Boston situation -Reply -Reply

Wed Feb 26 19:18:15 EST 1997

On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Earl Young wrote:

>      The city - or some government agency - is paying for the library.  The 
>      building, the computers, the electricity - you name it.  The golden 
>      rule - those with the gold make the rules - applies here.  No smart 
>      politician wants to be in the position of providing access to 
>      something that many will find objectionable - given that their 
>      constituents are footing at least part of the bill.

If it is the case - and I don't doubt it - that no "smart politician" 
wants to provide access to "objectionable" material, then "smart
politicians" should not want to support public libraries whatsoever. 
Luckily, cooler heads than those of "smart politicians" have prevailed. 

This money argument is all wrong.  The money costs are in two places here. 
1) Paying for the Internet access in the first place.  This is widely
touted by such luminaries as our, cough cough, president, to be essential
to education and every other good thing under the sun.  2) Paying for the
"blocking software."  Let me highlight this.  If the local taxpayers paid
for Internet access the first time, they will have to pay a second time to
block out some of that Internet access.  The censorship question is an
entirely separate question from the provision of Internet access and
hopefully no citizen/taxpayer/HUMAN BEINGS will be fooled into thinking
the two are inextricably linked.  The point ought to be made, in an age of
increasingly limited resources, can we afford to spend scarce resources on
an ineffective and politically troublesome (as well as morally repellent)
piece of software, when we could instead be spending that money to provide
MORE resources for the community?

[deletia]

>      As far as First Amendment - the Constitution is silent as to whether 
>      government has a duty to provide me access to material. It merely says 
>      the government cannot deny access (absent a "crowded theater") to free 
>      speech.  That is why I do not see a big First Amendment issue over 
>      whether libraries need to provide access.  Whether the material should 
>      be banned from the Internet - that is THE First Amendment issue in my 
>      opinion.

As I already stated, the government (i.e., taxpayers via the government
via our library) is already paying for the internet access.  It would have
to pay again to deny some of that access.

>      
>      Earl Young
>      
>      
>      
> 
> 
> ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
> Subject: Re: Boston situation -Reply -Reply
> Author:  DLESTER at bsu.idbsu.edu at INTERNET
> Date:    2/25/97 4:30 PM
> 
> 
> >>> Earl Young <eayoung at bna.com> 02/25/97 01:23pm 
> >>>
> There does not seem to be any significant Constitutional 
> issues.  The city is  not attempting to block access - only to
> avoid paying for access.  There are -  to be sure - lots of stuff 
> --------
> HUH?   First, it has First Amendment written all over it.  Just 
> ask the folks at ACLU....who're probably all over it already.  
>      
> And what do you mean about "avoid paying for access"? 
> How is the city going to pay for something that a user 
> accesses?  I'm not suggesting that people should set up
> accounts with Suzy's Porn Palace from PL stations....but if
> they do, it isn't the library's fiscal liability.....unless they give 
> out their mastercard number to the patrons.  o-)  
>      
> Of course the issue of exposure (for the library) to all sorts of 
> charges and lawsuits is there, and is probably what the
> mayor is worried about....that and the political fallout.  (gee, 
> imagine that, a pol who think he can avoid being seen as a 
> sleazy SOB   yeah, sure.... )   
>      
> =====================
> on the Web that children ought not see.  I do not  subscribe
> to the idea that seeing objectionable stuff automatically scars 
> you  for life, but parents ought to be in control of such things 
> -----------------------------------
> I agree with the first sentence...that there are many things 
> inappropriate for children in all sorts of places in the world. 
> But, libraries seem to have established quite clearly that they 
> are NOT in loco parentis.  Yeah, these days everyone wants 
> someone else to take care of all their problems....but the
> kids are the parents' problems, not the library's.  What next, 
> and armed guard stationed in the 612.6s or the 700s?? 
> ================================
> and the state ought  not be subsidizing access to material 
> that "community standards" find  objectionable. 
> -------------------------------
> Well, the state isn't doing that.  Or the city.  The workstation 
> is there and hooked up to the net, whether used or not,
> whether used for "good" or "evil" or something else.  In a 
> small place where dialup was required, this is theoretically an 
> issue, but I assume they have better access in Boston. If
> not, they have a different, and larger, problem. 
> ============================= 
> particular reason to put themselves at risk by  failing to block 
> sites where there is a probability of material that would 
> otherwise not be in the library.  I suppose that's my litmus test 
> - if it would  be on the shelves, it should be available on the 
> net. Otherwise, what's the  problem? 
> ------------------------------------------------
> The problem is blocking software doesn't work.  Some work 
> even less than others, but none of them are as effective as a 
> person looking at books.  And thus it will always be, by the 
> nature of the beast.  Plus, we know that even when "real 
> librarians" select books that there are always some
> taxpayers who'll not like the selections anyway....
>      
> the antiquated cyclopean
>      
>      
> Dan Lester, Network Information Coordinator
> Boise State University Library, Boise, Idaho, 83725 USA 
> voice: 208-385-1235   fax:  208-385-1394 
> dlester at bsu.idbsu.edu     OR    alileste at idbsu.idbsu.edu 
> Cyclops' Internet Toolbox:    http://cyclops.idbsu.edu 
> "How can one fool make another wise?"   Kansas, 1979.
>      
>      
>      
>      
> 

Laura M. Quilter   /   lauramd at uic.edu
Electronic Services Librarian
University of Illinois at Chicago
http://www.uic.edu/~lauramd/

"If I can't dance, I don't want to be 
in your revolution."  -- Emma Goldman