Per this article, Michael Golrick, who sits on the American Library Association (ALA) Executive Board doesn’t want to put anti-porn filters in the library because he believes this is censorship. He had to make a decision for his library which will cost him thousands in federal funds based upon a ruling from a federal lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the ALA which claimed that the Children’s Internet Protection Act passed by congress in Dec of 2000 was unconstitutional. It was shot down 6-3. Filters must be installed and they will enforce this by simply removing/denying federal funding.
I am torn on this one. I think that it’s very important to protect children from adult content and at the same time I’m not sure what or why somebody would want to view porn in the public library (why?), however I don’t think tax dollars should prevent someone from being able to do research in the library (ok, one reason why). It is censorship, yes, but the real problem is that most of these filters on the market are about as useful as most spam filtering products. Harold Robbins novels are pretty dicey and they are in the library, yes? I think this one falls under the Parental Controls category. It’s up to parents, not the government or librarians, to raise children on what they should and should not be doing in public places.
