A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about why I was choosing to step down from my elected position on the Printz committee next year. YALSA changed a policy with regards to how members on committees may use social media, and it said the following:
This is all noted in my post, along with the original policy that was up for a consent vote at annual in June.
The element of the policy about not communicating electronically about any eligible titles was the cause for concern. And I wasn’t the only person who saw this and had questions. Those questions were asked of YALSA, and they weren’t answered, suggesting that indeed, the policy was clear enough.
When I wrote my letter to the executive director and to the incoming president of YALSA, I laid out that this particular element within the policy, about no communication about any eligible titles electronically, was my sticking point. The response I got to my concern was short, brief, and said thanks for considering the opportunity and whether it was a good fit for me, followed by assurance my vacancy would be filled.
No explanation. No clarification. No pointing out my interpretation was incorrect.
I took that to mean I had read this correctly, both because my question wasn’t answered about interpretation and also because the response I got following my concern being why I thought it was best to step down didn’t address a misinterpretation.
But now, the FAQ has changed.
Following annual, a new FAQ about the social media policy came out, and it’s much friendlier. The sticking point about whether committee members were gag ordered was clarified to say blogging and tweeting in non-review form of eligible titles would be fine. You can read it in full here.
It’s good YALSA followed through and clarified this policy. It makes it clear, consistent, and allows professionals to be just that: professional. They’re asked to use their best judgment in talking about eligible titles, rather than being told they can’t speak about them at all. This is a great thing, and I’m glad that members now know that writing book lists or otherwise sharing information about titles which may be eligible for their committee’s award or selection list is okay.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t change a thing for me.
It’s more disappointing than I can express that, despite multiple attempts, my concerns about this could not be addressed. That even in private communication, those in charge at YALSA chose not to discuss with me the issues I had and chose not to tell me that the FAQ could change or that my interpretation was incorrect. If anything, it feels personal, as this change came after asking and after quitting.
While I will continue to support YALSA members and the incredible work they put into the organization through volunteering, through educating, and through sharing, I will not be further involving myself with the organization. When my membership renewal is up next month, I will be spending that money in other ways.
We have to make choices about our time, our energy, and our money. At this point, it’s clear to me that YALSA doesn’t want me part of their organization, so I’m going to choose to go elsewhere.