cyberfiltering: just say no... Not no, yes!

[Ronnie Morgan]

>DBurt has dropped the challenge. He says that more and more librarians
are
>speaking up in favor of filtering (whether or not we know or care what
the
>filter providers think is worthy of filtering).
>
>I, and I believe others, have dropped out of this fight because it's
obvious
>that people like DBurt and Ronnie Morgan think cybercensorship is a Good
Thing
>(tm) and none of us are going to convince them otherwise.
>
>Unfortunately, we're giving the wrong impression by not arguing. "Keep up
the
>fight, we're winning" says DBurt. So, for the record: I think
cyberfiltering
>is the wrong thing to do on public Internet terminals. Anybody else?

You people make me laugh...

David Burt and I (and others that I have spoken with privately) know that
because it is on the internet, it does not mean it's right.  I think a lot
of you believe that EVERYTHING on the net is good, because it's there. 
That simply is NOT true. 

One thing that I have found interesting in the debate with a few of you in
private.  Everytime I made an argument, you always had a reason why my
argument was wrong.  But, when I mentioned this one thing, which I should
have thought of a long time ago, all responses stopped.  You know that I'm
right, and you don't want to admit it.  Till now, I have only shared it
privately, but I'm going to share it with everyone on the list now.

It is a fact that if a minor trys to purchase porn at a convient store, or
even an adult book store, the owner can not sell it to them.  Why?  Because
it is against the law for anyone to sell porn to a minor.

The funny thing is, most of you believe that you can give the stuff away. 
What do you think is going to happen to the owner of the adult book store
if he started giving it away simply because they are under-aged?  He'll be
shut down so fast, it'll make your head spin.  

Yet, most of you still want to provide the stuff, to anyone, for free.  

Sure, some of you can make me believe that porn is "information", depending
on the situation.  But, in general, porn has one intent, and one intent
only, to satisfy the pleasures of those looking at it.  Oh sure, I can
disguise it as being a "research" project.  That's fine.  Have at it.  But
don't allow my child to have access to it, that is NOT the kind of research
he/she needs to be doing.

And, as far as that goes, you are right, I should be with my child where
ever he/she goes.  But used to, the library was one of the few places where
I would have allowed my child to "browse" around the library.  It's a
pretty safe place for my child.  I'd like for it to stay that way.  You, as
an adult, should be allowed to view anything you want, but the library also
needs to know that the children are a great asset as to whether or not the
library stays open, or not.  The library needs to be a safe place for our
kids to learn and to get a GOOD education.  Porn isn't good for kids, no
matter what you say it is for adults, it is NOT good for kids.  

This has NEVER been about censorship, rights to access, or even
constitutionality.  This has ALWAYS been about protecting the children. 
Sure, one day they may be a porn star, and letting the view porn at an
early age would not have mattered, however, there are a LOT of things that
kids simply don't/can't understand at an early age.  They are better off
finding out about stuff like that when they are older, and more mature.

And  back to that law again, why is it against the law?  If it is so good
for kids to know about porn, why does that law even exist?

And another thing.  I believe the mechanics are already there that would
allow a library to set up there own list of sites to block.  But let me
make you aware of how much staff time we're talking about.  If you decide
to block all of the porn sites, you are going to have to have a staff of
people looking for and verifying that it doesn't meet your collection
developement policy (sorry, had to throw that in).  ANY library is going to
be better off accepting a companies database, and challenge what is on the
list if something is discovered that really shouldn't be on the list. 
Those companies have better resources for keeping the database maintained. 
I doubt that any library director will want to spend tens of thousands of
dollars when they can have something better for, maybe, thousands of
dollars. 

Now, the final question:  will THIS be my last long message to this list? 
Time will tell, I suppose...

Ronnie Morgan