American organization jumps to NOTL librarian Cathy Simpson's defence

Cathy Simpson, terminated from her position as CEO and chief librarian of the Niagara-on-the-Lake Public Library, has had an American organization she has aligned herself with jump to her defence.

She was let go because of an opinion piece she wrote that was published recently in The Lake Report, a NOTL newspaper, in which she addressed library censorship, with library books promoting diversity of identity “but little to no defence of books promoting diversity of viewpoint, and the purchase of books promoting ‘progressive’ ideas over ‘traditional’ ideas.”

However, said library board chair Daryl Novak, “the big concern (with her opinion piece) is not about her saying we need a balanced collection, the big concern is the FAIR (Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism) organization,” which Simpson references to back up her view of library censorship.

Novak refers to FAIR as a growing militant, political organization “that goes against what the library stands for, and that the board could not accept.”

“Board members did some research into the organization,” he continued, “and found that FAIR isn’t as fair as it appears to be.”

Simpson however has another side of the story which she told The Local she would like to make public, and given the community response to the news of her termination, she knows the public would like to hear, but it has become a legal matter that she can’t discuss.

She will say she believes her opinion was “misrepresented,” and she is grateful for the support of a wide community, many of whom are afraid to speak up, fearing they too might be fired.

Monica Harris, the executive director of FAIR, having jumped in to defend both Simpson and FAIR, writes on X (formerly known as Twitter) that Simpson’s “sole crime" was speaking out against the rising tide of censorship she saw in libraries and advocating for FAIR’s principles of neutrality and viewpoint diversity.”

What's happening in Niagara-on-the-Lake, she said, “should be a wake up call to freedom loving people everywhere.”

She goes on to write that Simpson is being punished for her relationship with FAIR, “because some residents believe it is an organization that promotes “right-wing propaganda" and amplifies "anti-LGBTQ+ pseudoscience.”

“I want to be perfectly clear so there is no misunderstanding,” she said. “FAIR is a nonpartisan organization committed to protecting civil liberties and promoting universal equality.”

The misunderstanding Harris refers to is from a presentation made by resident Matthew French to the library board about Simpson’s opinion piece.

French told board members he was shocked to see the CEO of the library “using such loaded terms and the dog whistles — communications that are designed for only some audiences to hear.”

He referenced a statement from FAIR in Canada, that the public has the right to access information and ideas from the widest possible diversity of thought and opinion, and that libraries should champion and facilitate this diversity, especially on controversial issues. And he noted that some of that wording was also found in Simpson’s opinion piece.

French, who introduced himself as a member of the LGBTQ community, told those at the library meeting FAIR claims that in the interest of intellectual freedom, public libraries should carry anti-LGBTQ books, and also that information about LGBTQ people should be banned from public schools.

“The same thing goes for their arguments about racism. This isn’t about academic freedom; this is about, as they say in their statement, ‘traditional’ ideas.”

Leigh Ann O’Neil, a lawyer with FAIR, also took to X in defence of Simpson, and the organization she represents, arguing against French’s interpretation of FAIR’s motives.

Simpson’s crime was writing about her “dedication to intellectual freedom,” and outlining FAIR’s principles in support of Freedom to Read Week. “Ironically,” O’Neil said, FAIR’s “stated mission aligns perfectly with Freedom to Read Week’s principles of intellectual freedom, freedom of expression, freedom to read and resistance to censorship.”

Novak, in response to his concern about Simpson’s statements, and alignment with FAIR,  said he asked her for a plan to restore the situation, but “we didn’t get much in response,” and that’s when the board made the decision that the division between them was irreparable.

Also, when library board members looked into some new acquisitions Simpson had chosen herself — typically, Novak said, there would be some staff discussion about new purchases — they found a selection of books that he believes don’t meet library policy. And staff members have come forward to say they too are uncomfortable with some of Simpson’s choices, he said.

Novak acknowledged interpreting library policies on censorship can require “a bit of judgment,” but said “what it came down to essentially is that board members and a number of staff all see things the same way, and Cathy sees things differently. That’s why the decision was made that we’d have to part company.”

She has been terminated without cause, and a severance agreement is in the works.

Andrew Porteus, former chair of the library board, spoke strongly in defence of Simpson’s opinion piece. He explained his extensive background of working with libraries for more than 30 years, some of it developing policy on intellectual freedom.

He believes, he said, that information which is nonconforming, and goes against the norms, “should be included in library collections, sitting alongside the materials that espouse more orthodox viewpoints.” And, he adds, “you know what, so does this library.”

He goes on to point out the many library policies and documents as evidence, including that the library is “responsive to the needs and interests of a diverse community,” and that “people have the right to reject for themselves material of which they do not approve, but they do not have the right to restrict the intellectual freedom of others.”

Porteus told The Local he was “quite surprised at the severity of the reaction of the library board” to Simpson when she was put on administrative leave, and then “shocked and dumbfounded that the board has terminated her employment with the library. Since 2012 Cathy has been a strong advocate for the library in the community and beyond, and brought stability and vision to the library.”

“With the fondness many people have for Cathy and with free speech and censorship being such a big issue,” Novak told The Local, “I think a number of people in town might have been a bit confused about the right of an individual to express him or herself freely, and what happens when one is acting as an organization.”

There is no doubt, Novak said, “the culture wars are out there,” adding he was sure that as a public library there was a very good chance they’d “be dinged” at some point. He wouldn’t know when or why, he said, and until it happened, there wasn’t much they could do about it.

“The disappointing thing is I didn’t think we’d be thrown in the culture wars by our CEO.”