IP: I think this is worth reading for the view of the net etc. -- Comments on internet filtering in libraries - support of Libraries from the EFF

[David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> X-Server-Uuid: 61afff7a-dbde-11d2-be31-0008c74c62f4
> From: "Paul Sinasohn" <psinasohn () siebel com>
> To: "'David Farber'" <farber () cis upenn edu>
>
> A reply to Stanton McCandish's comments from a working librarian. She gave
> me permission to forward this on, so you can send it to IP if you want.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Paul Sinasohn   psinasohn AT siebel DOT com
> Instructor/Curriculum Developer, Siebel Systems (Emeryville)
> vox: 510-594-6153  fax: 510-594-6119
> There's a fine line between a groove and a rut.
>
> --- "<Lesley Knieriem>" <lknierie () suffolk lib ny us> wrote:
> From: "<Lesley Knieriem>"
> <lknierie () suffolk lib ny us>
> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 11:58:22 -0400 (EDT)
>
>       I agree wholeheartedly with the general thrust and most of the
> specifics of Mr. McCandish, but there are some
> comments that I must
> respectfully, but strongly, take issue with
>
> On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Paul Sinasohn forwarded:
> > Actually, even our courts don't buy this. This
> > issue was tested in the
> > Loudoun Co., VA, library case, and comes down to
> > there being a major
> > distinction between the library selection process
> > (the principal criteria of which are a) "can we afford this?"
> > and, b) "will it be
> > popular and/or useful enough to make it worth
> > buying?") on the one
> > hand, and the filtering (the sole criteria of
> > which is "should this be
> > censored?") on the other hand.
>
> I think he streses the economic too much in this distinction.  The
> criteria must be reversed;  first and foremost, "is
> this material useful, appropriate (to our mission) and desired (by our
> patrons)?"  only then do we ask, "*how* can we afford it?"  To put things
> the other way would put the library in the position of buying crap just to
> empty out its budget --  a sad truth in some libraries (yes, I know all too
> many libraries can't afford even the essentials, but we're talking about
> *ideals* here!)
>
> > Another important distinction is that the Internet is, in effect, a
> > single resource composed of many subresources. It
> > is more analogous to
> > an encyclopedia than to a single book.
>
> I've heard this analogy before, and I don't like it.  If the
> Internet *were* an encyclopedia, we wouldn't buy it
> -- too little authority control, too much irrelevance and
> misinformation, no clearly defined focus, audience, or purpose.  Internet
> access is totally sui generis, and libraries are never going to be able to
> successfully defend  access unless they get hold of this basic fact.
>
> Frankly, the Internet is used mostly as an entertainment medium in
> our library, and if I were forced to choose between it and, say, the
> career file, the computers would be unplugged and out the window before
> you could sneeze.  I think the best analogy for the Internet would be with
> a popular periodical like Time or Newsweek, but that doesn't include it's
> value as a communication medium (that is, if you let patrons have access
> to e-mail, which too many libraries don't).  The analogy I use in my
> introductory Internet classes is that the Internet is like a telephone --
> you can use it to contact someone who has information or an opinion on
> practically any topic, but it takes discipline, training, and common sense
> to call someone whose information or opinion is worth a damn.  But no-one
> gets rid of their telephone because of a few wrong numbers or obscene
> telephone calls!
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~!~~
> ~  Lesley Knieriem                                                 ~
> ~  YA / Reference Librarian           (516)  549-4411                  ~
> > ~  South Huntington Public Library  fax (516) 549-6832            ~
> > ~  Huntington Station, NY  11746        lknierie () suffolk lib ny us   ~
> __________________________________________________