should libraries filter access to some information on all computers?

from oregon live everything oregon

Mom warns patrons about porn Toni Manning says the naked images harmed her daughter; library officials say filtered Web access is in the children's section
Toni Manning says the images harmed her child; library says filtered Web access in children's section

ERIC MORTENSON
GRESHAM -- In late October, Toni Manning took her three daughters to the library in search of information on hemophilia. Manning's been seeing red ever since.

On the way home, Manning overheard her 10-year-old daughter, Heidi, whispering to 8-year-old Hannah about what she'd seen at the library. While her mother was helping 13-year-old Holly with her hemophilia homework on the computer, a teenager sitting near them was looking at naked women on his computer.

Heidi was red-faced, embarrassed and confused. Her mom was just plain mad.

"Are you sure you saw this?" Manning asked.

"I wanted to let it go at first, I thought it was just a bad incident," Manning said. "Then I thought, 'No, I can't let this go.' "

Manning went back to the branch library in downtown Gresham the next day. The librarians were sympathetic and acknowledged that sometimes patrons use the free Internet access to look at sexually explicit material. But the staff said there was nothing they could do about it. First Amendment, the librarians said.

"I understand people have a right to view it," Manning said, "but in a public place, I don't think it should be displayed."

All of which has been argued before as the Multnomah County library system continues to struggle with cases where one person's free speech is considered foul spew by another.

County allows access to adults

Internet access may be the greatest knowledge gateway since Gutenberg, but some people seem to be more interested in stimulation than information.

And at Multnomah County's central library and its 16 branches, that's allowed. Protecting a person's right to view sexually explicit material is a point the library system carried all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003.

The county challenged the federal Children's Internet Protection Act, which requires libraries to filter pornography from Internet access or lose federal funding. The county argued that the law violated patrons' First Amendment rights and overstepped local authority. The Supreme Court ruled that Internet filters did not violate the First Amendment, noting that libraries exclude pornography from their print collections.

The county continues to disagree, hasn't changed its policy and gave up about $100,000 in federal funding.

"In general, adults have a right to access material that is constitutionally protected," said Cindy Gibbon, senior library manager. "It's a fine line we walk to make sure children are not exposed."

The library has taken steps to minimize problems. "Privacy screens" on the computers block the screen from view unless someone is standing behind users and looking over their shoulders, Gibbon said. She acknowledged they don't always work, however, and Manning's 10-year-old daughter probably was at eye-level with what was visible on the computer.

The library also can exclude people for bad behavior. If a person prints out offensive material and displays it, for example, he or she could be warned or barred from using the library. Computers in the children's area of the libraries have filters that screen out sexually explicit material.

The library is proposing policy revisions that will go to the Board of County Commissioners in early December. Under the policy, patrons 17 and older could continue to choose filtered or unfiltered software each time they use a library computer.

Children ages 13 to 16 could choose either, unless a parent or guardian said otherwise. Children 12 and younger would have filtered access unless a parent or guardian approved unfiltered access.

Mother passes out fliers

In a case such as Manning's, when a child sees something unintentionally, patrons should tell library staff about the problem, Gibbon said.

More information and a message on the subject from library Director Molly Raphael are available at www.multcolib.org/filter.html. The site includes a list of frequently asked questions.

For her part, Manning is making sure people know such material is available. She printed 500 fliers with her daughter's photograph and a message that such "innocent eyes" were exposed to pornography. She's distributed them outside the Gresham library, and most people she talked to were outraged. About one in eight argued that it was a free speech issue, she said.

Manning, a registered nurse, favors moving the computers out of public view and would welcome a filtering system at all the stations.

"I don't see why they need to have that in the library," she said. "It's a form of entertainment, and I don't know if libraries are necessarily there to provide entertainment.

"It's offensive to a lot of people," she said. "A lot of people think it's dangerous and degrading to women, but that's an ACLU and court fight for the future that's beyond me."

I disagree with that mother. ( Saying that politely, since I am not sure how to explain what I mean in the right way.)

the lady is strait trippin yo, a nude woman is the most beautiful thing in the world and denying people to view such things would be a crime against nature

well in this case it is a primary example of a woman that was never properly explained to about human sexuality and the human animal. So her view of nudity is of sexual entertainment, not human nature or the human animal, and that boy looking at it.....complete typical boy sexual curiosity. Then again I saw nude paintings as a very small child and replicated it at schoool and was yelled at for it by my grade 3 teacher, my mother, rightley so, told the teacher to grow the fuck up....in much nicer words. Until we deal with human sexuality in a healthy mature open way, silly little incidents like this will continue.

I agree with CPRB on that, as well as Killatomic. :thumb:

I would have to disagree with the mother i mean why the hell is it such a big deal that a girl saw a picture of a nude woman on the internet i dont think that has ever harmed anyone. If it was hardcore pornography that the child was exposed to then i might be more sympathetic to to mother but apparantly it wasnt oh and i hate it when libraries use web filters because they almost always block out something i need for research that isnt sexually explicit at all web filters are really pointless anyways because my boarding scholl had one and i got porn on my comp all the time because they cant catch everything and half the time they block out something that doesnt contain anything rational people would find offensive

Filters should be used for Pop-up adds, Spam, and Viruses. When I was going to high school, they had filters that were a joke. They flooded the screen with porn, but any info on the French Revolution, or Actors was restricted, and not allowed to be accessed.*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrightStar

Filters should be used for Pop-up adds, Spam, and Viruses. When I was going to high school, they had filters that were a joke. They flooded the screen with porn, but any info on the French Revolution, or Actors was restricted, and not allowed to be accessed.*

---

yeah i know exactly what you are talking about. thank god we dont have those in college

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidthorazine

yeah i know exactly what you are talking about. thank god we dont have those in college

---

Public colleges anyways, go to some of these colleges founded by evangelists like Bob Jones or Oral Roberts University. They have filters there to block things from Evolution to the Democratic National Committe. Bob Jones is a fucking prison with professors. Shit, couples can't even hold hands there. And you have to be in before 10pm for the 10:30 prayer time. Thank god I go to a public university.

As far as nudity goes, as long as the guy wasn't looking at hardcore porn. I really have no problem with it. I do believe that there are things that kids shouldn't see, but they will see those things eventually

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hewhoisagod

Public colleges anyways, go to some of these colleges founded by evangelists like Bob Jones or Oral Roberts University. They have filters there to block things from Evolution to the Democratic National Committe. Bob Jones is a fucking prison with professors. Shit, couples can't even hold hands there. And you have to be in before 10pm for the 10:30 prayer time. Thank god I go to a public university.

As far as nudity goes, as long as the guy wasn't looking at hardcore porn. I really have no problem with it. I do believe that there are things that kids shouldn't see, but they will see those things eventually

---

Speaking of bob lones remember when people mad that big deal about their "no iterracial dating policy" the sad thing is the people who go there are adults and are staying there primarily out of free will

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidthorazine

Speaking of bob lones remember when people mad that big deal about their "no iterracial dating policy" the sad thing is the people who go there are adults and are staying there primarily out of free will

---

Yeah I remember that......... then again this is South Carolina, not exactly the most open minded state.

The carolinas suck, along with florida.

This is just like the case with Larry Flint and Hustler. Then, they put the plastic around the mags so, kids couldnt just pick it up and flip through it.

In Missouri, the libraries will not allow anyone under 18 to use the internet without a parent there. I believe they have the secruity controls set so, most porn sites are blocked from being looked up.

I think this is a good idea for a library. I mean, if you want to look up porn, you can go to a net cafe I am pretty sure or maybe a Kinkos where you pay to get online. I don't even know why people would even want to look it up in a public place. I mean really, who wants to look up porn in a place where you can't beat off?

I also believe that children should be taught that nudity is not dirty or bad. I mean, it's completely natural. I think if we all learned to embrace ourselves without our clothes on, then children would be less interested in sneaking around and trying to look at porn behind parents' backs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should all run around naked or whatever, but I think children should learn that we were born nude, and we shouldn't be ashamed of it.

Children shouldn't be veiled from so much, the USA babies their children far more than any other country that I've known. If you sit down with your child and tell them the natural process of reproduction and the way the world exploits it, I think they will have a better understanding of it all and not be so curious to look up stuff or scared to ask you questions later on in life.

Communicate with your kids and keep them updated on world events and what the world is like. If you leave your kids out in the dark, they are going to find out about it by some other source; a source you may not want them to learn from. If kids are starting school earlier and having to learn more within every 5 generations, then kids should start to learn more about how the world works and the dangers of it all.

I hope you get what I'm saying...... the mother is wrong for giving her kids some kind of impression that nudity is bad or naughty. The library is wrong for not having better security control.

Addition: The Missour libraries also have those screens on the computers where you have to be sitting directly in front of the monitor to see what the person is viewing. Maybe they should install some of those monitor covers.

whoops...I reread it and saw they included it in the story...must've skipped a paragraph by mistake *^_^*

In south carolina, they called the police department, when some kid wrote a bad word in marker, or some such nonsense.

Parents and teachers like that should lighten up. *

It's offensive to a lot of people," she said. "A lot of people think it's dangerous and degrading to women..."

"If porn is degrading to women, it's just as degrading to men... and we get paid a lot less for it!"
-ron jeremy, porn star