John Helling: Public libraries help voters make informed decisions

In 1853, a teenager who was working as a bobbin boy in a textile mill went to his local apprentices’ library in Pittsburgh to try to educate himself and improve his lot but found he was not allowed to use any of the library’s books. The library had been free to use but was now charging a $2 subscription fee.

Incensed, he wrote a letter to the Pittsburgh Dispatch arguing that access to the library should continue to be free. The argument must have been a strong one—but not quite strong enough. The librarian relented and let the young Andrew Carnegie in, but the charge remained a barrier to everyone else in Pittsburgh.

Decades later, when Carnegie was the single wealthiest person at that point in human history, he cited this experience as one of the reasons he donated the cost of constructing public library buildings to communities across the United States, including two that are still serving patrons in Indianapolis. Carnegie thought public libraries could help people better themselves individually, but he also thought an educated public would be an educated electorate and would benefit the country.

Today, the issue of free, low-barrier access to information and ideas is even more critical than it was in 1859. While public libraries are now almost universally free to use, people still need to overcome barriers such as transportation and digital literacy to access them.

Lack of access to reliable information can prevent a person from improving their personal lives, as Carnegie was trying to do. And telling the difference between accurate information and misinformation is more challenging than ever. These barriers can make it impossible for people to find the information they need.

In an election season, this means that individuals who cannot access useful information to decide whom to vote for are effectively disenfranchised. If a person is hoodwinked by misinformation on social media or if they accept narratives from politicians that they might interpret differently if they had a bit more context, they are at risk of not taking full advantage of the power of their vote.

For people to be able to make the best possible decisions for themselves and their communities, they need to be able to access the best possible information on the topic in question. For example, if a Carnegie library were on the ballot in your hometown today, you might be interested to know that the architectural requirements of these buildings included a long flight of stairs leading to the front door, making it very difficult for some people to use. You might also want to know that the workers in Carnegie’s various factories and mines often observed that, if he were truly interested in improving their plight, he could simply pay them more and not do things like send in armed strike-breakers when labor unions refused to accept a 22% pay decrease. You could also take issue with the way Carnegie abided by Jim Crow, instructing Southern communities to count only the white population when applying for his grants, the outcome of which was racially segregated libraries.

Is Carnegie one of history’s great philanthropists, or, to paraphrase Mark Twain’s opinion on the subject, a cynical capitalist who was trying to purchase a legacy? Either point of view is defensible, but you are only able to create an informed opinion if you’re aware of the variety of perspectives on the subject.

In a nutshell, this is the goal of public libraries. We want to make reliable information available to the public from a range of sources and perspectives so our patrons can use that information to pursue their own educational goals and come to their own conclusions. One of the best uses of the public library’s resources is to make informed decisions about candidates for political office.•

__________

Helling is chief public services officer of the Indianapolis Public Library.