Does Porn = Freedom or does Freedom = Porn?

This isn't math: a = b doesn't mean that b has to equal a. Here's a story about a library in California that doesn't filter Internet access and doesn't want to even though one patron was arrested for distributing child porn using their network. Fine if they don't want to filter the Internet, but I don't understand the logic behind the decision. (Or maybe I do understand it; read on.)

Libraries share an uneasy coexistence with the Internet. The story says, "Despite the conviction of one man for using a public computer at Cabrillo College to share child pornography, librarians remain committed to unlimited access to the Internet." Thus, most librarians fight any policy that would filter access to the Internet.

Now here's the problem as I see it:

Four public libraries report to WorldCat (which is a huge database of library holdings: your edifying editor; "Excelsior!") that they carry Penthouse magazine including Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and New York (with SUPERVISED USE). And Huster is only available in New York with that same supervised use. White Power, "The newspaper of white revolution" is in three public libraries. NY, again, supervised; and in Milwaukee. The Stormtrooper magazine; 14 libraries, but no public libraries. NAMBLA Journal: NY, supervised.

Anne Turner, director of the city-county library system (we're back to the
original story in California: your geographic gourmand), summed it up
best: "Free access of information is more valuable than the chance that somebody
would see porn."

But I don't see that any library in Santa Cruz, California carries any of the above periodicals.
If I offered to donate these magazines to some public libraries, totally free, I wonder how many would accept them and display them on their shelves. Most libraries have policies against accepting "offensive" materials. But put the same material on the Internet and suddenly the librarians champion free speech.

And now excuse me when I do a 180º turn...

The truth is what Anne Turner says; librarians support access to information. A librarian could find a good reason to collect just about any book or periodical that's been printed. That's the definition of the job: to collect, categorize and archive information in every conceivable medium. I wouldn't have the job if I didn't agree with the core beliefs.

And I'm sure that originally, many libraries collected whatever items they could get. And that philosophy spread to libraries that were open to the general public. (Really? I can summarize the entire history of libraries in two sentences?)

But eventually the public became uncomfortable with certain topics: sex, hate, extreme politics and other topics were eliminated from most collections. The people spoke.

Now libraries have collection policies and use reviews in magazines like Booklist and School Library Journal to select materials for their patrons. If it doesn't have a good review (or Oprah's endorsement), the library won't blow your tax money it.

In essence, this acquisition process is a filter.

And most librarians accept this limitation. You don't hear many stories about the librarian who fights to get White Power carried in his library.

Now here is the part where I do another about face and keep spinning until I fall down.

Librarians accept self-censorship when it comes to books, magazines and electronic databases, but oppose any censorship of the Internet. And I think I can explain why.

Librarians oppose all censorship, but the people pay the taxes that pay for libraries. Until the people tell libraries that they don't want hate and porn in their libraries, librarians will continue to fight the filtering of the Internet. (Again, that's the mission of a librarian, access to information: your liberating...aw, hell. How did Stan Lee do this for all those years?)

It's a really complicated position to try to analyze a battle while it's being fought. The Internet continues to evolve and libraries continue to reassess their positions on whether or not to filter.

I don't blame the profession for these problems; librarians aren't meant to be cops.

Maybe this is what Americans really want. Porn.

Libraries are only an extension of the cultural and educational services that the government provides for its citizens. If people don't want porn they should say something. (No, not to me. Can't you see I'm reading?)

You think I'm saying I have the answers; I don't have the answers. But I seem to be one of the few people asking the questions that need to be asked.

Excelsior!

UPDATE: May 14, 2007. It seems that libraries in Illinois staged an Internet shut-down to protest mandatory filtering that a proposed Bill would require. Well, I guess disconnecing from the Internet is one way to solve the porn problem.