I didn’t set out to become friends with The Library Watcher.

In fact, when I first encountered their work, I was looking for something very different.

I had just left a library workplace that had become deeply difficult for me, and I was trying to figure out what to do with everything I knew about what had happened there. Like many library workers who have found themselves in a situation where speaking openly feels risky, I had a lot of questions about how to tell the story, how to document what had happened, and whether anyone would actually care.

That’s when I reached out to The Library Watcher.

I wasn’t reaching out because I wanted to create drama. I wanted to expose what I believed was happening at my former library and put information into the hands of people who had a right to know about it. I had documents. I had questions. I had experiences that I felt deserved to be examined rather than quietly forgotten.

The Library Watcher listened.

And then they did what they do: they started looking.

That interaction eventually grew into an unexpected friendship and a relationship that has connected us to other library workers who are navigating many of the same difficult issues.

We’ve never worked together. Our library systems aren’t necessarily close. We may never have crossed paths under ordinary circumstances. But sometimes the internet puts exactly the right people in front of you at exactly the right time.

For this installment of Library Voices: Unfiltered, I wanted to introduce you to the person behind The Library Watcher—and, more importantly, to the philosophy behind the page.

They have chosen to remain anonymous, and I will be respecting that throughout this article.

So, what exactly is The Library Watcher?

At its core, The Library Watcher is an advocacy page built around public records.

Those records have covered a wide range of issues: sexual harassment, unethical or wasteful expenditures, censorship, retaliation, favoritism, diversity, workers’ compensation, workplace culture, and public safety.

That list alone might make someone unfamiliar with the page assume that its purpose is to attack libraries.

The Library Watcher says that couldn’t be further from the truth.

“At first glance, someone new to the page may find it distasteful, or assume that I wish to dismantle the profession as a whole,” they said. “First, I’ll concede that my methods are not for everyone, and I recognize that naming names can seem hostile.”

But the motivation behind the page isn’t destruction.

It’s accountability.

“It’s not my intent to sabotage the mission of libraries or advocate for defunding them,” they said. “I believe in the core principles of this profession, and I’ve studied and worked in this field long enough to know there is a right way and a wrong way of doing things. When I see the leaders of these institutions going about things in what I believe to be the wrong way, then I want to call them out.”

That distinction is important throughout our conversation.

The Library Watcher isn’t arguing that libraries are bad institutions. They’re arguing that libraries are institutions, and institutions need oversight.

[Library Watcher Facebook Page]

“Radical love” for library workers

When I asked what inspired the page, the answer was surprisingly simple.

“Radical love for this profession and the people working inside these spaces.”

Their focus, they explained, is on the workers who often have the least amount of power.

“My heart lies with the workers,” they said. “Ultimately I am doing this for every library worker who has felt overlooked, or swept beneath the rug because their title didn’t merit them the privilege of being heard.”

That includes workers who may feel like they have nowhere else to go.

“Many workers in this profession are afraid to speak out, and there’s very little recourse for workers who do,” they explained. “By hosting this page, it’s my hope that I can give a voice to those workers who want to speak out but may be afraid to do so.”

That was one of the things that resonated with me most when I first reached out.

Because sometimes the hardest part isn’t knowing that something is wrong.

It’s figuring out what you’re actually allowed to say about it.

Library workers can be deeply invested in their institutions and their communities. They can love their jobs and still experience harassment, retaliation, favoritism, poor management, unsafe working conditions, or unethical decision-making.

Those things aren’t mutually exclusive.

And sometimes the people experiencing those problems are the least able to publicly discuss them.

When the problems start looking like patterns

The Library Watcher told me there wasn’t one single moment that caused them to create the page.

Instead, it was a culmination.

“Yes there was, both in my personal experiences and from what I knew was happening to my other colleagues,” they said. “I wouldn’t say any one moment stands out—it’s more like a culmination of not just one bad experience, but many bad experiences.”

Taking a step back allowed them to see patterns.

“By far I think the most disturbing experiences involve sexual harassment in the workplace, or just harassment in general. Public safety is another topic which has come up recently. The other concerning pattern I noticed was regarding how the library handles its finances.”

To The Library Watcher, those aren’t isolated problems.

“To me, the culmination of these experiences is a clear sign that there are not enough guardrails in place to prevent these situations from getting out of hand.”

That word—guardrails—came up repeatedly.

The argument isn’t that every library leader is corrupt or that every difficult workplace situation represents institutional wrongdoing. It’s that systems need structures that prevent individual people from having too much unchecked power.

“I think the underlying theme is corrupt or incompetent leadership,” they said. “Sometimes it’s on the administrative level, and sometimes it is on the managerial level. It can range from financial transactions, to library policy changes, to personnel decisions, and the list goes on. To me this signals a real lack of transparency from the top down.”

Following the paper trail

One of the things I find most interesting about The Library Watcher’s work is how strongly they emphasize verification.

If someone sends them a message saying, My library is a mess, that’s not enough.

“If someone is giving me exact details like names, dates, descriptions of specific events, and providing documentation to back that up, then it’s a lot easier for me to begin an investigation,” they explained.

The next step is often a public-records request.

“I need to see actual records and documentation to verify what I am being told is true. If I’m not doing that, then this page loses all credibility.”

That means knowing what to ask for.

“I cannot create reasonable public records requests if I don’t know what to ask for,” they said. “A reasonable request from a records custodian must be precise, so having names of documents, dates of events, names of people involved allows me to do that.”

And sometimes that means going through an enormous amount of information.

“Sometimes I get hundreds, even thousands of pages back, and I have to look through all of that, and determine what the most important things are to share with the public.”

The goal isn’t to overwhelm people with documents. It’s to make the important information accessible.

“Even if I don’t share everything on the page, I have provided numerous individuals with access to the entirety of the records I’ve received.”

That last part is particularly important.

The Library Watcher isn’t presenting themselves as the sole authority on what the records mean. In some cases, they share the records with others and ask for their perspective about what stands out.

“It’s definitely a collaborative effort when things are working well between us,” they said.

And not every investigation requires a formal records request. Board meeting minutes, recorded meetings, financial documents, and other public information can sometimes provide the necessary primary sources.

“Once you verify that, then the truth is really your shield.”

Public doesn’t always mean publishable

This is perhaps the most nuanced part of The Library Watcher’s philosophy.

They have access to public records.

But that doesn’t mean they believe every piece of information in those records belongs on their page.

“I try to post a checklist of items as a ‘heads up’ to everyone who follows this page,” they explained. “This allows for the time to have word travel, and anyone to notify me with any objections.”

If someone reaches out with a legitimate concern about a potential post, they listen.

“I may not agree with them, or may choose to still post about a topic, but it’s all a case by case basis. If someone can convince me that making a post will do more harm than good, then I will absolutely reconsider making that post.”

There are also rules The Library Watcher has established for themselves.

“If the post is centered around something a person did outside of their public capacity, then I don’t post about it. I’m really only interested in publishing information about how a person acts as a public servant.”

They generally don’t publish records they personally obtain about library employees who aren’t in leadership positions.

Minors receive particular consideration.

“If the name or image of a minor is part of a record request, I ask that the record custodians redact this information or blur the photo.”

And when records contain personal information that isn’t relevant to the story—addresses, phone numbers, medical information, and similar details—they remove it.

“Any of that information is not something I want to publish on this page,” they said.

That distinction gets to one of the biggest ethical questions surrounding this kind of advocacy:

Just because information is legally accessible doesn’t mean we have an obligation to amplify it.

The Library Watcher is very aware of that line.

The ethical gray area

I specifically asked how they reconcile advocating for workers while potentially making things more difficult for workers who are still inside the system.

The answer was honest.

“This is definitely something that weighs on me,” they said.

They’ve heard from workers who find the page anxiety-inducing, including people they know personally.

“I empathize with these people, I really do.”

But empathy doesn’t necessarily mean stopping.

“Shutting down the page is simply not an option for me. Some of this information should be out in the public. Some of it does create accountability, and real world change.”

That doesn’t mean they believe every post is harmless.

They understand that exposing institutional problems can create consequences for real people.

But they also believe that protecting the status quo simply because change is uncomfortable isn’t a solution.

A friend once told them something that has stayed with them:

“Sometimes people want to hide the poison instead of healing it.”

That sentiment seems to capture much of the philosophy behind the page.

“I’m not okay with the status quo,” The Library Watcher told me. “I think libraries are magical places, and the people who work in them are incredibly important.”

But the magic comes with a cost.

“A lot of people don’t understand that magic comes at a cost, and sometimes the people who are meant to be serving the community begin serving themselves instead.”

The problem with vocational awe

One of the most important parts of our conversation was the discussion of vocational awe.

For anyone unfamiliar with the term, vocational awe describes the tendency to view library work as inherently noble and librarians as almost above the ordinary problems that affect other workplaces.

The Library Watcher believes that can become dangerous.

“We all experience it,” they said. “That idealistic version of a librarian that most patrons think we are.”

They don’t dispute that librarians do incredible work.

But the public often doesn’t see what happens behind the scenes.

“They don’t think about how we are funded, who the board members are, why certain decisions are made, and that’s because they trust us.”

That trust can become a blind spot.

“The vocational awe blinds people to the fact that libraries can be just as corrupt as any other workplace.”

For library workers, this can be particularly frustrating because the public may see the library as a place of safety and inclusion while having no idea what the people working inside the building are experiencing.

“They don’t see the work culture, or power dynamics either,” The Library Watcher said. “Public libraries are becoming more and more top heavy—paying administrative bloat six figure salaries while the workers on the ground struggle to make ends meet. They don’t see that we are being asked to do more with less, and for less than the rising costs of living.”

And that’s why they believe criticism of libraries isn’t inherently harmful.

“I really wish more people understood that it’s actually a good thing to be critical of the library. Not to dismantle or discredit them, but to provide those guardrails from an outside source.”

Who watches the library?

That question leads naturally to another issue The Library Watcher believes deserves more attention: library governance.

They want more people attending public board meetings and learning how their library is actually governed.

“I wish more people came to publicly held board meetings. I wish more people were aware of and knew how to make public records requests.”

They also question whether library boards are always structured in a way that encourages meaningful oversight.

“How can we expect board members to provide meaningful oversight of their library systems if they are receiving those positions as some political favor?”

Their personal opinion is that board members should be interviewed and voted into their positions rather than simply appointed.

Whether or not someone agrees with that particular proposal, the larger question is worth considering:

Who is watching the people who are watching the library?

Library workers may identify problems from inside an organization, but they don’t necessarily have the power to fix them.

“Though they may try, there’s still many things that are up to the administrators and the board,” The Library Watcher explained. “But you don’t really know who is making those decisions unless you have that information, and share that with others.”

To them, that’s where public accountability begins.

The unexpected connection

This is where my own story intersects with The Library Watcher’s.

I initially reached out because I wanted someone to look into what had happened at my former library. I had left that workplace with questions, documentation, and a strong feeling that the public deserved to understand more about what had happened behind the scenes.

The Library Watcher didn’t know me.

They didn’t owe me anything.

And yet they took the information seriously.

That doesn’t mean they simply accepted everything I told them as fact. That’s not how their process works. They asked questions, looked at records, investigated, and followed the information where it led.

Somewhere along the way, the relationship changed from person who submitted information and person investigating it into something much more human.

We started talking.

We realized how much we had in common.

We realized how many other people were having similar experiences.

And I began to understand just how many workers were reaching out to this person I’d known only as an anonymous page on the internet.

The Library Watcher told me that connecting people is one of the most valuable things the page has unexpectedly accomplished.

“I can’t tell you the number of emails I’ve received from people just thanking me for doing this, saying that it gives them hope.”

That has certainly been my experience.

And it is one of the reasons I wanted to do this interview.

[Read: Library Voices: Unfiltered; Vol 6. Youth Services Librarian in IN. My story.]

More than the numbers

As of August 26, 2026, The Library Watcher had received 673,448 views, 22,929 engagements, and 561 followers since launching in January.

For a niche page focused primarily on library workplace issues and public records, those numbers are significant.

But The Library Watcher isn’t particularly interested in follower counts for their own sake.

“The statistics indicate that the majority of views are coming from non-followers,” they said. “That to me was very reassuring because it shows that people are sharing, and coming to this page regardless of whether they follow it or not—they’re intentionally seeking this information out.”

That reach has also changed how they approach the work.

Initially, there was a feeling that they needed to constantly produce content.

“When I first began I felt the need to continually add content to this page, not just for the sake of it, but because I had numerous records in hand that I wanted to get out to the public.”

Now, they’ve realized that not everything needs to happen immediately.

“It’s important to take personal time, and also to do thorough research, so while I will be still generating content, I won’t always be posting on a weekly or daily basis.”

And that’s probably important to remember when looking at the page from the outside.

The Library Watcher isn’t a team.

“I’m just one person,” they said.

They’re balancing work, family obligations, life events, and everything else that comes with being a human being.

“I get a lot of help from my sources who provide me with information of their own, and that is a huge help. I try to be respectful of that trust, and earnestly investigate any concerns, and share that information if it’s appropriate.”

They’re also considering creating a trusted network of “watchers” who could share information, help formulate public-records requests, and support one another’s investigations.

For now, though, the work largely falls on one person.

What keeps them going?

With everything involved—the research, the ethical questions, the emotional toll, and the inevitable criticism—why keep doing it?

The answer comes back to the people who reach out.

“It’s really the number of people who continue to reach out,” they told me. “I’m literally just a stranger on the internet to these people, and they are reaching out and sharing a part of their life with me. When someone gives me that level of trust I feel compelled to help.”

They don’t always have the answers.

They can’t always change what is happening.

But they can investigate.

They can document.

They can make information accessible.

And sometimes, they can simply let someone know that they’re not the only person who has experienced something.

“I may not have the answers, or be able to do much at all, but if I can help someone in even a small way, then I feel like I’ve fulfilled the purpose of this page.”

The stories themselves keep them going, too.

“I’ve been shocked by some of the things I’ve discovered since running this page. I’m empathetic to every person who reaches out to me because I’ve also worked in these spaces, and can relate to many of their experiences.”

And ultimately, they hope that exposing problems can prevent them from happening again.

“Even if I can’t stop or change what is happening, I can at least make other workers aware of what is happening in their workplace.”

Maybe someday the inbox will be empty

There was one thing The Library Watcher said during our interview that I keep coming back to.

“I once told someone that I look forward to the day that my inbox is empty, and all my tabs closed.”

That isn’t the statement I’d expect from someone who wants to run an advocacy page indefinitely.

But that’s precisely the point.

They don’t actually want an endless stream of workplace complaints.

They want libraries to get better.

“Maybe that will be a sign that these workplaces are on the mend, and this page is no longer relevant.”

Until then, they intend to keep going.

“My inbox will remain open, and I will continue to check my messages should anyone be in need of my services. I truly look forward to the day I don’t have to do any of that.”

That, to me, is the most important thing to understand about The Library Watcher.

You don’t have to agree with every post.

You don’t have to agree with every investigative method or every conclusion.

You can question the messenger. You can ask for more context. You can challenge an interpretation. The Library Watcher themselves says they welcome those conversations and has changed or abandoned posts when credible concerns have been raised.

But perhaps we should also be willing to ask ourselves why a page like this exists in the first place.

Why do library workers feel like they need an anonymous stranger on the internet to investigate what is happening in their workplaces?

Why are workers sometimes afraid to speak to their own leadership?

Why don’t more people attend library board meetings?

Why don’t more taxpayers understand how their libraries are governed?

Why do we sometimes treat criticism of libraries as an attack on libraries themselves?

And perhaps most importantly: what happens when we stop assuming that good institutions are automatically good workplaces?

The Library Watcher’s answer is straightforward.

“We cannot sit by in silence when we know something unethical is happening. Things will never get better unless we start to speak up and demand real accountability from these institutions.”

That doesn’t necessarily mean starting a Facebook page.

It might mean documenting an incident.

Keeping emails.

Writing things down.

Going to a board meeting.

Asking a question.

Filing a public-records request.

Supporting a coworker.

Or simply refusing to accept that something is normal just because everyone has gotten used to it.

“You can affect real change when you use your voice,” they said. “That may look differently to all of us and how we choose to participate in this kind of advocacy.”

And that’s probably the message I hope readers take from this conversation.

Libraries are worth defending.

Library workers are worth defending.

And accountability isn’t the enemy of either one.

Sometimes accountability is exactly what allows an institution to become what we all believe it should be.

Until the day The Library Watcher’s inbox is finally empty, they’ll keep watching.

And I, for one, am glad they are.

---

If you enjoyed this post and want to see others like it, check out these popular posts & subscribe to get the newest posts delivered to your inbox!

*This blog is intentionally ad-free. I want it to be a clean, distraction-free space. Here, public librarians can find practical ideas for youth services, outreach, and programming. There will be no pop-ups or sponsored clutter.

Some posts may include affiliate links for books or supplies I genuinely use and recommend. If you choose to purchase through those links, I may earn a small commission at no additional cost to you. It’s a simple way to support the work while getting materials for your own programs.

If you’ve found value in these ideas, please consider helping keep the blog running. I’m unemployed, so tips are always appreciated. They go directly toward hosting costs and content creation. You can do so here: https://www.paypal.com/ncp/payment/SPBXH4RPDHCCY