How does the Supreme Court decision on the Communications Decency Act (CDA) affect what we do at the local library?

The decision to overturn the indecency provision of the CDA makes providing a closed or filtered Internet system even more imperative, because there is no federal law in place to deter online pornographers and predators from knowingly giving such material to children.

The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that communities may adopt their own standards, and implement laws and ordinances accordingly. The decision on the CDA in no way affects community standards, and those standards should be upheld, including at the public library.

Isn’t the use of blocking software on the Internet censorship?

No. Censorship involves prior restraint by the government of production or distribution of materials. Essentially, censorship occurs when the government tries to stop the expression of ideas. To choose not to stock certain materials is not censorship, but selection, because those materials are still available elsewhere.

The same holds true with the Internet. Blocking software and closed systems allow librarians to select what will, and will not, be made available at the public library.

What is the difference between filtering, blocking, and closed systems? Don’t they block access to information on breast cancer, AIDS research, works of art, and other materials?

Filtering technology blocks objectionable sites based on key words. This software, which has improved since its introduction, would flag words like "breast" and prevent access to sites including the word.

Blocking technology blocks objectionable sites based on address. The site is flagged based upon words, then a human being checks out the site to see if it meets the criteria for pornography. This means that objectionable sites are blocked regardless of what name the pornographer has used, but that legitimate sites are still available. Updates to lists may be obtained every few hours, and take only a few seconds.

Closed systems allow access to organized materials selected by librarians, and sites outside the system cannot be reached. Utilizing a closed system significantly reduces the chance of pornography slipping into the system. Although more labor-intensive than blocking, closed systems provide a more organized Internet, and libraries may share their lists of interesting sites.

I’ve heard there is no such thing as server-end blocking. Is this true?

No. Technology is moving at a terrific rate, and there are currently at least 30 software programs which block at the server level. This means the software is installed on one computer, which acts as a server to other computers on the system. These programs are also available to individual computers, making them idea for smaller systems or individuals.

Don’t adults have a right to view anything they want at the library?

Adults have the right to view anything on the library shelves, but they obviously cannot view any materials the library has chosen not to stock on their shelves. If they want to view such materials, they must go elsewhere. By this same token, if an adult wants to view materials the library has chosen not to stock on their computers, they are welcome to go elsewhere. Selection on the Internet is consistent with the selection librarians already make materials they will carry on their shelves.

Furthermore, libraries should certainly be concerned about the hostile work environment created for library employees, as well as the hostile environment created for library patrons, by Internet pornography. The creation of a hostile work environment has been the basis for many lawsuits to date, although there has been no precedent set regarding a hostile work environment created by Internet pornography. Such precedent may well be set in the future, and libraries would be wise to consider this when they implement their Internet access policies.

Finally, a great deal of the pornography on the Internet seems to meet the Miller test for obscenity, meaning it is illegal material. Libraries should be concerned about providing illegal material to patrons, especially in light of the fact that production and distribution of Internet obscenity are federal crimes, so state exemptions do not apply.

Aren’t parents responsible for what their children do?

Parents do have the greatest portion of the responsibility for their children, but they cannot be expected to be the sole bearers of that responsibility. Our society has long recognized the need for societal support of parents, which is why we have laws protecting minors, including laws making adult pornography illegal for children in print and broadcast.

We must also recognize that not all parents will be as attentive as they should be, but that does not mean their children should be neglected by the rest of society. Protecting children requires a partnership between parents, society, and the law.

Aren’t you asking library staff to babysit?

No. Parents should never leave their young children unattended for hours at the library, but they should be able to regard the library as a safe place for children. In the past, libraries have wanted to be considered a good place for children, and reasonable Internet policies would relieve concerned librarians of the fear that children may be accessing harmful material on the Internet.

Shouldn’t people who don’t like pornography just ignore it, and let others do what they want?

The problem with pornography, as with many things, is that it affects more than just those who look at it. Not only is pornography addictive and progressive in nature, but research shows that pornography affects attitudes and behaviors. Pornography has been strongly linked to sexual crimes against women and children, innocent victims who did not look at it.