Week 11 Readings

Bertot, J. (2009). Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries: Effects
and Implications.

This article looks at the challenges and practices of PAT (Public Access Technology), meaning the provision of Internet in public libraries.  It points out that the use of PAT in libraries shot up from the  mid 1990s to the late 2000s, and demand is still increasing.  Databases, technology training, e government, ebooks, and reference are some of the important technological services that resulted.  Cost has increased because of the resulting need for staff, maintenance, costly equipment, and unsuitable spaces.
The article mentions the increased demand for electricity/power created by the PAT provided in libraries and some technologies that are brought in by the patrons, unconnected with libraries.  This subject continues to interest me.  How far are we willing to go to provide PAT?  Will we support facebook, itunes, secondlife, iphones, and youtube?  Is that really the information we need to spend our funds providing or is there a line?  I suspect one will need to be drawn to preserve funds for more worthy pursuits (that’s right...I said it), especially as egovernment continues to flood the libraries.  But then again, don’t we have to keep the “customers” happy? Can't the above mentioned resources be used in ways that are informationally valuable?  The comparison of technology to a hamster wheel seemed fairly accurate to me.
The article mentions varying kinds of IT support offered at libraries.  From my experience, if you can’t fix it yourself within a few minutes, the patrons become very frustrated very fast.  I anticipate that everyone will need to have a working knowledge of the basics of the technology offered for it to work efficiently.  Waiting between an hour and a few days for IT staff to fix something is not a realistic method.  Training for both the staff and the patrons will need to be constantly provided. I liked the idea of spreading the responsibility for providing  PAT throughout the community, though just where it would go, I do not know.

Sex in the City. (2002).

This article  on unrestricted Internet access leading to sexual harrassment was exceptionally interesting and very important.  I think it’s easy to have a blanket attitude of never restricting access to information in libraries (for good reason).  I actually debated this (hotly) in my collection development class, though I was for limitations.  We do need to draw the line somewhere, or risk doing more harm than good.  To provide free, unlimited anything is generally not a great idea.  There are always repercussions.  This article looked at those repercussions in relation to unfettered Internet access in public libraries.  It seems unforgivably naive, in hindsight, that libraries didn’t see pornography coming.  I’m left with the conclusion that the library should try to cater to the masses somewhat in their policy, though this could lead to issues of bias and exclusion if we aren’t careful.  It is up to the director and board members to make policy that is fair to as many people as possible.  After that, issues of restriction should be taken on a case by case basis.

Comer, A. (2005). Studying Indiana Public Libraries' Usage of Internet
Filters.

Despite an abundance of typos in this article, it examines some interesting data.  Overblocking and underblocking, as well as accidental blocking are common issues libraries with filters are dealing with.  Hopefully we will come up with a way to lessen the extent of these problems, though even if we don’t, I believe they are better than the sexual harassment issues that could ensue in their place.  It seemed  to me that most of those chosing not to filter lived in smaller, rural communities.  It stands to reason that the anonymity of a big city might make filtering more necessary, which to me supports the “library by library” approach to filters.

The library that made their computers “strictly for information” seemed odd to me.  After all, books are not strictly for information.  I also found it somewhat appalling that a “young teenager” would be banned for life, simply for viewing inappropriate materials.  My Youth Services professor told us that banning patrons for life should be limited to more serious offenses, since teens grow up and also often have children who we will want to use the libraries.

At my former library, I do remember one instance where I was sent to “spy” on the computer of a patron who was behaving suspiciously (blocking computer screen or closing things quickly when we walked by).  He did turn out to be viewing pornographic materials, which I discovered by watching through the stacks (sneaky, I know).  We then shut his computer down and blocked his Internet access with an accompanying note about our policy.  I’d say that the later half was a good method of dealing with this problem, though we should not be reduced to spying on patrons.

Jaeger, P. I., & Zheng, Y. (2009). One Law with Two Outcomes:
Comparing the Implementation of CIPA in Public Libraries and Schools.

This article examines CIPA (children’s internet protection act), which regulates the access children have to internet information in public schools and libraries.  One thing I wanted to know more about was why regulation of internet content is so easily abandoned as an option.  Both this article and the above state that efforts to control posters failed, which is why the focus shifted to those accessing the information.  My guess is that it violates some sort of freedom of expression, but I’ll have to look into it further.

While I am for filters on children’s computers as preventative to accidental information access, I’m not sure that it is effective or fair in cases where children are seeking information that is blocked, because I’m not sure what level the block is set at.  Shouldn’t a child researching news related issues be able to access them, even if they aren’t “appropriate”?  

Anten, T. (2005). "Please Disable The Entire Filter": Why Non-Removable
Filters On Public Library Computers Violate The First Amendment.

This article discussing the use of filters on library computers is interesting because it points out that libraries are not just one environment.  They are simultaneously a community center, family friendly space, research provider, entertainment provider and much more.  This is part of why limits on internet access are so controversial.   I wondered why women’s health topics were overblocked often, but men’s were not mentioned.  It stands to reason that if one is being blocked, the other should be as well, even accidentally.

What I took from this article is that filters need to improve quickly if they are going to be used. Personally, I like the idea of an optional filter of several levels for all age ranges, which can be controlled by parents until a child is 16. Parents already have the ability to control their child's access to library materials, so this shouldn't violate any additional rights. Adults will have the option of using a filter so they aren't assaulted by images and information they deem inappropriate. Finally, a statement in the policy and conditional upon logging in to each session should be added, stating that pornographic materials are not allowed to be viewed or printed at the library, and will result in termination of the user's internet privileges. My former library had this as a pop up on the computer screen that patrons had to "sign" before using the computer.

Week 11 Readings

Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries: This article states that public libraries started offering "PTA"as soon as it was possible, the article explore how this is done, what is needed to make this happen, and whether it's done effectively.

For the most part I thought this article was just one "duh" after another. PTA means both hardware and software, to have PTA you need technical support- like nothing gasp worthy. But I suppose having an article outlining what baseline PTA is, could be, and should be, is important. I also suppose that looking at and evaluating how libraries impalement PTA, as it's something that libraries just jumped into, is worth while. I just think that unless this baseline standard is being enforced or encouraged somehow.

Please Disable the Entire Filter: Looks at Phoenix Public library and it's response to the accusation that it was used to look up download and print kiddie porn of putting internet filters on all its computers- which cannot be disabled by librarians.

I am a very huge fan of the footnotes that took up half the page! I thought this article was well written and did a very good job of going into the history and the laws of restrictions on public libraries computers. What I want to point out is that the owner of all the kiddie porn only said that he got it all from the Phoenix library. Who's to say that he didn't just claim that to try and seem slightly less squeezy to co-workers or family, who's to say he didn't just say that to keep the heat off his friend who he downloaded child pornography with every week? I think child sexual exploitation is horrifying- legitimately so-  and I think the Phoenix public freaked the f*** out, and I think that the mayor and library responded with a harsh and poorly thought out solution. Internet filters will not stop the exploitation of far too many children, it will however stop library patrons from being able to access information they need or maybe just want- much of which, as the article points out, isn't at all sexual.

Studying Indiana Public Libraries' Usage of Internet Filters: This article summarized the findings of a survey conducted to try and find out which Indiana libraries filtered their materials, and how or why they did or did not.

One Law With Two Outcomes: This article looked at the differences of the effects CIPA had on Public Libraries and Public School Libraries.

So I hate CIPA and I hate internet filters. I think CIPA is a very annoyingly vague law, saying that internet content needs to be filtered from children could mean almost anything. Who are children? Is it anyone 18 and under? If so that seems very unfortunate because there's information that children shouldn't be exposed to that teenagers should be able to access- and that too is subjective, some 14 year olds could totally benefit from information about sexuality, some could still probably wait a couple of years. Also what kind of filters and what kind of settings is left completely up to the librarian (or tech person) setting up the technology. So if the person setting up the technology doesn't really know what they're doing, or if they're homophobic, or if they're a strong believer in abstinence only: they can those filters in ways that are really harmful to many of their patrons. Filters also sometimes block totally unintended things, like an article about someone with the name Gay, because it's an algorithm not a person.  Also filters themselves often times are horribly homophobic, either the software itself is or you can set it to be, it think it's offensive that homosexuality is an option of something one could choose to filter. I think that has horrifying implication for any queer or questioning patron's a library could have. And finally there have been many instances (the ACLU is working on a project just about this RIGHT NOW) where pro queer sites have been blocked and sites promoting ex-gay believes are not. I think this is a frightening time and if we are not making sure that historically marginalized groups can be found in google searches at our local libraries then we are failing at the basic premise of intellectual freedom.

March 20th Readings

Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries

This article talked about how public-access technology has changed over the years for libraries.

Public-access technology has changed dramatically over the course of this study. PAT tremendously impacts libraries and their relevancy to the community they are serving. As a librarian, I need to understand the services my library provides to our patrons and help the patrons have the best experience possible with PAT. I will need to keep up with the technology that is coming out and how I can incorporate it with our library efficiently and effectively. Patrons look to libraries for most of their technology needs.

Sex in the City

This article talks about restriction or the lack of on the internet in the public library.

I would hope that since this article was written, more libraries have at least some sort of policy in place for their library. I know I would not want to work in an environment like this, it would not be good. It must have been hard for the librarians to be the first and take these steps. I do believe that no censorship is good until it interferes with others experience in the library.

Studying Indiana Public Libraries’ Usage of Internet Filters

This article talked internet filters on computer in the state of Indiana.

Indiana public libraries have a wide range of filters on their computers. Some have very strict filters while others have none. I think that the strictness of a filter, if any, depends on the library and their patrons. If a library never has any problem with patrons bothering others with what they are looking at then the filter can be lenient or none at all, but if computer usage is being a problem and bothering other patrons, then a filter can be stricter. I know that any filter a library may use is not going to be perfect and may have problems.

One Law with Two Outcomes

This article discusses CIPA in public schools and libraries.

This article first talks about the history of CIPA and how it was formed and implemented. It seems that it was easier for schools to implement CIPA than it was for libraries and libraries are still fighting against the affects of CIPA by not taking the money that comes along with it. It does seem a little unfair that public schools and libraries are the only ones who have been the focus of CIPA. There are other institutions that children go, such as YMCA or the Boys and Girls Club.

Please Disable the Entire Filter

This article talks about the Phoenix Public Library and internet filtering.

This article talks about a few of the court cases involving internet filtering in various venues. Part of the decision is that patrons can request that a site be unblocked but it is up to the librarians and the filter provider whether to unblock the site or not. I don’t agree with over-blocking but if there is a website that I know is safe and is blocked for one reason or another, I would go ask to have it unblocked.

Week 11 Readings

Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries

This article talks about the changes in public access technologies over the years and how libraries have dealt/are dealing with them.

I found the list of technology skills needed by public librarians to be almost overwhelming, especially for one person who may not be trained in IT support. The increasing demand for libraries to provide technology resources that are user-friendly, synced with each other, and work perfectly all the time is frustrating, however. It's as though patrons don't realize that the people at Google are being paid to make sure their sites are easy to use and they don't have to worry about the millions of other tasks that public librarians may have to perform on any given day. Not only that, but software that costs thousands or millions of dollars to produce and maintain will still have bugs; there is no way a public library could afford to have and maintain a bug-free system. (Actually, I doubt those even exist.)

Sex in the City

This article covers the experiences of the Minneapolis Public Library staff with the introduction of computers with unfiltered Internet access, and how the staff ended up dealing with the problem.

What really surprised me about this situation was the reaction of the library supervisors and administration. On the one hand, I can sort of understand the desire to not be seen as censors of information, but on the other hand, I don't feel that protecting employees and patrons from blatant sexual harassment counts as censorship. If library users were abandoning the library because of the amount of porn visible at the library (and on the way to the Children's Room? Did the administration want to be the ones responsible for explaining bestiality to a 4 year old?), the administration should be working on changing that atmosphere. I'm not entirely sure where I fall on the 'filter-no filter' spectrum for public libraries, but in this case, the patrons who were viewing porn on the library computers explicitly stated they were doing it at the library because they wanted others to know what they were watching. According to the American Bar Association, hostile environment harassment (which is considered a form of sexual harassment) is defined as "when an employee is subjected to comments of a sexual nature, offensive sexual materials, or unwelcome physical contact as a regular part of the work environment" (http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_issues_for_consumers/sexualharassment_hostileenvironment.html)

I'm glad the library staff received support from their coworkers, but the response from others seems harsh. There is a difference between supported the freedom to information and putting up with people deliberately trying to harass and make others uncomfortable. No one should have to put up with, and certainly not in their workplace.

Please Disable the Entire Filter

This article discusses the internet filtering policy of the Phoenix Public Library and why it is unconstitutional.

I don't think that it's wrong for libraries to have filtered computers, but I don't agree with a policy where every public computer is filtered, especially when that filter cannot be removed by a librarian (who presumably would have approved the site being unblocked). There are sites on the internet that should probably not be accessible by children, or be accessed in public where anyone can see, there's no question about that fact. However, there are plenty of websites which contain information on topics that should be available to patrons. The article mentions women's health and homosexuality as topics that are at risk for over-blocking. A site from Columbia, Go Ask Alice, has on its recent Q&As page the following terms: handjob, birth control, AIDS, masturbation, abortion. Blocking that site would remove a huge resource for teens and young adults, especially if they don't know where else to go for health information that is directed towards them. We don't have image recognition software that's discriminatory enough to determine what is pornographic and what is artistic, and basing blocking decisions on text alone will mean that many informational sites will be blocked and many pornographic images will be easily accessible, certainly to someone who is actively looking for them.

Studying Indiana Public Libraries' Usage of Internet Filters

This article examines the various ways Indiana public libraries use or don't use internet filters on their computers.

It would be interesting to see the sizes of the libraries that responded, and see if there is a correlation between that and use of internet filters. Smaller libraries might have an easier time monitoring patron computer use. Also, if there do not seem to be many problems with internet use, why bother using a filter in the first place?

One Law with Two Outcomes

This article looks at the differences in the implementation of CIPA between public schools and public libraries.

It was interesting to read the reasons for the different reactions to CIPA in public schools and libraries. Schools' increased need for E-Rate funds makes it necessary that they comply with CIPA, while libraries, who serve a very different population from schools, have a slightly lesser need for E-Rate funding. Implementing CIPA filters on all library computers prevents adults from accessing legitimate information, and frankly, filters are not exactly the smartest at determining what should and should not be accessible, especially when it comes to images. However, a library I went to when I was younger had a separate computer room with unfiltered computers for patrons 18+. The screens were placed in a way that made it hard for people walking by to accidentally see something they didn't want to, and the reference librarian was also stationed right outside in case of any problems. The rest of the computers, which were in the regular section of the library all had filtering software, but it was made clear that adults who wished to could just go to the other computer room. Of course, this solution isn't practical for many libraries, but I do think there are ways to provide a safe space for children while still not censoring information adults want access to.

Week 11 Readings

Sex in the City by Wendy Adamson

            The article discusses the events that took place at the Minneapolis Public Library regarding pornography and public access. The article covers the events that took place and the actions taken by the library to protect their rights.

            While reading the article I felt that the writer did a good job defending their course of action as to why they would ban pornography and install the filters they did. It seems that although there was only a small core group of people using these types of sites, it was affecting a larger group of people. The purpose of the library is to serve the community at large. The fact that this small group was able to lower the attendance at the library so drastically speaks volumes of why I feel their actions were necessary. Not only were these people affecting the patrons that wanted to frequent the library, but the staff. I feel that the people had every right to defend themselves because what these sexual deviants were doing was malicious. Nobody should have to deal with that kind of mistreatment, and although public access is pressed, there is a line that needs to be drawn. Therefore, I feel the library did what they felt was best because nobody, staff or patron should be subjected to being uncomfortable and harassed on a daily basis simply because of twisted entertainment.

Studying Indiana Usage of Internet Filters by Alberta Davis Comer

            The article details a survey done around various libraries in Indiana. Within the report there are detailing of what types of filters are used and the mentalities many hold for what should and should not be involved in filtering information.

            The article has many interesting quotes, but there were a few that especially bothered me about why they did not filter the internet. One of the reasons was that they were in a small rural community and had a very religious base and therefore did not filter and had no problems. Although stereotypical, people that have a religious background tend to shy away from pornography and anything relating to sex. If community members are incredibly evangelical then most likely the very thought of someone of the opposite gender in a compromising situation will having them thinking God will smite them down. The reality is, religion isn’t as prevalent as it used to be and people have different views than they did even 50 years ago. I think it is naïve to think that every community will have the same experiences and therefore, if a library feels that they need to use filters on their material they should not be condemned for their decision.

One Law with Two Outcomes: Comparing the Implementation of CIPA in Public Libraries and Schools by Paul Jaeger and Zheng Yan

Paul Jaeger and Zheng Yan explore how the Children’s Internet Protection Act affects the public library and schools. The paper discusses the legal background and the formulation of CIPA, as well as the results that have occurred based on its implementation.

While reading the article I felt that there is definite grounding in why CIPA is implemented. However, there are issues that I also agree with based on my own experience when trying to do research in school. My high school had some of the highest filters implemented for the internet. Actually it got so bad that at one point I had to create no less than 5 or 6 email accounts because the filter would constantly blog the website. As students, we tried various shortcuts that would allow us to check or mail for about a week and then we had to move to a new email account. It was very frustrating, especially when we had to do research. Many of the sites we wanted to go to that would be considered helpful, were blocked. It took ages to do research due to the constant blocking on sites. I think the article makes a valid point that the filters should be high for younger students than older because older students may have to access information that may be blocked. For example it took hours to find information on the school computer on sexually transmitted diseases because every site was blocked. Mostly the blocks were because of the word sexual being in the search. The act has merit, but there should be a review as to whether or not it will cause more harm than good, especially in the age where the internet reigns supreme.

Please Disable the Entire Filter by Todd Anten

            The article discusses the events leading up to the reasons behind the Phoenix Public Library installing filters on the internet.

            I think it is interesting that many of the people that were claiming that what the library was doing was unconstitutional. In my mind, the library was doing something that would protect them from further problems. There is a line that must be drawn between what is research and what is “research”. Many people access the internet for personal information or needs, like facebook or myspace. This is fine, but when content on the computer can be accessed by others whether it be by history or “accidental” viewing while passing is still an issue. The library is there to serve the community and many people may read, watch, or access sites that are not appropriate on a regular basis, there is a line that must be drawn at the library. People come to the library because they feel that it is a safe and friendly place to go, not only that, but many can, “get away from it all” if they really need to. This does not mean that the library should put up with everything that is thrown at them. At other institutions or businesses, if a person is caught in doing something that is unfavorable, they lose their job. Why should the library put up with it simply because they serve everyone? I think that there is more than one constitutional right being broken and it is not by the library.

Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries: Effects and Implications by John Carlo Bertot

The article relays the implications the public library experiences by using public access technologies. Most of the paper discusses the amount of public access that public libraries provide.

            One of the interesting pieces of information pointed out was the external pressures on PATs. The beginning of the section discusses all of the expectations placed on the library by the public for “functionality”. What is completely overlooked, however, is that what the library provides is a service. They do have to provide certain things, but all the expectations seems to be almost impossible to meet. The library has different business partners, separate contracts, and various other things that need to get done. Therefore, it seems unfair of the patrons and library users to come in and think of it as a luxury spa with the all-inclusive deals given by other companies or things sited. It should be expected that some things will not work as well as others, but every library is different and though they are trying to do their best in reality people have to remember that the internet is a fairly new frontier. Not only that, but it is constantly changing. Until a better understanding is reached of all the implications the library has, people should simply understand that the library will not be able to meet the unrealistic views that many may hold for the library.

Readings Journal 3/20

Sex in the City: What happened to the Minneapolis Public Library by Wendy Adamson

This article discusses the many problems MPL had with patrons accessing porn and other sexual images and how they handled the situation.

What caught my attention most in this article is how the administration repeatedly ignored concerns from the staff about the problem.  Because the administration was so caught up in the idea that the Minneapolis Public library “supported unfettered access to information,” they didn’t realize how many patrons they were losing and what these images were doing to their library and their staff.  I used to live in Minneapolis, and I have been to this library on many occasions (after this problem was solved).  The library is very large and spread out, so I can easily understand how it would be difficult to keep track of people abusing the Internet.  The article mentioned how patrons looking at these images would often just move to a different department after being asked to leave.  With the size of the MPL, I can easily understand how this could happen.

One Law with Two Outcomes: Comparing the Implementation of CIPA in Public Libraries and Schools by Paul Jaeger and Zheng Yan

This paper explores the implications of CIPA and it’s effects on public schools and public libraries.

The main thing that I find disturbing about CIPA is that it clumps schools and public libraries together and applies the same rules to each.  Schools and public libraries serve different populations, and, as such should not be clumped together.  Schools serve only children, however, public libraries serve adults as well as children.  So, if a library complies to CIPA, the adults lose access to internet privileges just because children also use the library.  This doesn’t seem fair to anyone.  Some people who use the library’s Internet don’t have access anywhere else.  What if a site they really need to access is blocked?

Studying Indiana Usage of Internet Filters by Alberta Comer

This article looks at how Indiana Public libraries deal with Internet filtering.

Internet filtering is obviously just as important in Indiana libraries as anywhere else, this is clear in this article and in the PubLib Listserv.  On February 13, the Worthington Jefferson Township Public Library asked the Listserv to recommend good Internet filters. This article also implied that it may be easier to avoid filtering in small libraries.  Librarians from small library’s were less likely to filter and said they could watch the computer screens to make sure nobody was abusing them.  However, this is not an option in a large library where there is no way to have a staff member monitor every computer screen.  Looking back at the article about Minneapolis, this makes sense.  Since it was a larger library it was harder to keep track of what patrons were using the computers for.  This article also made me wonder why libraries would block people from using their email.  As I mentioned previously, what if these people can’t access the Internet anywhere else?  How will they use email?

Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries: Effects and Implications by John Bertot

This article discusses Public Access Technologies (PAT) and their effects on public libraries.

This article mentions that users want a customized experience while using technology.  I have noticed this while working in libraries in the past.  Patrons don’t seem to understand that library computers are not their own personal computers and they can’t download things on them or use them however they want.  It surprises me how many times I have had to explain this to a patron.  As this article mentions, it is often the patron, not the technology that is the problem.

“Please Disable the Entire Filter”: Why Non-Removable Filters on Public Library Computers Violate the First Amendment by Todd Anten

This article discusses why the Pheonix Public Libraries’ non-removable filters are unconstitutional.

“Public libraries are in a ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ situation.” (p. 77) This quote from Anten’s article sums up all of the readings for today.  Libraries can’t seem to win.  Of course libraries want to be able to provide users with full access to materials and filtering can reduce this access.  However, libraries also can’t afford to become like Minneapolis where sexual harassment is common and causes patrons and staff to be uncomfortable.  There seems to be no good way to solve this problem, no matter what libraries do, someone will be angry.

Weekly Readings 3/20

Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries by J. Bertot

This article discusses a study about how public libraries have handled being on the forefront of offering free online services and its impact on services.

This is definitely a fundamental issue that needs to have more attention paid to it before librarians continue spiraling down this road of having new tasks dumped into their laps without training/funding, like we discussed with e-government. Proper training is becoming increasingly important as more and more services rely solely on internet access. Even Encyclopedia Britannica just announced that they are no longer offering printed editions after 244 years (Pepitone). Yet we are not IT professionals, and certainly don't get anywhere near their pay even when we act as such. Thankfully at MCPL we have an IT department that I can submit a ticket to whenever a computer acts up, and usually within an hour someone will descend from upstairs to fix the problem. Most libraries aren't this fortunate. Even with software issues, when I cover a shift at MCPL, the others on the desk often defer computer questions to me because they know I am more comfortable with them. Even then, I certainly don't know about every program/website patrons ask about. What should the library's time and monetary burden be to train staff on these kinds of sites? I make an effort to familiarize myself with as many free services as possible (Facebook, Pintrest, etc.), but since I don't use services such as iTunes or SecondLife or e-readers, there are times I am flying as blind as the patrons. I loved the quote from the librarian about the computers being pretty stable, but that the patrons using them are often the issue. There are a lot of times I feel that the patrons do not appear to appreciate that they have free access with free help from librarians who often try their hardest but aren't technology wizes . They expect perfect equipment, no problems, and everything set up to their personal preferences and all the programs they want to use. But is there really a way to solve that? Ultimately, I especially liked the idea of partnering with the county or state library for IT needs, namely for rural libraries. This would help open a dialogue to discuss why public access is currently resting solely on the shoulders of the library and enlighten local government about the struggles being faced.

Pepitone, Julianne. "Encyclopedia Britannica to stop printing books." CNNMoney 13 Mar. 2012. Web. 16 Mar. 2012. .


Sex in the City by Wendy Adamson & Please Disable the Entire Filter by T. Anten

Adamson describes the experience of one library's early struggle with patrons viewing pornography and how to deal with it lawfully. Anten gives a very detailed look at why the Phoenix library's internet policy to have non-removable filters is unconstitutional.

I'll say up front that I'm one of those "prudes" who thinks pornography (as the dictionary defines it) has no business in a public library, partially because of the issues raised by the Adamson article. The circumstances described in this first reading where rather shocking to me, with patrons purposely dragging others into their activities by leaving pictures lying around, websites open, and "forcing" staff to look at them to increase their arousal. How did this not constitute sexual harassment? My unrealistic wish is that this issue would police itself because it is certainly unfair and illegal to block text and images that are not obscene. For the most part, though, I do think this self-regulating happens more than I think (I've never dealt with it at MCPL, though I know others have when I haven't been scheduled). The way I understand MCPL's policy is that you are allowed to do anything within the library that isn't prohibited in the rules unless it is bothering someone else in the building. Thus, if anyone (patrons or staff) has a problem with someone viewing porn, they can be asked to stop. But I read an article last month about a library in Malibu, California, with the librarians saying they couldn't legally stop a patron viewing sexual materials even though another patron was complaining (Kashtan). While they were somewhat correct in using the court rulings in their defense, and I know the ALA is fully behind completely unfettered computer access, why should the patron making the complaint not have an equal say in the library they are paying for? After reading the Anten article, I feel like the court rulings have not come down on the side of defending the viewing of "obscene materials," but rather how to stop the viewing from happening. I recognize that filtering software is certainly far from perfect, especially in blocking images and (to a lesser extent) videos, but some things being blocked would be better than nothing. To me a combination of the image filtering like Anten mentioned being used in Des Plaines and a list of specifically blocked sites appears to be the best option, based of course on what the community wants. Even MCPL is beginning to look at filtering options. This is especially important in smaller buildings where the adult computers can be seen from virtually anywhere in the building. However, fewer computers also allows for greater staff sight lines which can reduce the need for software filtering. When possible, it would be good to provide unfiltered/disabled-filter access on machines in a more private area where staff can still be sure rules are being followed. This would also allow those who are performing sensitive research to do so without prying eyes. On a lighter note, I would agree with the way a commenter on The Society for Librarians Who Say "Mofo" put it, "if it's a place where you can't run around naked and have sex, then it's not a place where you can watch porn" (http://library-mofo.livejournal.com/1621952.html).

Kashtan, Paula. "Librarians stand aside as patron watches porn." Malibu Times 1 Feb. 2012. Web. 16 Mar. 2012.


Studying Indiana Public Libraries' Usage of Internet Filters by A. Comer

Comer details the responses she received to a survey of Indiana libraries about their filtering policies and other computer-related questions.

This was an interesting article for its simple reporting of raw data on just one state, though I wish more than 33% had responded. It really backed up on a local level the issues raised in the Anten article, in that approximately 1/5 of patrons were blocked from needed information while the same percentage were still able to get around the filters. Some expanded explanation about the blocked information could have been helpful. Were they able to gain access by having the filter disabled? I liked the one librarian's comment about their policy reflecting the community wants and needs, and that someone responded that they have no filtering but there haven't been any complaints. I guess this shows there is more self-policing than I was giving patrons credit for. I was surprised and confused by the 5% who restrict e-mail usage for adults, as well as the library that insists all computer time be for information and nothing else. How can the staff seriously put such a policy into practice. It would certainly reduce the number of people who come up to me saying their work on the computer is more important than Facebook, so they should be allowed to get on first. Ultimately, this definitely shows that there isn't one answer appropriate for every library (like just about every other library issue).


One Law with Two Outcomes by Paul Jaeger and Zheng Yan

The authors examine the implementation of CIPA in both public and school libraries and the affects of having the same law for two very different institutions.

This article made some interesting points about whether public libraries and school libraries should be seen in the same light. There are obvious differences, just in regard to children, with the biggest being that parents are very rarely with their children at school libraries. However, parts of this writing didn't sit quite right. As I understood the article about the Phoenix library, it is illegal for a librarian to refuse to turn off a filter, yet this article listed one problem being librarian refusal (and even listed it first as if it is a significant problem). Also, the filters blocking the Constitution seem like an extreme example of a filter that probably doesn't deserve to be used anyway. This article also mentioned the number of low-income people who depend on the library for internet. This is only speaking from my experience, which I admit is limited, but I find that a majority of people who appear to be lower income are more likely to come to the desk for help than research on their own because they just don't have the information literacy skills. I agree that even one person needing a filter to be disabled is reason enough to have a system in place that allows this to be done as quickly as possible, but in some ways it feels like the number of people from any socioeconomic status proported to be doing research via the internet in libraries is slightly exaggerated (not just in this article, either). I did really like their suggestion of starting classes on computer and internet basics earlier, and I think this would be especially beneficial when parents/caregivers are also able to attend with the child.