FW: Staten Island Porn on the Internet, Part II -Reply -Reply

[KAREN SCHNEIDER]

The SF Chronicle is also a bit small and backward.  (crouching
low as the flames shoot toward me) SF has way fewer than a
million people,  which makes it a bit parochial to begin with.  As
for the Chronicle and the Examiner, serious readers supplement
the local papers with other resources.  (Now I'll never be able to
go home again... )  

That said, I didn't make the argument that only a small, backward
paper would sensationalize this topic.  Someone had wondered
about the Staten Island Advance.  I wanted to put THAT paper
into context, since we had been exposed to so much of its writing.

Karen "hand me my beret, I'm off for a cappuchino" Schneider


>>> Mary-Ellen Mort <memort at netcom.com> 03/05/97 07:13pm
>>>
Karen--

Is your argument  that only a small, backward paper  in a
politically 
conservative town would present the issue in such sensational
terms?

See THIS from Saturday's San Francisco Chronicle:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/chronicle/article.cgi?file=MN8815.DTL&directory=/chronicle/archive/1997/03/01

"Online Smut in the Reading Room: Net Access poses library
dilemna"

BTW, the ONLINE title for this article, when it was featured on
the front 
of the website was: Got Porn? Visit the Library.

Mary-Ellen Mort
JobSmart Project Director