Dan “I don’t play gotcha” Kleinman

Dan Kleinman, the man behind the curtain in Ginny Maziarka’s Oz in the West Bend Library book challenge (update and info), does not (according to his SafeLibraries blog) “play gotcha.” As he astutely notes, “…nobody is a computer and is expected to remember everything they ever said.” This is certainly a fair and diplomatic assertion.

The politics of “gotcha” journalism or “gotcha” blogging are indeed crude and ineffective. They strip statements of the context that is vital for their understanding. Too often they don’t acheive ther intended goal, which is to expose hypocrisy. Rather, they twist and coerce statements into a black or white mold that is tailor-made to fit this polarized argument or that polarized argument.

On this note, I’m not sure Dan Kleinman understands what he is saying when he claims he does not “play gotcha.”

In his response to the UW-M School of Information Studies Statement of Support for West Bend Library, he opens with this statement:

“In recent weeks, two citizens of West Bend, Wisconsin have petitioned the West Bend Community Memorial Library to remove gay-themed books….” Yes, but they are no longer seeking that goal and implying they are can only be misleading. Issues should be fought on the issues, not on false implications.

This is his opening piece of evidence for why UWM is “misleading” West Bend Citizens. Take notice of that curious little elipsis at end of the quote he pulled from UWM’s statement; as most all casual readers and writers know, elipses in this context are used to denote that the quotation is only some – not all – of a the quoted sentence. Let’s take a look at what Dan swept away with that curious little bit of punctuation:

In recent weeks, two citizens of West Bend, Wisconsin have petitioned the West Bend Community Memorial Library to remove gay-themed books from a section designated “Young Adults,” arguing the books should be reclassified and placed in a restricted area requiring parental approval prior to being released to a minor.

Yikes, Dan. It seems that elipsis was a little more than curious – it was loaded with all kinds of context-stripping consequences. Turns out, UWM was not misrepresenting the complaining party’s petition afterall! Who’s misleading whom now, Dan?

Now, some interested person might ask: “But isn’t the complaining party looking to remove sexually explicit materials and not “gay-themed books,” like UWM claims? That’s what Dan Kleinman says. And Dan Kleinman doesn’t play gotcha!”

To such an inquiry I would respond with…context! Yes, their petition currently states that they are aiming to “Protect Youth From Sexually Explicit Materials.” This petition was born out of a complaint about a gay-themed book list on the West Bend library website, which turned into a call to ban gay-themed books altogether (which was later modified to a request that they be moved to the adult section of the library), and was eventually expanded into a call to reclassify and relocate all sexually explicit material as broadly outlined by the content of their petition – which still includes references to homosexual materials, as well as “actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts.” I do not feel I am going too far by claiming that Ginny Maziarka and the folks at WISSUP would include homosexuality on their list of “perverted sexual acts.” Nevertheless, Dan Kleinman insists that the “…issue of ‘GLBT materials’ is a nonissue because the proponent of the changes in the library has long ago (relatively speaking) dropped her claims regarding GLBT materials…” when, clearly, the GLBT issue is still very much a part of the debate and – both explicitly and implicitly – a part of the petition. Who’s misleading whom now, Dan?

More notable than this rhetorical dog-and-pony show, however, is his recent response to ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom acting director Deborah Caldwell-Stone. (It was his response to her that elicited the grand Dan-Kleinman-doesn’t-play-gotcha assertion in the first place.)

First, there is a radio show on WORT 89.9 in Madison called Queery. Queery has a blog – here is that blog. On this blog they announced an installment of their show centered around the issue in West Bend. Dan Kleinman read this blog post. Dan Kleinman then responded with the following comment – here is that comment. On his own blog, he claims that in the comment he “…said only the following about Deborah Caldwell-Stone: ‘Further, the books will just be moved in the library. Even Deborah Caldwell-Stone has said that is appropriate in the appropriate circumstance.’”

This prompted Deborah Caldwell-Stone to get into the fray, personally responding in another comment on the Queery post:

For the record, Mr. Kleinman does not speak for me nor does he accurately portray my views or the views of ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom.

Dan goes on – in another comment and on his own blog – to cite this podcast as proof that Ms. Caldwell-Stone did indeed say what he claimed she said. I went ahead and listened to the podcast myself, and I found Dan’s transcription of the statement to be off, so I’ll go ahead and transcribe it again:

…there are times when a book might be moved. For example, a Young Adult novel makes it into a fourth or fifth grade classroom and that’s more appropriate for the high school library. And a committee can say, you know, that wasn’t an appropriate book to buy for this age group, but it works for high schoolers and to move it to that high school library.

Dan concedes that the issue here relates to school libraries, while the West Bend issue deals with a public library. He states on his blog:

Now my reading of that tells me that there are times when a book might be moved for reasons of age appropriateness. Yes, the context was a public school library, but the same principle applies, and the speaker was Deborah Caldwell-Stone herself.

His reading that the statement implies there are times when a book might be moved is spot on. However, his assertion that “the same principle applies” here is dead wrong because he is not talking about the same principle. The principle Deborah Caldwell-Stone is illustrating with her YA novel in a fourth or fifth grade classroom is not about content (sexually explicit or otherwise) but about age appropriateness in terms of reading level and language. Teachers and school media specialists must make decisions on material based on the reading and comprehension skills of their students. Ms. Caldwell-Stone’s example is not a whimsical one – it is indeed the opposite. YA literature is generally intended for audiences between 12 and 18 years of age, while fourth and fifth graders are generally between the ages of 9 and 11. In turn, moving the YA material to a high school library means it will find its appropriate audience based on cognitive considerations, not content considerations.

The principle outlined in Deborah Caldwell-Stone’s example is one that stems from – and applies directly to – school libraries and the considerations of teachers and school media specialists. Public librarians are not school media specialists, and moving the challenged library materials from the YA section of a public library to the adult section (as the complaining party’s petition specifically requests) does not speak to the same purpose (or achieve the same ends) as moving books around in a school library system.

It is not “the same principle.” Dan Kleinman strips Deborah Caldwell-Stone’s example of its appropriate context to make it appear as if she has defended a practice which she clearly has not. Still, Dan Kleinman insists that he does not “play gotcha.”

Who’s misleading whom now, Dan?

(For more information on the West Bend Library controversy, please see West Bend Parents for Free Speech and Sleepless in West Bend.)