Electronic Brown Wrapper

[DEIRDRE F. WOODWARD]

I am shocked and saddened at the number of people on this list who support
filtering in libraries.  It is the library's function to provide information,
not determine what kind of information will be provided.  Certainly, selection
occurs in determining what library books a library will purchase, but if I, a
patron, comes into a library and asks for information on cliterodectomies,
sodomy, bomb making, NAMBLA, neo-Nazi propoganda, beastiality, or any other
type of information, the library's function is to help me find the information
I am looking for.  That doesn't mean the library needs to sink resources into
purchasing these materials, nor does it mean that the library supports in any
way the information I am seeking.  All the library does is provide me with 
access to the information via 1) interlibrary loans of the material I am 
requesting, or 2) resources I can turn to for more information.  

Selection is not filtering; it is smart management of resources.  Selection 
is choosing to be information strong in particular areas, including
patron interest, and choosing to not duplicate the information in nearby or
easily reachable centers of information.  Selection is about creating depth
and interest in the library's in-house collection. Selection is not about 
denying patrons access to information.

Filtering is telling a patron that no, the library will not interlibrary loan a
book because the library finds it objectionable.  How many librarians on this 
list support that practice?  Filtering is crossing out all the objectionable 
subjects, authors and titles in the Books in Print volumes, so the patron
cannot find certain information.  How many librarians on this list support that
practice?

I vehemently object to filtering Internet sites in public libraries.  The
nature of the Internet is to be a space of information access which cuts 
through many of the money and space restrictions libraries, towns, regions, states, countries, and people 
ourselves necessarily face.  You can't have access to the Internet without
simultaneously having access to all the information on the Internet; the two
are inseperable.  If people don't want to allow other people access to
information (what a ridiculous idea! In the United States of America! Who has 
the gall, the *ego*, to assume the job of disallowing others access to 
information?) then those people should object not to this site or that site, 
but to the very concept of the Internet. How many libraians on this list 
support that practice?

People object to the Internet because it contains information they don't want
to know, or they don't what their kids to know.  I fully understand that 
public librarians are harrassed on a daily basis by the people who prefer to 
experience the world with blinders on, but the answer for dealing with those 
people is not to propose the impossible solution of filtering Internet access.
If librarians want to truly intervene in this problem, the best thing they 
could do is set up menus (check out ours:  http://lib.4cty.org/spiedie.html) 
which provide "clean" sites in the areas which people need the most:  
education, government, resources.  

I'd like to close this meandering diatribe with a quote from the New York State
Guide to Intellectual Freedom in Libraries:

		One of the most difficult challenges in supporting 
		intellectual freedom comes not from censors outside 
		the library, but from within . . . Avoiding self-
		censorship is, indeed, one of our most important 
		challenges.

As an intellectual, as a free person, I cannot and will not support the
practice of filtering the Internet.  As a library patron and supporter, I hope
that the librarians on this list cannot and will not support the practice
either.

Deirdre

Deirdre F. Woodward
Automation Assistant
Four County Library System
Vestal, NY

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS MESSAGE ARE MINE AND MINE ALONE.  I THOUGHT IT, I
WROTE IT, I SIGNED IT.  IF YOU WANT TO BLAME MY EMPLOYERS FOR ANYTHING, BLAME
THEM FOR NOT GIVING ME A BETTER OFFICE.