cyberfiltering

[Lori A. Schwabenbauer, Camden County Library]

I think, judiciously done, the use of some Internet filtering software is OK.  
We as librarians are protecting access to information, but we are also 
providing a public environment for our users.  I think it's almost tantamount
to sexual harrassment to allow public display of some of the more extreme,
explicit graphics on the Web.  That's exactly the complaint we've gotten from
staff members who have had to walk past people viewing such sites -- even a 
casual glance is enough to catch the eye, and some staff have found it creates
a threatening environment.   

Our library did buy special ergonomic workstations which put the monitor under 
the glass suface of the desk, so the computer display is much harder to see
just casually passing by.  This has helped a great deal.  But for libraries who
don't find that's enough, a package like CyberPatrol where you can choose to
block by category and disallow keyword blocking is a valid choice.  We have
used CyberPatrol with only 2 categories blocked: Full Nudity (as opposed to 
Partial Nudity/Art) and Gross Depictions, with no keyword blocking, and what we
found was that Hustler-type sites were blocked while we could still access
information on sexually transmitted diseases, homosexuality, etc.

This is not a perfect solution, but since it's the explicit porn graphics that 
catch the eye and are found to be most consistently offensive, I have no 
problem with blocking that part of the Internet.  Until we buy porn as part of
our print/A-V collection (and I'm not talking about Playboy -- I'm talking
much more extreme than that), I see no need to include it in our Internet
access.  If someone really did come along who was doing a thesis on
pornography, I'd turn the filter off for him or her.  Until then, I see no need
to allow graphical pornography in a public place.  

I think a lot of us have a knee-jerk reaction to words like "censorship," but 
librarians have always been exclusive about what goes in their collections.  
We don't accept just any donations of print materials -- why should we accept 
just anything that's "donated" to cyberspace?

*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Lori A. Schwabenbauer               609-772-1636 x3336
Supervisor, Automation Services     fax 609-772-6105 
Camden County Library               lori at camden.lib.nj.us  
203 Laurel Road                     http://www.cyberenet.net/~ccl/
Voorhees, NJ  08043  USA            Opinions/ideas/gripes are mine.
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

>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?
>
>Jennifer Heise,                             Net: jahb at lehigh.edu    \
>Senior Specialist, Web Management, LUIR     Phone:(610)758-3072   / /
>Linderman Library (30), Lehigh University, Bethlehem PA 18015     \
>My opinions are my own. No one else would HAVE them anyway.
>
>"We are often considered society's gatekeepers, but librarians are actually
>the gateways. We are the one profession dedicated to ensuring the right to
>know. We must never lose sight of this mission despite the seductive siren
>songs of our information age's mythology." --  Patricia Glass Schuman