FW: Letter to Brock Meeks: Another perspective on the filtering issue

[filteringfacts]

Karen Schneider posted the following letter to Brock Meeks on Fight Censorship: 


---------- Forwarded message ----------
X-Sender: kgs at panix.com
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:54:50 -0400
From: "Karen G. Schneider" <kgs at bluehighways.com>
To: brock.meeks at msnbc.com
Cc: BERRY at LJ.CAHNERS.COM, gflagg at ala.org
Subject: Letter to Brock Meeks: Another perspective on the filtering  issue

 From: Karen G. Schneider
Subject: "The Case of the 'radical' Librarian"
http://www.msnbc.com/news/104439.asp
To: Brock Meeks, MSNBC

Mr. Meeks:

I am taking a break from a rather hectic writing schedule to address an
article I just read:  "The case of the radical librarian."  

First of all, I don't disagree that the ALA takes a very high ground when
it comes to filtering software.  Although (like the ACLU) they can be
maddening at times, it's also good to know that some folks are hardliners
on the issue.  If librarians don't take a strong, even quixotic stand on
intellectual freedom, who will?  I think I'm not alone in my profession in
thinking that ALA's positions on intellectual freedom are a lot like your
New Year's goals--you know you aren't going to get there, but wouldn't it
be terrific if you did?  

Second, the library association doesn't "deride filtering software"; it
says it opposes filtering software that blocks constitutionally protected
speech.  I should know; I'm the flaming moderate who proposed the
additional wording, because I'm very much opposed to the "four legs good,
two legs bad" mentality that pervades *both* sides of the filtering issue.
Trust me, some folks draw their skirts aside when I walk their way, but I'm
a tough cookie--if you can't take the heat, don't go to library school.
Filters are not evil in themselves--good grief, we're talking about
software, not neutron bombs.  On the other hand, it is not time to stop
worrying and learn to love them, either; the technology is too new.
Skepticism, hesitation and caution are very good emotions at this point.
Think "Pinto."  

Third, I am sure Burt gets his share of vituperative email, but he hasn't
exactly reached out and said to his colleagues, "can't we all just get
along?"  I encourage you to search the archives of the discussion lists
where he has been active (http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Web4Lib/ and
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/PubLib/ are two good places; he's often seen on
ALAOIF, though I think that list is 90% drivel, and that's before Burt
starts posting).  I'm in a committed relationship with a minister, and from
what I see of this community, if Burt were a man of the cloth, I think the
other pastors would whisper that he wasn't a team player.  They sure
wouldn't play reindeer games with him, anyway, not after exchanging a
message or two.  

I do know close to fifty librarians who are team players, however: the
participants of TIFAP, The Internet Filter Assessment Project
(http://www.bluehighways.com/tifap/).  This has been a meandering,
unscientific, slapdash project I pulled together in late March to assess
filters under reasonably real-life settings.  It has been interrupted by
any number of personal crises, including the EPA sending me to Puerto Rico
for a week just when things were getting started (I know, but someone had
to do it), my webserver changing midstream,  and the usual problems with
managing a project on the one or two hours a night that are left over when
you work full-time and have a long commute (including shopping for a new
used car when my Nissan suddenly died).  I have eaten more Healthy Choice
macaroni and cheese than I care to contemplate, and my absence from my
usual circles prompted a visit from my minister, to whom I could not admit
that I was spending Sunday mornings looking at poorly-executed cyber-porn.  

Fortunately, the people who volunteered for this project clearly have no
personal lives and are perhaps a little unbalanced, because despite no
possible chance of remuneration (not even a free book, darn that publisher,
though they do get a little discount) they poured many, many hours of
personal labor into designing the survey forms, developing the questions,
installing and configuring filters, and all the other elbow grease that
goes into walking the walk.  If you look at the Hall of Fame on the
website, you see they are the absolute purest gems of librarianship; they
were in this out of intellectual curiousity, concern for the profession,
and an interest in the unknown.  Staring sternly over their bifocals, they
asked, over many days, hours, weeks, and months, "show me the filter!"  We
tested questions, we tested URLs, we tested at full throttle, we tested at
"Lite" settings; several volunteers, I cringe to report, ended up
reinstalling operating systems because recalcitrant software wouldn't leave
their computers (the gift that keeps on giving?), and I knew I was in deep
when, sleepless with worry over deadlines, I logged in to my computer at 2
a.m. one Sunday, to watch surveys from several TIFAP volunteers flow
methodically into my inbox.  

Burt was an early TIFAP volunteer, by the way, but dropped out just before
the real work began, claiming we were focusing too much on keyword blocking
(if you don't prove it's a problem, how do you know for sure?).  Burt now
labels me and the rest of the project as "antifilterers," which I think is
either a) related to "disestablishmentarianism" or b) means we haven't
issued  a statement agreeing with absolutely everything he has said.  There
are definitely some TIFAP volunteers who are anti-filter under any
circumstances, but there are also some folks who are more interested in
learning how filters work, and who, in assessing some fairly rough porn,
had no problem saying both that they felt that site should have been
blocked and that they believe in free speech.  If that makes them
"antifilterers," then I'm an antidisestablishmentarianist.

I have been hoping to put off my site report until this weekend, because I
took all my vacation time and then four days of leave without pay this and
next week to get my manuscript to my editor by September 2. (Oh yeah, the
book: A Practical Guide to Internet Filters, published by Neal Schuman, due
out early fall.) If it will make a difference, I'll write it and post it
tomorrow ("it" being the summary report, which will also be a chapter in
the book--two manuscripts in one!), but I'd rather use the weekday to
finish what I've been doing, which is talk to filter vendors about the
TIFAP results and ask them questions about their products.  Most of the
vendors are very nice folks, very interested in the library market and very
interested in hearing what we have to say.  They tend to be around during
the week, which is one reason I took this vacation time to get this work
done.  

And what we have to say is that we can confirm some WOMs, put some fears to
rest, and raise some new issues.  Keyword blocking is bad.  That's a WOM.
We demonstrated that thoroughly.  Note that you can't disable keyword
blocking in several filters.  Obviously, you don't want to buy them for
library use.  "Tweaking a filter" (a term I introduced, by the way--just as
the "cost model" argument for why vendors have private lists is something I
initially raised, which Burt also fails to attribute) to just block the
porn is a good predictor of better performance.  But it's not perfect, and
the leakage rate goes up.  In TIFAP, and I've called around and confirmed
this anecdotally, you get about a 10 percent leakage of porn if you tune
the filter to minimal, porn-only settings.  (Oops!  There goes that "safe
library" assumption!)  There are filters that have agendas; Cybersitter is
one.  This product is pretty much a red herring, imho--it performs so
poorly that no library should consider it, anyway.  Cyber Patrol had to be
taught not to block pagan or feminist information, and even at "Lite"
settings they are known to block stuff they shouldn't.  I'd say they are
definitely on probation.  Some filters have categories, but you can't
select them yet--that would be Bess.  Nice product; needs that feature.
Websense and SmartFilter didn't do too badly.  Not Pintos, but they aren't
Corollas yet, either.  Let's not forget the software performance issues.
If you only tested the network version of Cyber Patrol, you might become an
"antifilterer" yourself.  We noted many problems with filtering software
that need to be heeded by any serious public service system.  The
computer-guru types that participated in TIFAP were all too willing to bend
my ear on this topic.  

There are other, even more intriguing issues.  After watching sites get
blocked... unblocked... and blocked again, I began to ponder the issue of a
central database versus community standards.  This is a librarian's issue;
you may not be aware of OCLC, which is a marvelous librarian invention--a
worldwide catalog which contains master records to which we attach holdings
(tags that indicate we own an item).  I raised this with vendors, pointing
out that every community was different.  They all had different responses,
but to date not one vendor has not seemed at least somewhat intrigued by
this new concept.  IP authentication is another issue; filters are
responding to libraries that say we want different access in different
settings.  I have raised the library-card issue, pointing out that children
often get permission to use adult resources and that cards are coded this
way, and that swiping or keying a library card barcode would be a great way
to authorize use to certain levels.  Every single vendor I have spoken with
to date thought this was a marketable feature that would be inexpensive to
add.   As for the hidden site lists, as someone who has run a business, I
understand the need to keep some information proprietary, but am equally
concerned about turning the Internet into "closed stacks" accessible only
to companies whose interests are not always congruent with the public
trust.  However, even filter vendors acknowledge this is an issue; in other
areas of life we have more checks and balances on our freedoms.  We'll have
to find a common ground on this.  We may have been a slow, ragtag and
unglamorous product, but we've resulted in some spectacularly useful
information for vendors and librarians alike.  If any group of librarians
is primed to discuss this topic, it's the TIFAP team.  

There are many more issues, and many things to think about.  Librarians are
good at that (thinking, that is); that gets us in trouble sometimes,
because thinking, and then acting, is the most radical act of all.  I've
been pushed to make a ranking list of "bad to good" on the filters, and
I've also been pushed to list the blocked sites, as if that would show
anything.  Like most librarians, however, I know that information is hard
work, and I believe on providing all sides of an issue.  I'll save the
product reviews for my book.  I too would like to see the filter vendors
engage more with the library community.  I can't fault the Intellectual
Freedom Committee for not arranging a welcome reception for these
companies, but it is time for the rest of us mere mortals to open the doors
to communication.  Finally, the library that chooses not to filter, and
does this consciously and carefully, is part of our flock, too.  If you
don't need to filter, why should you?  Would you put on a sweater, if you
weren't cold?  Librarians are trained to know their own communities.  Let
them exercise their best judgment and make the best decision they can at
any one particular time.  

If you want some more balance on the issue, talk to Michael Schuyler of
Kitsap County.  He moderates a discussion list, filter-tech, which is
strictly about the technical issues related to filters.  Meanwhile, I have
a chapter to finish tonight, and as a nightcap, I have a few more questions
to retest with Bess, since the vendors kindly gave me access for a month.
It's not a bad vacation, all said and done; in my own, librarianesque way,
I feel a bit radical myself. 

____________________________________________________________________________
___

Karen G. Schneider | kgs at bluehighways.com | schneider.karen at epamail.epa.gov
Director, US EPA Region 2 Library | Contractor, GCI | Opinions home-grown
The Internet Filter Assessment Project: http://www.bluehighways.com/tifap/
Author, Forthcoming: A Practical Guide to Internet Filters (Neal Schuman, 1997)