Closing the filtering debate?

[CMUNSON]

  Ronnie Morgan wrote:>
     
>I really think this discussion needs to move from why we shouldn't 
>implement filtering to how we can effectively filter.  Yeah, I know, a lot 
>of you still disagree about filtering programs, but, at some point in the 
>future, libraries are going to be forced into it.  Wouldn't it be better 
>to have a plan of action when your city, county, state government or 
>board, or whatever entity is in control of your library comes to inform 
>you that you have to filter?  Yeah, sure, explain to them that it's 
>censorship or whatever, but you'll still end up implementing a filtering 
>program.
     
     Gee Ronnie, you haven't even seen the opposing forces but you've 
     decided to start waving the white flag? There is no reason why this 
     has to become an eventuality, in fact, I'm offended that a 
     professional would think that filtering in libraries is a fait 
     accompli. Have you ever heard of advocacy? Have you ever heard about 
     ethics and the professional's responsibility to sat NO?
     
     I think we should have a little discussion of the history of the FBI 
     and public libraries. If I remember correctly, there were some 
     courageous bunheads who said NO to this powerful agency when it came 
     around asking to snoop into patron records. Any historians here?
     
     I know that this isn't quite the same thing as the filtering 
     phenomenon, but I think we should advocate for ideas such as open 
     access to all, BEFORE we are coerced into installing censorware by 
     some law.
     
>So, why don't we talk about how to do it the best possible way and not talk 
>about why we shouldn't do it???
     
     Because those of you who favor filtering want those of us who oppose 
     it to shut up. You want to close off debate so that it would appear 
     that consensus has been reached in the library community. You are free 
     to discuss, thanks to Roy, anything you want on this list (relating to 
     web for libraries), but don't expect us to shut up. You talk about 
     ways of implementing and we'll talk about ways of not implementing.
     
>I like David's idea, and although his vision is not attainable at this 
>time, it may be that we have a representative from CyberPatrol (or some 
>other software company) lurking in the back ground.  If this person see's 
>that we (for once) agree on an idea, they may be able to get something in 
>the works that meets what we are looking for.
     
     Representatives from the censorware companies do monitor this list -- 
     I've received email from them in the past. I'm sure they are very 
     interested, not only because libraries are such a good market, but 
     because libraries are a litmus test for how well filtering will be 
     received in society as a whole.
     
     Chuck "Just say NO"