Outfilter the filterers

[Burt, David]

 Chuck Munson wrote:

    > What gives the librarian the right to determine what constitutes
     >"objectivity, reliability, usefulness, presentation quality,"
other
     >than with optional guides? What give a librarian the right to
     >determine that I, Joe Library Patron, can't access
www.peepshow.com,
     >because it doesn't fit the selection criteria? The cost to access
the
     >site, at least the free parts, isn't any different than ibm.com.
What
     >if I'm doing research on adult web sites and how they administer
web
     >sites? What if I simply want to be entertained? Julie Library
Patron
     >can check out a hot bodice-ripper but I can't pursue my interests?

    You make an error here  by assuming that use of the Internet is an
unlimited resources, with no opportunity cost.  Use of the Internet in a
public library is a finite resource.  Just as you only have so many
books, you only have so many blocks of Internet time to allocate to your
patrons.  The opportunity cost of one person looking at porno is that
someone else can't do their homework, or look up a sports statistic.
What you need to think about is what's an appropriate use of scarce
resources.

You also don't address the issue of appropriateness.  Economics isn't
the only reason we don't collect everything in our libraries.  Public
libraries don't carry Hustler or Deep Throat.  This isn't because of
economics, it's because it isn't considered appropriate.  Librarians
have always made global decisions for their patrons, about what
resources and behaviors are appropriate for their libraries.  Our
patrons expect this.  We would be derelict if we did not set standards.
Why do we have to  throw appropriateness out the window when it comes to
the Internet?

Sadly, librarians seem to be willingly surrendering their right to
select, insisting that there is only one possible model of Internet
access: everything or nothing.  For the public, the special, the school,
the academic, the large, the small, the specialized, the generalized,
one size must fit all, otherwise, you are  one of those evil censors.

Take for example, a map library which decides it wants to install an
Internet workstation for its patrons to access on-line maps and other
geographic resources.  Suppose they filtered out everything except maps
and geographic information.  Why would you have a problem with this?
Why would you not allow a library to customize its Internet access to
suit its mission and collection policies?  If a patron came into this
hypothetical maps library and spent his allotted hour looking at say,
sites on basketball, how would this serve the map libraries' stated
mission to provide only geography-related information?  Why would this
be a responsible use of that library's budget?

Again, why must one size fit all?


  ***********************************************************
          David Burt, Information Technology Librarian 
          The Lake Oswego Public Library 
          706 Fourth Street, Lake Oswego, OR 97034
          URL:          http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/library/library.htm
          Phone:     (503) 635-0392 
          Fax:           (503) 635-4171 
          E-mail:      dburt at ci.oswego.or.us