Neo-Censorship in U.S. Libraries: An Investigation Into Digital Content Suppression is a painfully timely report into digital censorship in the United States, released by Library Futures in February 2025. It is an essential documentation of how our knowledge infrastructures are threatened, eroded, and deployed to ideological ends. Library Futures's Michelle Reed shares the story of how it came together, why it matters, and how you can join the fight.

Hi Michelle, can you please introduce yourself?

Hello, hola, salut! I’m the Director of Programs at Library Futures. We’re a small nonprofit that works to advance the digital rights of libraries through research, education, and advocacy. In my role, I oversee the organization’s education and community programs, project activities, and research portfolio in support of equitable access to knowledge.

Prior to joining Library Futures, I worked for over a decade in academic libraries at the intersections of education, technology, and intellectual property, including as the Director of Open Educational Resources (OER) at the University of Texas at Arlington. I’m a fierce advocate of big-tent open initiatives as an avenue for expanding access to scholarly knowledge, and I also believe libraries have an often untapped collective power to fight the corporate interests that exploit our public resources and harm our communities.

Tell us about the project you’ve been working on.

Library Futures recently released a new report, Neo-Censorship in U.S. Libraries: An Investigation Into Digital Content Suppression, that focuses on unsubstantiated allegations of “pornography” in library databases and digital collections as an intimidation tactic that results in large-scale censorship and suppression of legitimate research materials, particularly in K-12 digital library collections. For the study, our research team analyzed content ban legislation, public hearings, public reports, and confidential interviews with information professionals from across the United States. 

There has been a lot of conversation in both our professional networks and in the news about the increase in book challenges and book bans across the United States over the last five years. However, despite the fact that access decisions about print collections also impact digital collections, we found the discussion about censorship in libraries often excluded the complex factors at play in the digital realm, where restricting access is not as straightforward as removing a physical book from the shelf. In investigating two related accusations about “pornography” in library databases administered by EBSCO Industries, Inc.—a library vendor that provides proprietary access to K-12 and higher education research databases and educational materials—it became clear that digital censorship was an underreported but very concerning threat in the library landscape due to the ability of censors to quickly shut down access to large amounts of information for large populations. A common technique used in censoring digital collections is the use of stopwords and filters in library databases. However, a lot is still opaque in how these techniques are applied, making it difficult to understand how much content has been suppressed directly by vendors vs. what has been applied locally by information technology teams based on demands by pressure groups, school boards, and pro-censorship legislation. 

What this research made clear is the allegations of pornography in library databases are disingenuous at best and willful disinformation at worst. Approaching these allegations as “good faith” concerns is a challenge when the people making the reports have claimed to find inappropriate materials in a database at times when access to the database was shut down, such as in Utah. Similarly, Colorado parents have written about objectionable materials in K-12 databases and then directed concerned readers to a university database to investigate for themselves. It is misleading to suggest that resources available to university students are the same as what is available to middle school students; they are different products that contain different materials. As an organization, Library Futures absolutely believes in holding corporations accountable, but making false accusations about pornography and implementing subjective criteria that no vendor could reasonably comply with isn’t the way to effective accountability. 

I imagine many readers are familiar with library databases, such as the EBSCO products discussed in the Neo-censorship report, though the impact of filters and stopwords may be more difficult to comprehend. Unfortunately, in the United States, we’re seeing an equivalent situation unfold as the Trump administration seeks to disappear all DEIA (i.e., diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility) content from government websites. Similar to what happens in library databases when stopwords are indiscriminately applied to content, a recent purge of DEIA publications by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was found to cast a wider net than presumably intended. Popular Information reported that almost all of OSHA’s deleted publications were not associated with DEIA but rather used one of the words in the acronym in a different context. For example, one deleted publication that did not discuss DEIA topics included the following: "diversity of state-specific certification, training, and regulatory requirements" for "[Emergency Medical Services] agencies" and "diverse conditions under which EMS responders could work." Another deleted publication appears targeted for "development of [Musculoskeletal Disorders] may be related to genetic causes, gender, age, and other factors." 

Amidst other information purges, budget cuts and barriers at the National Institutes of Health and a recent PubMed outage have many wondering if the medical database is the next target for censorship and digital content suppression. The paywalled portion of the linked article on PubMed expresses concern that outages to the U.S. government-funded database could become common as workers tasked with maintaining it lose their jobs due to rampant Department of Government Efficiency cuts led by billionaire Elon Musk. While we can’t predict what essential resources will be targeted next, we can say with some confidence that efforts to censor content–particularly content that empowers and gives voice to marginalized communities–will increase. As information professionals, open advocates, and communities who just give a damn, it’s important to educate ourselves on the tactics pro-censorship advocates have used to push their agenda forward so we can effectively fight against it.

How can people learn more and get involved?

This most recent report and all our other work is shared via the Library Futures blog. Last month in connection with the Neo-censorship report’s release, we brought together an all-star panel to discuss digital censorship. We had great attendance and were flooded with questions–we’ll have a blog post out soon recapping the event. Moving forward, we’ll look for more opportunities to be in conversation and to strategize in community. We’re also working on an interactive OER based on the “Intellectual Freedom Choose Your Own Adventure” presentation by American Library Association president-elect Sam Helmick. The resource will offer an engaging way to help library workers respond to threats to intellectual freedom and to the rights of library users. 

We have a paid internship program for current students and recent graduates that accepts applications on a rolling basis. The Library Futures interns are an international cohort of students who work remotely to support a variety of projects. Their work has included conducting research for the Neo-Censorship report, a digital redlining map, and a recent report on OER and public libraries. Soon we’ll post a request for proposals for our Research Network, another cohort-based program that brings together library workers, advocates, and researchers. The community experiments with bold ideas and creates new resources that increase awareness of key issues impacting digital libraries. You can also find news about upcoming events and other ways to get involved by connecting with us online.

The best way to keep up with our work is to sign up for updates on our website and follow us on social media (we’re on Bluesky, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram). 

So many misfits to love! My favorites are probably the discounted and irregularly shaped apple cider doughnuts from my neighborhood apple orchard. But this word also came up recently at the launch of News Futures, a community of journalists, organizers, and civic allies working together in a “do-ocracy” to build a future for news that is service-oriented, participatory, and reparative. New Futures is seeking new members for its peer-led working groups, which are open to anyone committed to the organization’s values and collective efforts. Library Futures is excited to be working with News Futures to better understand and align the work of journalists and librarians in this critical time of mass disinformation and censorship.

Photo by Michael Dziedzic on Unsplash