FW: Staten Island Porn on the Internet, Part II

[Burt, David]

 ----------
From: Burt, David
To: 'publib-net at nysernet.org'
Subject: Staten Island Porn on the Internet, Part II
Date: Monday, March 03, 1997 8:51AM

Here is the second article:

"OUR LIBERTINE LIBRARIES"
Editorial, Staten Island Advance, 2/10/97


If you find your 13-year-old using the public library more and more
these days, maybe you had better find out why.  It might not be for
educational purposes -- or at least not for the education you had in
mind.

All 84 branches of the New York Public Library system now are equipped
with personal computers library-goers can use for research, particurly
on the Internet.  (There  are 91 PCs in use in Staten Island branches).


Schoolchildren, too, are invited to use these facilities, in the fine
tradition of the library, and in an age when so much depends on
computer literacy,  this can be a tremendous help to kids from families
that haven't been able to afford a computer at home, (In his Saturday
radio address, President
Clinton announced plans to increase Internet and PC access for children
in schools and libraries.)

So far, so good.

The Internet, as we all know by now, has some very entertaining and
educational things -- as well as some very useless things -- on it.  But
it also has very sick and lurid -- very lurid -- things on it.

This last fact is not lost on adolescent and preadolescent  youngsters
who are now at war with their hormones,and on the threshold - or in the
foyer - of the great mystery chamber called sex.

Their healthy curiosity about the subject can lead to some rather
unhealthy efforts to obtain any form of titillation they can.  That,
especially in combination with their natural deviousness and kids'
seemingly inbred familiarity with technology has resulted in an alarming
new pastime.

Advance reporter Kerry Murtha discovered that young people, particularly
boys in their pre-teens or early teens,  have been making far more
frequent  visits to the library, not to expand their knowledge, but to
look at hard-core pornography on the Internet.

This is not fuzzy-lensed soft porn, but the real deal.  Some are even
making printouts or downloading the stuff onto discs for their personal
edification.

A, Great Kills man, a father himself, told our reporter he watched two
boys between 12 and 14 years old accessing X-rated websites recently in
the Richmondtown branch of the library.

'They were taking these [thumbnail] pictures, blowing them up, printing
them out and sticking them in their school bags," he toId us.

Aghast at this abuse of library facilities for pruriet purposes, he
notified a librarian, who told him there was nothing she could
do because she didn't  have the time to police the kids' web-site
destinations on the Internet.

An executive of the New York Public Library put a loftier spin on it.

"The library takes the position that there are, unfortunately, some
websites which,we collectively may wish children would not access
without close supervision of their patents,' said Norman Holman, senior
vice president and director of the New York library branches.  "But in
order to make rich resources available to them and adhere to the
libraries' long tradition of avoiding censorship, we've chosen to make
everything available and rely on responsible use."

This position is wholly disingenuous.  "Responsible use" and "teen-ager"
are not terms one usually associates, especially when it comes to
explicit pictures of naked women and sexual intercourse.

First of all, the reason many of these kids are using library PCs is
precisely because they know can call up pornographic pictures without
adults, even those working in the library, stopping their quest.
Students are generally encouraged to learn to use the library alone for
academic purposes.

Now, Mr. Holman is saying parental guidance is a requirement.

Everyone understands that the library system hard-pressed for resources
and it's difficult for employees to leave their assigned duties to
police
Internet access.  But surely, if a librarian sees a child doing
something he shouldn't in the library, the librarian is to be expected
to step in.  To suggest otherwise is irresponsible.

The censorship excuse is a canard.  We're not suggesting that sexual
material shouldn't be on Internet.  That would be censorship.

But libraries don't carry copies of Hustler or "The Story of O" or
"Debbie Does Dallas" and no one suggests that policy is in violation of
the First amendment.

Freedom of speech or expression, primarily intended to protect political
speech, has been expanded  by the courts to protect pictures and
material with no artistic or educational value.

Fair enough.

We-don't question the right to produce such material, including on the
Internet. But there is no law that says children have a right to have
access it.  In fact, the question as to why the libraries even permit
anyone to access websites without any socially redeeming or educational
value is legitimate, in view of the fact that libraries	don't stock
printed or recorded pornography.

What about screening access for kids who might fall  into sexually
suggestive online conversations with pedophiles who are known to lurk on
the Internet? Is that free speech, too?

The technology to prevent access to cyberporn, by means of software
screeners  exists. The public schools use it on their computers. But
again, the	library objects.	

"These devices don't make subtle distinctions	about the context in which
a word is used," Mr. HoIman said. "For example, all information
on	breast cancer would be blocked if the keyword 'breast' was programmed
... The Internet is an informational resource and its variety of web
sites have value.  In order to make all of those things accessible, we
choose not to screen the information".

Fine, then why not have some PCs for adults, and others, with the
screening software, especially for kids?	

Or better yet, how about dropping the free-speech absolutism and the
fatuous officiousness that verges on absurdity and arriving at a
rational policy that keeps children away from material that no sane
person thinks children should see?

Librarians currently prevent patrons, including children, from causing
disturbances, defacing books, and engaging in other objectionable
behavior.

Now, they're merely being asked to prevent unescorted kids from gaining
access to pornography on the Internet.  Store-owners deny children the
right to purchase pornography all the time.  Should the library be any
less responsible?

It's a reasonable request on the part of parents and the community, and
the library's rather libertine objections to it are astounding.