This essay focuses on strategies for acquisitions in Swedish public libraries. The topic has been occuring in the public debate off and on since the70s. The dominant view has been that librarians have allowed demand direct the purchases of media and thus have ignored quality literature. This debate has caused me to reflect on the librarians constant dilemma when purchasing media. Are they supposed to choose literature that are in demand, or should an evaluation made by librarians be the decisive? The previous research has shown that the library profession is traditionally characterized by a non-judgmental approach. It also suggests that librarians rather talk about their information intermediary role than their work with acquisitions. My theoretical problem is a somewhat provoking hypothesis that librarians are reluctant to appear as arbiters and that this can have a direct or nondirect impact on acquisitions. My purpose with this paper is to study which one of the selection criteria; demand, quality or professional competence is the most dominant in the texts, an also how the acquisitions are organized. As source material I use collection development policies. From the result of the investigation I conclude that demand is the dominant selection criteria. Thus it is the patron who is put at the center, rather than quality and the librarian´s expertise regarding acquisitions. The competence of the librarian is however mentioned in the acquisition process, sometimes in an indirect way, but it is not highlighted in the texts. I therefore argue that there is evidence to suggest that librarians as professionals do not want to emphasize their role as arbiters and that it affects the media selection in Swedish public libraries.