Libraries under fire
Parents want Net porn site filters; free speech advocates resist
Saturday, 11 December 1999
http://www.azstarnet.com/public/dnews/LA0640.html
NEW YORK (AP) - Libraries that defend unrestricted Internet access as free speech
are facing growing resistance from parents and family groups that want to block out
porn sites.
The pressures prompted one library this week to drop Internet access altogether,
a move the American Library Association called unprecedented. City commissioners
in Hudsonville, Mich., voted Monday to pull the plug.
Hudsonville officials said they felt cornered: If its library installed software
filters to block out sexually explicit sites, free-speech advocates might sue. If
the library did not, then conservative groups might sue. The American Family Association
was already demanding a referendum on restricting access.
``It's really sad we have to do this,'' said Pauline Luben, assistant city manager
for Hudsonville, a Grand Rapids suburb of about 7,000. ``We didn't feel we can financially
fight it.''
Free-speech battles are not new to libraries. They are often confronted with campaigns
to ban such books as Mark Twain's ``Huckleberry Finn'' because of what some consider
racism or other objectionable topics.
What makes the Internet different is its reach and ease of access. Libraries can
decide which books to buy. But with the Internet, a youngster can browse the world
- and see all sorts of sexually explicit material.
Judith Krug, director of the American Library Association's Office for Intellectual
Freedom, called Hudsonville's action appalling and said she fears more such battles
will result in other communities.
``It's the biggest issue in libraries,'' she said.
According to an October report by a pro-filtering group, Filtering Facts, more than
75 libraries installed filters on all of their terminals over the past year, bringing
the total to nearly 1,000. Anchorage, Alaska, and Memphis, Tenn., were among the
communities to do so this year.
The Tucson-Pima Public Library system has opted for a middle ground: It has some
computers with Internet filters and some without.
``Our particular philosophy is that we provide those as an option for parents,''
said Elizabeth Burden, a spokeswoman for the system.
Minors who come in alone and sit at unfiltered computers are allowed to visit any
sites they want, as long as they don't break library behavior rules, she said.
Each computer has a sign indicating whether it has filtered access. In the children's
area at the Tucson-Pima Main Library, all of the computers have filters.
At the University of Arizona libraries, not one computer has an Internet filter,
said Barbara Allen, a program coordinator.
Because of the libraries' respect for the First Amendment, ``We don't interfere with
people's viewing,'' she said.
If, however, someone is offended by the sites a nearby computer user is visiting,
library staff will inform the offender of that. But it's not a warning or even a
scolding.
``We won't tell them, `You can't look at that,' '' she said.
``People generally leave at that point.''
Thousands of other libraries refuse to install filters. Some cite a ruling last year
from a federal judge who said the libraries in Loudoun County, Va., violated the
First Amendment by filtering all its terminals.
The American Civil Liberties Union complains that installing filters on terminals
used by grown-ups as well as children denies adults access to materials they are
constitutionally permitted to see. The ACLU also notes that electronic filters that
search for certain words are imperfect and may even block materials on birth control
and AIDS.
The American Library Association opposes filters altogether, believing age is no
reason to deny anyone materials protected by the First Amendment. The group believes
parents should decide what is appropriate for their kids.
That attitude irks parents like Beth Spader, whose son stumbled onto an image of
a woman naked from the waist down. Tyler, now 13, was looking for online pictures
of wrestlers at the library in Brielle, N.J.
``It's unbelievable to think an institution such as the public library would be openly
providing hard-core obscenity,'' Mrs. Spader said. ``My assumption was that libraries
are safe.''
Karen Jo Gounaud, president of Family Friendly Libraries in Springfield, Va., said
free access is not a matter of free speech. The Constitution protects Playboy, she
said, but libraries do not have to subscribe.
She also claims such sites make libraries a haven for pedophiles and sexual molesters.
In 1996, Congress tried to curb Internet smut by making it a crime to put adult-oriented
material online where children can find it. A year later, the Supreme Court struck
it down. Since then, Congress passed a less restrictive law, but a federal judge
in Philadelphia blocked it earlier this year. Federal courts also have blocked state
laws in Michigan, New Mexico and New York.
The passage of filtering laws represents the next line of attack.
Many parents, unable to persuade their libraries to install filters, are turning
to City Hall, state legislatures, even Congress.
Arizona and South Dakota passed laws this year requiring public libraries to restrict
Internet access to minors by using a filter or some other means.
In Congress, bills sponsored by Rep. Bob Franks, R-N.J., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.,
would require libraries to install filters to receive federal Internet subsidies.
Similar language is in a larger piece of legislation working its way through Congress.
Arizona Daily Star reporter Pila Martínez contributed to this story.
------------------------------------------------------------------------