Outfilter the filterers

[CMUNSON]

Why can't we turn this argument around.  Instead of contributing our 
effort to censor sites, we could contribute to selection.
We establish some criteria for what constitutes valid library 
resources.  Things like objectivity, reliability, usefulness, 
presentation quality, etc. -- all of the things that we would consider 
in selecting a print resource for the library.  We might also rank 
things as juvenile, research, etc.  And we would qualify professional 
librarians to grant this distinction.  The distinguishing mark of these 
sites would be the library symbol - a figure with an open book.
We would invite all web sites to apply for this distinction by 
sending Email with a URL to a qualified librarian.  Our effort is 
then positive - we are selecting rather than censoring.  Any library 
could then use or ignore the library quality subset or ignore it.
  Millard Johnson    INCOLSA
     
     
     So who is to decide what are "valid" library resources? I can 
     understand this argument in the traditional realm of printed and 
     physical materials and limited budgets. I can also commend the 
     numerous librarians who have put together guides to the Internet.
     
     But this "selection" proposal would create another hoop for library 
     users to jump through. Why can't patrons simply be allowed to decide 
     for themselves what constitutes a "valid resource?" That's what most 
     people are doing now on the Internet now--they simply don't need 
     librarians to find what they need. Is this threatening? I guess it is 
     for some librarians and for those who take an elitist approach to 
     information dissemination.
     
     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? 
     
     Librarians should continue with our efforts to provide guides to the 
     web. We should avoid becoming gatekeepers to the Internet. I think you 
     should look at Yahoo and how it provides links to almost everything.
     
     Fortunately, the fact that libraries are so underfunded will prevent 
     this from being widely implemented.
     
     Chuck Munson