I received my MLS in 1972, spent my career as a research and law librarian, retiring in 2003. I have never belonged to ALA but have been a member of the Virginia association and the Special Library Assn.
Even in 1972 the ALA was more interested in politics than in libraries and a recent president advocated using libraries to push a specific social and political agenda. Meanwhile reading has declined dramatically in all age groups, and publishing is dominated by the same political and social agenda. Book prizes are awarded for what is basically propaganda.
The ALA has failed to encourage viewpoint diversity, has hurried to promote the latest fad so yes, a frank conversation is desperately needed. I wish you luck getting started!
This article raises an important issue and I agree that a discussion about how well ALA serves library professionals needs to be had. That said, I need to point out an error which underscores the perils of using AI prompts for such an article. It lists the "South Tillamook County Library Club" in Oregon as an example of a "historical or notable city/county club/society" In reality, this is a Friends of the Library-like organization of community volunteers, not an association of librarians. I appreciate the author's transparency in including the AI prompts she used, but I also find it ironic and concerning that in 2026, even LIS professors are simply sharing what AI tells them and calling it research, vs. actually exercising what is supposed to be our core competency--providing accurate information.
O, it wasn't research..I was trying to demonstrate that there are organizations that support libraries that could be part of the conversation. I did actually take out a lot of the Friends Groups that popped up, but missed that one. What stood out to me is that there is no source to track all this information. Who should collect these data? We need a full landscape of library-related and supporting organizations. I saw the ALA membership numbers (they are footnoted) and thought I needed to start a conversation--that was my only goal but you are correct--were this a different kind of article I would write to every group before making a statement. Mostly, I want to consider how we can create alliances.
That is indeed a startling decline in membership, and it is worthwhile pointing out the many other library associations in the U.S., pointing to the need for a "Federation of Library Associations" such as we have in Canada (where we haven't had a national library association since the Canadian Library Association dissolved in 2016). However, I think the post would have benefitted from more of a discussion as to *why* membership has declined so dramatically over the past 20 years, prompting the formation of alternative organizations like the Association of Library Professionals; and, indeed, why you believe that Heterodoxy in the Stacks is one of the few places where such a conversation could even happen. In other words, we need a conversation about ALA's ideological monoculture, and if it might possibly be changed.
Although ALA has a list of affiliate members it has been my observation that there are very few posts at ALA Connect from them (if any). Heterodoxy in the Stacks seems to reach a broader range of librarians regardless of association affiliation.
I've been around such a long time that I participated in the regional events in Illinois in 1978 that were part of EACH STATE's preconference leading up to the Illinois White House Preconference. I recently re-read the state of Illinois report. I was reminded of a time when people who love libraries and librarians came together. By my (very rough) count there are over 100K librarians with active memberships in some library organization.
100% Agreed, Michael. Unfortunately, ALA, and the library industry as a whole, are historically not great at self-reflection. I'm not sure ALA is ready for this conversation. Or even aware of its necessity. I am thankful for the arrival of ALP.
I know that the main reasons I won’t be renewing my membership are that the ALA is way too political and offers very little support for librarians experiencing difficult workplaces. Not sure if that’s applicable to others but that’s my two cents as someone new to this field as a second career.
Count me as one of those ALA members who left between 2005 and 2025. Between 2000 and 2010, I was really active in ALA, especially with the IFRT and various cataloging groups that were attempting to make the organization more appealing to catalogers in public libraries. As a cataloger in a public library, I always found ALA conferences to be quite unhelpful to me and my concerns. Those attempts to make ALA more helpful to public librarian catalogers fizzled out, and the ALA continued to go further and further into politics. At one point, I realized that the ALA was spending more time fighting political battles (mostly of their own choosing) than actually doing anything helpful to what I saw as the ultimate needs of the profession. Rather than talk about pay and professionalism, conferences seemed more concerned about making sure the ALA had the "right" stance on political issues of the day and talking about how "harmful" it is to have to serve patrons with whom you disagree politically, so I decided to walk away and save over $100 per year. I haven't regretted that decision.
Seeing firsthand what the ALA and its member libraries are trying to do to children, such a decline in membership isn’t a surprise at all. I’m only sad it wasn’t more.
I received my MLS in 1972, spent my career as a research and law librarian, retiring in 2003. I have never belonged to ALA but have been a member of the Virginia association and the Special Library Assn.
Even in 1972 the ALA was more interested in politics than in libraries and a recent president advocated using libraries to push a specific social and political agenda. Meanwhile reading has declined dramatically in all age groups, and publishing is dominated by the same political and social agenda. Book prizes are awarded for what is basically propaganda.
The ALA has failed to encourage viewpoint diversity, has hurried to promote the latest fad so yes, a frank conversation is desperately needed. I wish you luck getting started!
This article raises an important issue and I agree that a discussion about how well ALA serves library professionals needs to be had. That said, I need to point out an error which underscores the perils of using AI prompts for such an article. It lists the "South Tillamook County Library Club" in Oregon as an example of a "historical or notable city/county club/society" In reality, this is a Friends of the Library-like organization of community volunteers, not an association of librarians. I appreciate the author's transparency in including the AI prompts she used, but I also find it ironic and concerning that in 2026, even LIS professors are simply sharing what AI tells them and calling it research, vs. actually exercising what is supposed to be our core competency--providing accurate information.
O, it wasn't research..I was trying to demonstrate that there are organizations that support libraries that could be part of the conversation. I did actually take out a lot of the Friends Groups that popped up, but missed that one. What stood out to me is that there is no source to track all this information. Who should collect these data? We need a full landscape of library-related and supporting organizations. I saw the ALA membership numbers (they are footnoted) and thought I needed to start a conversation--that was my only goal but you are correct--were this a different kind of article I would write to every group before making a statement. Mostly, I want to consider how we can create alliances.
That is indeed a startling decline in membership, and it is worthwhile pointing out the many other library associations in the U.S., pointing to the need for a "Federation of Library Associations" such as we have in Canada (where we haven't had a national library association since the Canadian Library Association dissolved in 2016). However, I think the post would have benefitted from more of a discussion as to *why* membership has declined so dramatically over the past 20 years, prompting the formation of alternative organizations like the Association of Library Professionals; and, indeed, why you believe that Heterodoxy in the Stacks is one of the few places where such a conversation could even happen. In other words, we need a conversation about ALA's ideological monoculture, and if it might possibly be changed.
Although ALA has a list of affiliate members it has been my observation that there are very few posts at ALA Connect from them (if any). Heterodoxy in the Stacks seems to reach a broader range of librarians regardless of association affiliation.
I've been around such a long time that I participated in the regional events in Illinois in 1978 that were part of EACH STATE's preconference leading up to the Illinois White House Preconference. I recently re-read the state of Illinois report. I was reminded of a time when people who love libraries and librarians came together. By my (very rough) count there are over 100K librarians with active memberships in some library organization.
I've tried to remind people today about the energy and commitment of the two White House Conferences. Someone asked me if I made that this up. I've since added the information to Wikipedia under the NCLIS article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Commission_on_Libraries_and_Information_Science#White_House_Conferences_on_Library_and_Information_Services.
Minimally these groups could talk with each other. Right now there does not seem to be a way that happens naturally.
=====
Here is the Illinois report.
This was done BEFORE e-mail and before Word Processing
Baron, Jean, ed. 1979. “Illinois White House Conference on Library and Information Services.”
Illinois Libraries 61, no. 4 (April): 303–392. Full text available at ERIC ED179210.
100% Agreed, Michael. Unfortunately, ALA, and the library industry as a whole, are historically not great at self-reflection. I'm not sure ALA is ready for this conversation. Or even aware of its necessity. I am thankful for the arrival of ALP.
Me too!
I know that the main reasons I won’t be renewing my membership are that the ALA is way too political and offers very little support for librarians experiencing difficult workplaces. Not sure if that’s applicable to others but that’s my two cents as someone new to this field as a second career.
Count me as one of those ALA members who left between 2005 and 2025. Between 2000 and 2010, I was really active in ALA, especially with the IFRT and various cataloging groups that were attempting to make the organization more appealing to catalogers in public libraries. As a cataloger in a public library, I always found ALA conferences to be quite unhelpful to me and my concerns. Those attempts to make ALA more helpful to public librarian catalogers fizzled out, and the ALA continued to go further and further into politics. At one point, I realized that the ALA was spending more time fighting political battles (mostly of their own choosing) than actually doing anything helpful to what I saw as the ultimate needs of the profession. Rather than talk about pay and professionalism, conferences seemed more concerned about making sure the ALA had the "right" stance on political issues of the day and talking about how "harmful" it is to have to serve patrons with whom you disagree politically, so I decided to walk away and save over $100 per year. I haven't regretted that decision.
Seeing firsthand what the ALA and its member libraries are trying to do to children, such a decline in membership isn’t a surprise at all. I’m only sad it wasn’t more.