the option to opt in, read them, and a little money does go the author’s way. 

Which means that the Hoopla system allows your patrons to read and view what they are interested in, provides them access to a lot of options, without forcing the library to actually buy the material. 

This is almost a perfect setup for intellectual freedom, an intellectual freedom you are challenging by censoring what’s available.

Which doesn’t make you wrong, necessarily, but it does mean you should be doing your diligence and being a little more thoughtful about what you are and are not removing.

You might have to read some shit.

Good Enough

Hoopla was pretty responsive and removed 5 publishers from the platform in agreement with library staff.

Hoopla apologized, explained what went wrong, and made a promise to do better in the future. This is an apology structured exactly as you would ask them to be, as anyone can see in your Trauma Informed Practice guidebook. 

Hoopla’s response contains all the elements of an apology, it reads to me as sincere, and I think we can move forward.

But no, of course we can’t, because that’s not good enough:

While we appreciate Mr. Jankowski’s quick response and the removal of the Holocaust denial materials librarians originally reported to the company, this response is insufficient. Our questions remain about how Hoopla selects and approves materials for their collections…This means that in public libraries across the nation, people are often not seeing any non-fiction materials about critical topics because their search results are dominated by unverified, unvetted materials.

People: This IS the process. Hoopla has a vetting process. You find some stuff that slips through. You ask them to remove those materials. They do. 

Isn’t this a good outcome?

The only process that could prevent ALL bad materials from getting in the system would absolutely also prevent a lot of good materials from entering the system.

From an intellectual freedom standpoint, it’s better to allow in a small number of bad materials and catch them as we go rather than cleaning up the platform to the extent that there are a lot of good materials we never see.

If we never see the materials because they are removed by too-aggressive a filtering process, then we don’t know what’s being removed and why.

If we see some lousy things press through, then we know where the flaws in the system are, and we can be vigilant in those areas.

This is not a bad system. It’s an imperfect system, which is reasonable when we’re talking about something this difficult for machines to understand and this important to people.

So, Librarians

The problem with restricting, banning, and censoring is that you have to use it wisely. Because when the tools are in someone else’s hands, and they will be, you need to be prepared to deal with the knife you sharpened being turned against you.

Remember that the book ban is a powerful tool, and when it’s applied by someone else, it retains its power. The justice level of the ban isn’t the relevant factor, the morality. It’s going to be about how effective a tool it is, how powerful, and how hard to check and balance.

Please use more care when removing books from the collection. 

And if you have a minute, maybe apologize to Frances Deanes, author of GOD Is Bigger Than COVID. Hopefully, instead of telling you that your apology and actions aren’t good enough and demanding to be part of your process, she’ll treat you with a little grace. I kind of suspect she will.