And from the other side of the issue...

Jim Minnery in the Anchorage (AK) Daily News has published an editorial calling for libraries to not selected protecting "our so-called liberties" at the expense of protecting children. Many of the public libraries in Alaska forgo the Federal and state government discounts on internet access fees because they do no want to install filters. 

Mr. Minnery feels that librarians cannot effectively monitor dozens of computers in a public library, looking for child pornography. He is correct. But if every child in a library had a parent monitoring what they were doing on the internet, Mr. Minnery would have nothing to worry about. 

Mr. Minnery makes the point that "Most parents don't know, and are generally shocked by, what kids are doing on sites like MySpace and FaceBook." Perhaps his organization, the Alaskan Family Council, should work with families on connecting with their children instead of lobbying for a bill that would require Alaskan public libraries to install internet filters. Intellectual freedom and access to information should not be sacrificed because parents do not understand what their children are doing online. 

Minnery, J. (2008, March 30). Libraries obliged to keep kids a click away from porn [Electronic version]. Anchorage Daily News, Retrieved March 31, 2008 from http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/360917.html

The viewing of Internet pornography is forbidden.

Just when you think that the world can't get any crazier. . . In 2006, two members of the Montgomery County, MD Homeland Security Department walked into a public library, announced that viewing internet pornography was illegal and challenged what one patron was viewing online. 

A librarian intervened and escorted the men to a work area. 

They believed they were enforcing a "sexual harassment" policy. Really. They left after police were called. How did the county respond? 

"Later that afternoon, Montgomery County's chief administrative officer, Bruce Romer, issued a statement calling the incident "unfortunate" and "regrettable" -- two words that bureaucrats often deploy when things have gone awry."

I'm not even sure where to go with this. It's so ridiculous on so many levels. I can't imagine that the greatest security threat to Maryland is someone viewing pornography at the library. Is that what the post -9/11 era has become? If the terrorists can view porn then the terrorists win? I'm certain that the $3.6 million dollars a year that is spent on the county's Homeland Security department could be spent somewhere else. 

 The library system in Montgomery County does not use filtering software (good for them)  and instead, asks patrons to be considerate of others. "Privacy screens" are available if someone is offended. I think that this is a most reasonable policy. The article explains that while a library is a workplace, it is also a public place so the US Constitution prevails. What the public chooses to view on library computers does not equal sexual harassment. 

Barr, C. (2006, February 17). Policing porn is not part of job description [Electronic version]. The Washington Post, pp. B08. Retrieved March 30, 2008 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/16/AR2006021602066.html

St Petersburg Library - A revisit

Well, not entirely. . . I was logged into their website to request a book and I noticed that there is an option to "record your reading list." When I clicked on it, a box appeared which warned that the record could be used by law enforcement and did I really want that.

I thought it was an interesting way of allowing people to keep an accessible record of what they have read while still alerting patrons to the fact that any record could be potentially accessed by law enforcement.

http://www.splibraries.org/

Language and School Libraries

Amy commented on my blog that she wondered how media specialists should handle material that has questionable language. She wondered if it should be left to the parents or if the school media center should act to protect children from foul language in books and other material. Robert G. Wengert suggests that librarians should focus more on their role as teachers as a way of solving ethical dilemmas. When a librarian acts to remove material from a young patron, he believes that the librarian is not moralizing but is instead removing material that will not be understood by the student. He states that "exposing someone to data might not provide that person with information" (p.486). He makes a good comparison between light and information, suggesting that unlike light, information does not illuminate everything that it touches.
When a student expresses concern about language used by an author, I believe that a librarian should use that as an educable moment and discuss what the author may be intending to express through the language that was selected. Now, not every book is going to be The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or Ulysses. There may be times when it is appropriate to just direct the student to a book with similar themes or in the same genre that does not have language that makes the student feel uncomfortable.
I can remember my high school librarian telling me that he kept certain books out of general circulation because there were some students who were not ready for that type of material. If a mature student asked for them, he would allow them to use the books.

Image from: www.teachers.ash.org.au/ mspouwbray/lit/huck.htm
Wengwert, R. (2001, Winter). Some ethical aspects of being an information professional. Library Trends 49: 486-509.