The "Dangerous" Public Library [see my comment at the

[David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

While I strongly disagree with most that Jean advocates, I do want to
present all responsible sides to major issues. I believe that the defense
of the Bill of Rights in the electronic age is a critcal issue for the
nation and it must come to grips with all the issues involved.


To quote Beatrice Hall paraphasing Voltaire:


"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it."


I wish others would defned to the death my right to look at what I want to
look at not just what my community thinks I should read and think.


Dave


ps and please child pornography is ILLEGAL and does not need more laws or
better filters -- just more and better enforcement.


Dave


Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 09:57:30 -0400
To: farber () central cis upenn edu (David Farber)
From: Jean Armour Polly <polly () well com>
Subject: The Dangerous Public Library


Dave-


many card-carrying members of ALA don't go along with the First Amendment
uber alles notion. We think local public libraries have a responsibility to
serve COMMUNITIES and not necessarily individuals. We believe in
intellectual freedom for individuals but can't see spending public money to
enable individuals to download pornography, or what is so "intellectual"
about that activity that it should be protected.


PUBLIB, the PL listerv which I founded back in 1992, recently carried a
story regarding a Lakewood, Ohio library arrest of a patron viewing nude
children on the Internet, and downloading to disk. the story was covered in
USA Today  6/30
http://167.8.29.8/plweb-cgi/idoc.pl?3622+unix+_free_user_+cgi.usatoday.com..
80+U
SATODAY_ONLINE+USATODAY_ONLINE+NEWS+NEWS++Lakewood%26AND%26Ohio%26AND%26Inte
rnet
%26AND%26library


As one librarian put it "Libraries are NOT "safe" places with no "dangers."
She was talking about the dark stacks and the lurkers in bathrooms. But
deas are often dangerous, too. Unfortunately the community perception is
often that the library IS a safe place. They may expect  controversial
books (as long as they were well-reviewed) but they don't expect public
funds to be spent on equipment so that a patron can exercise his first
amendment rights to walk in to look up the best ways to have sex with dogs,
or infants for that matter.


I don't think putting up "the Net isn't safe" signs  on the public PCs is
enough. The community pays the public library to be in line with its
community needs (OK, everyone--get out your library's selection policies
and mission statements. See anything about bestiality there?)


I also agree that filters don't work 100%. But every time a librarian puts
a dollar towards one book or one idea over another-- a filter is already
being used: the librarian! For ALA to say filtering is something libraries
just don't do is disingenous.


Perhaps, until PICS catches on, it's time to consider putting the Net
behind the reference desk for mediated use only. Before you dismiss this
idea, think about it long and hard. And remember that this is often the
case for other online services (Dialog, etc).


Can you really defend the intellectual freedom of the patron in Lakewood,
downloading pictures of nude little boys? And providing public equipment to
feed his addiction? Is that type of use in the public library mission? Even
if you think it is, what the people who pay the librarian's salary think is
paramount.


My point is that the already ailing and under-funded public library as an
institution may go down in flames over this issue, and that would be a Bad
Thing. Much worse than putting the Net behind the reference desk, or its
equivalent, a proxy server carefully tended by information professionals.


Sometimes I wish we had all taken "First, do no harm..." oaths when we got
our library science master's degrees.... but one thing I am sure about is
that ALA's stance is not helping local practitioners deal with anxious
town/school/library boards.


One librarian has started a 501c3 called Filtering Facts to counter the ALA
argument about the Library Bill of Rights. Check it out at
http://www.filteringfacts.org


Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 18:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Burt, David" <DBurt () ci oswego or us>
To: publib <publib () sunsite berkeley EDU>
Subject: www.filteringfacts.org
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.970717184630.17386C-100000 () sunsite Berkeley EDU>


Announcing a new organization and website, Filtering Facts
(www.filteringfacts.org)


Filtering facts is a non-profit organization that promotes the
acceptability of filtering in libraries. Our primary purpose is to
publicize the "other side" of the filtering in libraries debate. To
date, the debate has been dominated by the American Library Association
Office of Intellectual Freedom, the American Civil Liberties Union, and
other organizations which take an extreme stand on free speech. The
result of this one-sided debate has been that much of the media and
public have believed what ALA/OIF's says about filters.


We believe that libraries have the right to offer the kind of Internet
service they want. We do not believe that libraries are obligated to
offer everything on the Internet. We believe in exercising selection of
Internet resources. We believe in exercising our professional judgment
in the use of the Internet.


Filtering Facts began, appropriately enough, on the Internet. Filtering
was attacked by many in our profession. A few librarians spoke up on
library discussion lists in defense of filtering, and we were attacked
too. We were censured by our colleagues and called censors. Our point of
view was excluded at ALA conferences. But we would not remain silent.


We are seeking to organize pro-filtering librarians around the country
to actively counter the efforts of the ALA Office of Intellectual
Freedom. We have begun contacting the media to insure that our point of
view is represented in future news stories about filtering in libraries.
We have begun publishing articles in support of filtering in our
professional literature. We have begun to demand that our voices be
heard at conferences and workshops.


Our Goals


  *   Educate the public and media about Internet software filters.


  *   Encourage libraries to voluntarily adopt filters.


  *   Offer our support to libraries that implement filters.


  *   Persuade the American Library Association to rescind its
"Resolution on the use of filtering software in libraries", and adopt a
more tolerant
view of filtering .


  *   Persuade the American Library Association to adopt a "hands off"
policy toward libraries that filter.




David Burt, President and Founder, Filtering Facts