MSNBC Column on David Burt
Jean P. Gordon
gordonjp at dominican.dominican.edu
Fri Aug 22 13:00:31 EDT 1997
I heard on PRI that many of the pornographic sites require the
use of a credit card number to access their material. Is there
any way to build a patron barcode into a filter which would
allow full access to adult patrons and limit access to children?
I am normally against censorship in libraries, although I
recognize that collection development is a form of censorship,
but do have some real reservations about having my grandchildren
search out pornography on the Internet. It is not an easy
question!
Jean Gordon
filteringfacts wrote:
>
> Brock Meeks, cyber columnist for MSNBC, has written a column about me called "The Case of the "Radical" Librarian"
>
> See http://www.msnbc.com/news/104439.asp
>
> I'm finally starting to make some headway in my battle to counter ALA's views on filtering.
>
> David Burt, Filtering Facts, www.filteringfacts.org
> David_Burt at filteringfacts.org
>
> The case of the 'radical' librarian
> Why his colleagues in libraries are ganging up on David Burt
>
> WASHINGTON - If David Burt were a man of the
> cloth he might be labeled a heretic. Instead he
> has been branded an "extremist" and
> "unethical" by members of his own profession:
> librarians. To sneak a peek at Burt's e-mail,
> you'd think his colleagues had turned on him
> because he advocates burning books.
>
> BURT'S "CRIME" is that he advocates the use of
> "filtering" software to keep kids from looking at Internet
> pornography on their local library's computer. Opponents
> of Burt's stance, and they are legion, call filtering software
> "censor-ware" because it is notorious for hidden agendas
> and actually censoring much more than obscene materials.
> I know first-hand how devious these blocking software
> packages are; Declan McCullagh of the Netly News and I
> broke the story on their hidden agendas in a CyberWire
> Dispatch article last year. These packages block political
> views, educational sites and various other information based
> solely on someone's notion of what is right or wrong for
> children to view.
> But here's another fact: Most of the software allows
> the user to tweak the programs so that only pornographic
> sites are blocked, thus providing a wide-open field of other
> materials.
>
> THE LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS
> In a recent column, I took the American Library
> Association to task for its head-in-the-sand approach to the
> heated debate within its own community - whether or not
> blocking software should be used in libraries. According to
> the Library Bill of Rights, anyone of any age has the "right"
> to use all materials the library carries. That rule was written
> for the print age and doesn't account for the era of the
> Internet. Yet the library association has steadfastly refused
> to engage in any meaningful dialogue about addressing the
> problem of kids accessing porn on the Net.
> The association, on the heels of the U.S. Supreme
> Court decision that declared the federal Communications
> Decency Act unconstitutional (as a plaintiff in that case, I
> applauded that decision), issued a statement that said the
> use of blocking software violates the Library Bill of Rights.
> Yet the library association, as a plaintiff in the same
> Supreme Court case, had its lawyers hold up blocking
> software as an example of why legislation wasn't needed to
> "protect kids."
> Today the library association derides filtering software
> and instead suggests that librarians create and "promote
> library Web pages designed both for general use and for
> use by children. These pages should point to sites that have
> been reviewed by library staff." None of which are
> pornographic, I guarantee you.
>
> ENTER THE 'RADICAL'
> So David Burt has embarked on his "radical" campaign
> of advocating the intelligent use of blocking software
> through an organization called "Filtering Facts" I say
> "intelligent" because Burt preaches that librarians know how
> to tweak the blocking software so it is set to only block
> pornography.
>
> Burt says he has a growing number of supporters, yet
> many are afraid to speak out, fearing professional
> retribution. Many libraries also are running scared because
> of what Burt characterizes as "intimidation tactics" being
> used by the American Civil Liberties Union. Burt says the
> ACLU has threatened to sue several libraries for installing
> blocking software.
>
> THE SLIPPERY SLOPE
> What about the "slippery slop" argument? That being, if
> libraries start to censor pornography - and let's be clear,
> this is a censorship issue - that other areas will quickly
> follow. "We're not talking about banning books like " 'The
> Diary of Anne Frank' or 'Huckleberry Finn,' " Burt says.
> "Filtering software is just making the Internet look more
> representative of what is in the stacks. If it's not something
> (a library) would buy to put on the shelves, why object to
> having it blocked online?"
> Good question. A statement on blocking software, put
> out by the library association's Intellectual Freedom
> Committee, says: "Blocking Internet sites is antithetical to
> library missions because it requires the library to limit
> information access."
> Small problem, Burt says. Libraries routinely limit
> access to information as a matter of policy. Every library
> has a "collection development policy" that determines what
> types of materials are put on its shelves, Burt says.
> "Libraries put a lot of thought into these policies," he says.
> "But they are treating the Internet like a big switch and not
> putting any thought into it at all."
> Here's a little experiment for you. Ask to see your local
> library's collection development policy. Note what the
> library will and will not buy and see if you can walk over to
> the nearest computer terminal and access any of the
> unacceptable material on the Net. Then summon a librarian
> and ask him or her to explain why it is that you - or your
> child - are allowed to access this information via the
> library's computer, but can't find it on the library's shelves.
>
> NO LOCO PARENTS
> Another favorite argument the library association likes
> to toss out is: "librarians do not serve in loco parentis" or, in
> English: They aren't supposed to baby-sit your kids. And to
> some extent, the association is right. Libraries aren't
> watchdogs for parents who use them as free depositories
> for their kids. But it is also true, as Burt says, that "the
> community entrusts its children to be safe in the library
> because the community assumes that the library has some
> minimum standards for what types of materials a child might
> encounter."
>
> And, like it or not, a library operates from tax revenue
> paid by parents making those "safe library" assumptions.
> Librarians are public servants first and free speech
> absolutists second - or they should be. (That statement
> will surely get me kicked off the library association's
> Christmas, er? "holiday" greetings list.)
> I'm not saying libraries must buckle to right-wing
> fanatics who demand books be removed from shelves.
> Spare me that drivel. I'm simply saying that it's not a huge
> intellectual leap to have a library tailor its Internet access for
> kids to conform with the material on the shelves.
> People have accused Burt and his organization of being
> a "front" for right-wing conservatives. I challenged him on
> this. "I'm an atheist and a Democrat," he responds. "This
> isn't a religious or liberal/conservative issue."
>
> A PORN TOO FAR
> Can a library take Burt's position too far? Certainly. If
> libraries do install blocking software they must be diligent in
> maintaining it, seeing that its databases are regularly updated
> and that only the pornographic blocking categories are
> used. Second, there must be a mechanism for allowing the
> blocking software to be disabled at the request of parents.
> This issue is too serious to be resolved overnight. There
> must be a full, public debate on the issues before the
> community and its library decide together what course to
> take. Surely librarians aren't afraid of healthy debate. Or
> are they?
> Meeks out?
>
--
*************************************************************
Jean P. Gordon Phone: 415-257-0196
Archbishop Alemany Library Fax: 415-459-2309
Dominican College
50 Acacia Avenue E-mail: gordonjp at dominican.edu
San Rafael, CA 94901 Web page: http://www.dominican.edu
*************************************************************
More information about the Web4lib
mailing list