收稿日期: 2015-01-04
修回日期: 2015-02-05
网络出版日期: 2015-02-20
基金资助
本文系国家社会科学基金项目"公民权视域的社会弱势群体公共信息服务权益研究"(项目编号:12CTQ011)研究成果之一。
The Preparation, Adoption and Revision of American Library Bill of Rights
Received date: 2015-01-04
Revised date: 2015-02-05
Online published: 2015-02-20
[目的/意义] 《图书馆权利法案》是图书馆权利、图书馆智识自由这一核心政策群之灵魂,对其制定与修订过程的微观研究不但有益于图书馆权利问题的探讨,亦可为图书馆政策的制定和修订提供参考。[方法/过程] 采用政策分析、历史研究的视角,从8个《图书馆权利法案》版本的文本异同出发,结合相应的政策信息和文献资料进行分析。[结果/结论] 总结单一调整、综合调整、条款增删和反复调整4类文本修订方式和效果,并结合大规模修订、小规模修订、被否定的修订3种场景还原政策修订过程、参与者的角色地位,进行修订程序的分析,发现ALA在政策制定过程中体现了回应社会环境变迁与守护职业立场的功能。
张靖 , 肖鹏 . 美国《图书馆权利法案》的制定与修订过程[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015 , 59(4) : 12 -19 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2015.04.002
[Purpose/significance] The American Library Association's Library Bill of Rights is the very core of the policies on library rights and intellectual freedom. Research on the procedure of policy revision could not only boost our recent discussion on library right but also benefit the reformation of Chinese library policy development.[Method/process] Adopting the methods of policy analysis and history research, the paper compares eight versions of policy texts and analysis their difference with related policy materials.[Result/conclusion] Based on the text analysis, the paper classifies four types of emend manners, participators' role and emendatory procedure in three scenes which are extensive amendment, minor amendment and repudiated amendment. Then it goes on to discover how the social environment influences the ALA to prepare, adopt and revise the policies on library rights and intellectual freedom, and how the ALA holds its ground on the freedom and equity of information and library service as professional positions by its library policies.
[1] 程焕文, 潘燕桃, 张靖. 图书馆权利研究[M]. 北京: 学习出版社, 2011: 9-36.
[2] 王静芬. 美国《图书馆权利法案》的历史演变及其特点[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2014(5): 121-126.
[3] 程焕文. 图书馆权利的界定[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2010(2): 38-45.
[4] 范并思. 权利、读者权利和图书馆权利[J]. 图书馆, 2013(2): 1-4.
[5] 张靖. ALA《图书馆权利法案》的自由精神[J]. 图书与情报, 2005(2): 12-15, 36.
[6] 郭晓敏. 从《图书馆权利法案》阐释的制定与修订看ALA政策制定的程序[J]. 情报资料工作, 2011(3): 46-49.
[7] The Office for Intellectual Freedom of the American Library Association. Intellectual freedom manual[M]. Chicago: American Library Association, 2010: 49-89.
[8] Robinson B A.1996 U.S. Supreme Court Ruling (Romer v. Evans)overturning an anti-gay amendment 2 in Colorado[EB/OL].[2014-11-20]. http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_laws7.htm.
[9] 张靖. IFLA、ALA与知识自由[J]. 图书馆学研究, 2009(12): 84-88, 46.
[10] ALA. About ALA[EB/OL]. [2014-07-24]. http://www.ala.org/aboutala/.
[11] 曼彻斯特.光荣与梦想:1932-1972年美国社会实录[M].广州外国语学院美英问题研究室翻译组,朱协,译.海口:海南出版社,三环出版社,2004:77-78.
[12] 德比希尔.哈金森历史辞典[M].朱渊, 蔡虹,译.南京:江苏人民出版社,2008:112.
[13] The trustees of the city library.Upon the objects to be attained by the establishment of a public library: Report of the trustees of the Public Library of the City of Boston[R/OL].[2014-04-04].http://www.scls.lib.wi.us/mcm/history/report_of_trustees.html.
[14] 张维平, 马立武. 美国教育法研究[M]. 北京: 中国法制出版社,2004:182-193.
[15] ALA/Special Committee on Civil Liberties. Report of the Special Committee on Civil Liberties adopted at the midwinter 1961 meeting[J]. AlA Bulletin,1961,55(6): 486-487.
[16] 程焕文.图书馆权利与道德[M].张靖,编译.桂林: 广西师范大学出版社, 2007:前言.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
